You might as well face facts. Pretty much everyone is going to be making jokes at the expense of Dr. Manhattan’s full-frontal nudity in Watchmen for at least the next week. Maybe two. If you can last that long, it’s probably the last you’ll hear about it.
Chalk it up to immaturity, I suppose. But I think there is something inherently comical about the nude male form. It’s so… inelegant. It deserves to be made fun of. Just… not when I’m around. I’m very self-conscious.
Sidebar: Fart jokes? Still funny.
So, let’s not waste anymore time, shall we? Watchmen. I saw it this weekend. What did I think about it?
I will admit to going into this movie with my expectations set very low. I can say I walked away having my expectations met. That’s a left-handed compliment. But, in the end, just another way to say that the movie was what I expected it to be. They didn’t completely ruin Watchmen, but they didn’t really do much better than the graphic novel. So, ultimately, I’m left looking back on it and asking “What’s the point?”
There are several things that Watchmen does well. Director Zack Snyder (stylist though he may be) does a good job of capturing the details and he knows which details are important.
I was particularly impressed by his interpretation of Dr. Manhattan. Much more than a big naked blue guy – in close-up, Snyder’s Manhattan looks like a an opaque, idealized construct of a man containing vast energies. You can see traces of it swirling and darting about beneath his skin. The eyes, instead of a hollow white, looked like a gentling expanding starburst.
And, of course, Rorschach’s shifting inkblot mask came off without a hitch.
David Hayter’s screenplay is economical while retaining the key elements that move the plot forward. I was surprised how satisfied I was with his simple solution to “the squid problem” in the climax of the movie.
I thought the performances and casting, for the most part, were excellent. Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach is a snarling, sinewy standout (even though I had been bothered by his gravely, apparent graduation from The Christian Bale School of Superhero Voices in the trailer).
Billy Cruddup does a good job as Dr. Manhattan. Emoting as through a digital character is no easy task, but he delivered a palpable sense of Dr. Manhattan’s detachment from humanity while hinting at the greater being he had evolved into. He didn’t sound like I imagined Dr. Manhattan to sound like at first (he came off a little too calm, a little too Zen), but now I can’t imagine him sounding any other way.
I was even impressed by Patrick Wilson as Nite Owl II. Given the unenviable task of playing a middle-aged sad sack, Wilson keeps the insanity around him tethered to the ground and plays the role with conviction.
Jeffrey Dean Morgan was also well-cast as The Comedian.
So if the movie looks right, sounds right and is performed correctly, what’s the problem?
It’s tough to put my finger on, but I think Snyder is so slavish to the source material, he can’t make it his own. I think that’s why I found myself aligned with Tom Charity’s review over at CNN.
To quote Charity, “‘Visionary’ director Zack Snyder, as the marketing would have it, has filmed Alan Moore’s ‘unfilmable’ graphic novel by treating the comic book panels as his storyboard and his Bible.
Doesn’t it bother anyone that this is about as far from the definition of ‘visionary’ as it’s possible to get?
The visionary sees what others do not see. Snyder — whose previous films were a remake (Dawn of the Dead) and another scrupulously faithful comic book adaptation (300) — is more in the line of a fancy photocopier, duplicating other artists’ imagery with a forger’s intensity.
A visionary transforms the world. Snyder slavishly transcribes what’s set down 5 inches in front of his face.”
Snyder’s “vision” is so faithful to the graphic novel, I spent most of the movie going “Okay, that looked a lot like the graphic novel. What’s the next scene they’re going to do? Will it also look as much like the graphic novel? I’m gonna look really closely at the details.”
What happens is that you’re not focused on the movie. Snyder’s attention to detail is his gift and his curse. What he puts on screen is intrinsically distracting because he undermines the story with his visuals in a “lookit what I can do!” kind of way. The images and the story never work in concert. To me, his is now officially the Michael Bay of comic book movies.
I also take issue with the music selection in the film. It seems every transition into any new scene was punctuated by some iconic “song of the era” to let you know exactly when and where you were. Bob Dylan’s “The Times They Are A-Changin’,” Simon & Garfunkel’s “The Sound Of Silence,” KC & The Sunshine Band, “I’m Your Boogie Man,” Nena’s “99 Luftballons.” Each song selection was more clumsy and stupid than the last. None more so than the amped up cover of Dylan’s “Desolation Row” by My Chemical Romance.
Supercharged with punk vitriol as it stampedes over the closing credits, it is the exact WRONG mood to strike after the grim conclusion. I left the theater repulsed by the crass commercialism of it. I usually don’t pay attention to the music in movies all that closely, but if there was any film that could have benefited from a brooding, ominous orchestral score, Watchmen would be it.
