Watchmen Blog and Journals

Alan Moore, who wrote the classic graphic novel, believes to this day that Watchmen cannot be made into a feature film. Terry Gilliam once tried to direct an adaptation of the story of masked vigilantes and deemed the work "unfilmable." So when it was announced a few years ago that Zach Snyder would finally give the idea a shot, the question still remained: Is it possible to film Watchmen?

The short answer? Alan Moore and Terry Gillam are still right. Sort of.



The long answer: Watchmen (for those who haven't ever read the graphic novel) is a complex, disjointed, and increasingly bleak story of an alternate world where masked vigilantes helped to fight crime. Set in 1985 (and featuring a third-term Nixon), a patriotic and violent U.S. hero is found dead and it soon becomes apparent that someone is looking to off masked superheros. The novel moves through a dense plot and tons of character-rich psychological development, while simultaneously deconstructing the superhero archetype. And the ending? Man, you really have to experience it to understand it's overarching brilliance.

(Note: If you've not read the graphic novel, there will be plot spoilers from here on out. I suggest you either read the novel or see the movie itself. It's fairly impossible for me to separate the two at this point.)

Clocking in at a whopping two hours and 50 minutes, Zach Snyder's Watchmen mostly sticks to the source material: The Comedian is found murdered, Rorschach begins his quest to find out who did it, and so on. And while he certainly deserves credit for doing a great deal of things very well, the things Snyder fails at ultimately bring the movie down.



The opening is grim enough, but it's clear from the get-go that Snyder is desperate to make Watchmen his. This is apparent by the ridiculous and distracting overuse of slow motion at least five times in the first 10 minutes alone; this quickly becomes the norm for, literally, every scene hereafter that involves any action that's faster than people walking. I had a feeling it was going to be bad, but it was far worse than I expected. Snyder doesn't allow the action to breathe at all. Especially in some of the scenes that should have been grittier and more brutal (such as Laurie and Dan's fight with the punks in the alley), the events on screen seem so choreographed and stylistic that they lose any sort of context or substance.

The same director who felt it necessary to drop larger-than-life, guitar heavy rock over battle sequences in 300 absolutely fails at using music throughout the film. Every non-score track (minus Bob Dylan) is out of place or so silly/ridiculous that it feels as if Snyder's actually making fun of his own movie. There is no possible way I can take a love scene seriously when Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah" is playing over it. There is no possible way I can appreciate the somber and haunting ending to the film when My Chemical Romance's atrocious cover of "Desolation Row" blasts over the credits. (Sorry guys. It's bad.)



But before I get to his worst offense, I feel like I should give Snyder his dues: the cast he chose was phenomenal, most especially Jackie Earl Haley as Rorshach and Patrick Wilson as Night Owl/Dan Dreiberg. Not only did they simply get their characters, but they pulled scenes from both the graphic novel and the script and made them feel alive. Rorshach's scenes in the prison are downright terrifying; his final monologue is (gasp!) better than I could imagine it while reading the book. Wilson is able to accurately play to Dan's weaknesses; the man's internal struggle with loneliness is palpable on the screen.

People complained that they felt Matthew Goode was a bit too creepy to play Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias, but I thought he was ok. I loved Billy Crudup as Dr. Manhattan, especially Crudup's ability to bring subtle emotion to the face of a man who was largely apathetic. And Jeffrey Dean Morgan is impeccably scummy as The Comedian.

Snyder also excelled at including nearly all of the main plot pieces and character developments for the main characters. In fact, by the two hour mark, I actually felt Snyder was about to pull off the impossible. I was able to ignore the terrible songs and the distracting filming styles because he was actually telling the full story of these super heroes. He'd actually delved into their fractured lives and their complicated psyches.



But the movie falls apart in the end. Badly. By neglecting so many small details from everything else in the story (the missing artists, The New Frontiersman, the man at the newspaper stand and his commentary, daily life in New York City), the final scenes of this epic comic book film...well, they don't seem so epic anymore.

SPOILER ABOUT THE END OF THE FILM AHEAD.

Snyder chose to simplify the twist ending in order to spend more time with character development. While he surely succeeded in that, the story flatlines because of it. Most people know there's no squid anymore, but as Veidt spells out his diabolical scheme, one with virtually no clues given throughout the course of the film, it's almost offensive in its banality. And then there's the whole issue of how Snyder's squid swap actually doesn't even make sense: how would cloning Dr. Manhattan's powers solve anything? The world is not going to unite over a force that isn't extraterrestrial. That's the whole point!

SPOILERS OVER.

I wanted to enjoy this film more than anything. The acting was refreshing; a lot of the deeper philosophical questions raised by Moore are still present. But the story fizzles out to mediocrity; I no longer feel as if I've watched something that forces me to ponder my own moral quandary. It's certainly entertaining, mostly wonderful to look at, and is clearly crafted with love. Unfortunately, it still misses the mark. Seeing as no one else will probably ever get another chance, I'd say that Watchmen isn't really filmable. At least not in a successful, satisfying way.