Beyond that, my complaints are middling. I wasn’t impressed by either Carla Gugino or Malin Akerman as Silk Spectre and Silk Spectre II, respectively. I hate to single them out since I applauded the performances of the men so much. But Gugino was way over the top and arch while Akerman simply doesn’t have the chops.
Okay, in all fairness, Matthew Goode as Ozymandias was a foppish, lazy-eyed bore.
I was annoyed at how the fight scenes were staged. The prison riot was well done, but the climatic showdown in Antarctica was stupid (Fight! Talk! Fight! Talk!)
Also, when Dr. Manhattan is the only hero in the movie with superpowers, it makes no sense when other characters are able to run vertically up towers, punch through walls and kick people across a room. Each punch landing with a booming “THUD!” and bone-cracking revelry.
That’s another thing. Snyder is a little too in love with his vision of violence. A woman is shot through the shin, a thug’s elbow is bent backwards, bones jutting from his forearm, Dr. Manhattan causes a couple of gangsters to explode, their sticky entrails dangling from the ceiling. It’s brutish and unnecessary.
And before I forget… Sndyer’s signature move — the slow motion. Call my a cynic, but Watchmen probably would have been 30 minutes shorter if it had run in real time. To go back to Tom Charity’s point about visionary directing, The Wachowski’s “bullet time,” this is not.
I will freely admit to the possibility that I walked into Watchmen expecting to hate it, but I claim self-preservation. Watchmen is simply too important to be taken lightly and, frankly, I don’t think Snyder was the right man for the job.
Part of me feels like I need to see the movie a second time to judge it more fairly. Maybe the second time around I won’t be distracted by the expectation of what’s next or how faithfully it’s translated to the screen and I can just sit back and enjoy it. Maybe I can remove my fanboy filter and look at it as the movie it wants to be.
But at the same time I don’t feel compelled to run out and buy a ticket. Watchmen is kind of an ugly movie in spirit and it seems to embrace that ugliness for all the wrong reasons. Because of that, the movie isn’t easy to like. And again, you’re left asking yourself “What’s the point?”
Have I entered into a phase where only visual gags will serve as the punchline? Perhaps after coming off such a long storyline, I’ve lost interest in having my characters actually speak for a while.
Even though today’s comic is a continuation of Monday’s comic, I really have nothing more to say about Watchmen.
The response to my review generated a lot of feedback in the comments area. People left some very interesting opinions. Some of you agreed with me, some of you didn’t. Some of you even exposed me to some new ideas and pointed out the hypocrisy of a few of my statements.
All things said, it was exactly the kind of debate I wanted to have about the movie and everyone was well behaved. So, thank you.
But, yeah. I’m all Watchmen’d out. We expressed our exhaustion a little bit during The Triple Feature on Monday.
After answering a reader question, I don’t think any of us were all that excited to start talking about the movie because we had spent the better part of the day hovering around the internet, explaining and defending our positions. It didn’t even help that we were largely aligned in our impressions of the film. I think we all felt beat about the head from it.
Still, I think we produced a very good show from our conversation. You should download it and give it a listen if you have time.
Something else you might be interested in… I’ve started to use Ustream to capture the comic-making process and recorded a session last night. You can download it here.
The set up is simple enough. My webcam captures the work I do on screen while a little picture-in-picture at the bottom right hand corner shows my ugly mug while I do my best to narrate what I’m doing.
The interface includes a chat field so people watching in real time can leave comments. I respond to some of what they’re saying there as well.
You can watch me work on the comic live every Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday evening. I don’t really have a set schedule for when I sit down and start working, but it’s typically after 10:00 PM CST. If you follow me on Twitter, you’ll likely see a notice to let you know when I’m broadcasting. Otherwise, if you miss it, you can watch the recording later from my Ustream account page, where everything will be archived.
If you’ve ever been interested to learn how I put the comic together, these recordings might provide you with some insight. And if you want to ask me questions about my process as I’m producing the comic, you now have that opportunity as well!
Just thought you might like to know.
No other news today so I’ll leave you with that. The weekend is almost here! Hang in there and I’ll talk to you soon!
This week has been a weird amalgam for me. I haven’t quite shed the trappings of a story line, but have succeeded in omitting most of the dialogue. It’s been a fun little exercise in writing visual gags.
Truthfully, after Monday’s comic, I just went where my imagination led me and I like how things turned out. I like this comic a lot for the pacing, the action and the overuse of blue – which hardly seems to appear in Theater Hopper, now that I think about it.
I probably could have been making more jokes about Watchmen, but I was more entertained by the idea of people having a fight using spray paint instead.
Speaking of Watchmen – and I know I said I was all Watchmen’d out – have you guys seen this? It’s a letter from Watchmen screenwriter David Hayter begging people to see Watchmen in the theater a second time this weekend.
Long story short, it’s basically a call-to-arms of the geek nation. Hayter implores us to see Watchmen a second time not only because “everyone is watching to see how the film will do in its second week” but because if you don’t, you aren’t supporting “movies that have a brain, or balls.” Begs Hayter, “if it drops off the radar after the first weekend, they will never allow a film like this to be made again.”
Gee, I had no idea that the fate of the comic book movie as a genre hinged entirely on Watchmen. Ugh.
Hayter discloses that he doesn’t see any extra money from Watchmen doing extra business. So, taking the cynical view, one has to assume that he’s trying to save face or keep his name from being too closely associated with Watchmen’s potential failure.
Hayter says that he makes his plea on behalf of “people who love smart, dark entertainment, on a grand, operatic scale.” But let’s be blunt. Watchmen is nearly dead on it’s feet. It underperformed in it’s opening weekend against NO competition. Box office analysts were expecting it to take in $70 million last week and instead it limped across the finish line with $56 million. Divisive reviews and bad word of mouth caught up to it by Saturday night and now, faced with a potential 50% drop off (as most second week movies encounter), Watchmen is in danger of being unable to match it’s $150 million production budget in domestic box office. When you factor in the additional marketing and merchandising tied into this movie, a lot of people stand to lose a lot of money.
I’m not saying Watchmen won’t make it’s money back eventually. But compared to the juggernauts of ’08 – Iron Man ($98 million opening weekend) and The Dark Knight ($158 million opening weekend) – it’ll look like the red-headed stepchild of super hero movies if it doesn’t pick up the pace.
Watchmen has been labeled “the greatest comic book of all time.” If it can’t make money, what does that say about the quality of the film or – in Hayter’s assertion – comic book fans, in general.
When you think about it, it’s kind of insulting to put the success or failure on the backs of comic book fans. Hayter claims that if Watchmen isn’t successful in it’s second week, you’ll never see such an uncompromising, harsh and gritty vision of super hero antics on screen again. But my assertion is that his plea just put a big, fat target on the back of comic book movies but assigning more importance to the adaptation of Watchmen than it deserves. Now there is a greater likelihood that people will be looking more closely than they would have for a movie that did $56 million on it’s opening weekend. Instead of studios saying “Well, it underperformed, it must not be very good.” Now they’ll look at Hayter’s plea, see Watchmen tank after the second week and say “Well, it was the comic book nerds’ fault. They didn’t come out to support this movie.
Incidentally, did Hayter miss the memo about The Dark Knight’s $1 BILLION dollar world wide gross?
Granted, people are a little more familiar with Batman than they are with Rorschach, but Nolan’s version of The Caped Crusader wasn’t exactly piffle. It dealt with some pretty lofty issues, too. The duality of man, the nature of good and evil… high test stuff. It wasn’t (for lack of a better comparison) Batman & Robin or Superman III. And it was also JUST AS LONG as Watchmen, so do cry to me about there being less opportunity to show the film and claiming that impacts box office.
If people want to see the movie, they’ll see it. But begging comic book fans to see it a second time out of some misplaced sense of duty? That’s just desperate and insulting. Bad form, Mr. Hayter.
Truth be told, I might see Watchmen a second time. But only if I can catch it in IMAX. Maybe if they can get the directors cut into theaters – the 5 hour version promises a more in-depth analysis of the characters- I’d see it. Otherwise, I’ll wait for it on DVD when it’s loaded down with extras and packaged with the animated Tales of The Black Freighter (because you know that’s coming.)
But I’m not going to see the Watchmen a second time as-is. Because, frankly, I didn’t think the theatrical cut was all that good.
I’m a card-carrying nerd. Will be for life. But don’t exploit me for your short term gain. I’ll stand up for a movie that I think deserves it. I’ll stand up for quality. But standing up for Watchmen at this point would not be a defense of “uncompromising vision.” It would be a permission slip for directors with more style than substance to run roughshod over future properties and ultimately short change the genre. Sorry, I don’t want to see a version of Y: The Last Man with slow-motion explosions and awkwardly staged sex scenes. I’ll stand up for quality.
That’s my two cents. I’m sure some of you will disagree. That’s what the comments section is for. Leave your thoughts below. Does anyone plan to see Watchmen a second time this weekend? Did Hayter’s plea have anything to do with your decision? Let us know.