Wednesday, 11 March 2009
-
Who Watches The Watchmen? Answer: Everyone Should!
The graphic novel Watchmen that many have called unfilmable is in fact entirely filmable and is even better in some ways as a movie. Sure, overall, the book is better, as it always is, but some things actually come across better on the big screen then they did on paper.
It captures the look and feel of the book perfectly, in many places as a literal translation from page to screen, and in every technical sense it is perfection. Most of the performances are spot on, especially those of Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach, Patrick Wilson as Nite Owl II, and Matthew Goode as Ozymandias. Most of the negative reviews I've read note the wooden performance of Malin Akerman as Silk Specter II, and while I'll agree that she wasn't as great as the others, she wasn't terrible either and I was able to buy her in the role in an emotional sense (as her character certainly has the most emotional work in the film) and certainly on a physical level (as is the case with all of the fight scenes, frakking incredible stuff).
As for the theme and meaning of the book, I believe that they translated perfectly to the big screen version. Like The Dark Knight before it, Watchmen is also much more then just a comic book movie. In fact it is almost a statement on the whole idea of comic book movies. It is a look at exactly what a world filled with vigilantes and "supermen" would be, what such a place would look like. (Just like the graphic novel was a statement on comic books).
With a superhero that is indestructible, what effect would that have on anyone else who attempted to be a "superhero" when they are in fact not at all "Super"?
What does being a vigilante require? What kind of tortured past must one endure and what kind of psyche would they have? Does the dark overcome them completely where they become almost as bad as the evil that they are fighting (Rorschach and The Comedian)? Or does their need to feel like they truly are important and making a difference in the world make them completely unable to be or do anything else (Nite Owl II and Silk Specter II)?
I also like how the film makes some statements on the time in which we live, 2009, (despite being set in an alternate 1986) much like the graphic novel made statements on the real 1986. "Who would want a Cowboy to be in the White House?" indeed.
Yes, Watchmen certainly strives to be much more then just a comic book movie and like the graphic novel on which it is based it completely succeeds.
Overall, the movie is incredible, truly fantastic. It was everything I could have hoped that it would be and more. High, high marks. Go see the film, I don't think you'll regret it.
Have you seen Watchmen yet? What did you think about it?
-
recommend
- recs 1
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to thepopsite's ThePopSite Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in thepopsite's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: josue23@xanga
- About Me: Enter here to read an aspiring screenwriter's thoughts on film, television, and occasionally sports.
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 7 Views: 0 7780 Comments: 0 98 View all posts by josue23@xanga
Comments (19)
i saw it & thot it wuz the best superhero film ive seen
with the xcepshun of batman beginz
I saw it and loved it, and am now in the midst of reading the novel.
If there's only one reason for everyone to see it, it's for Jackie Earle Haley's performance as Rorschach. Amazing.
I love it, I have always loved Watchmen since I was introduced to it awhile back. I hate that its suddenly a "hot topic trend", but eh.
The movie was very deep, and what I called "not another fluffy movie". Most movies these days are really full of useless plot and over used crap. Watchmen was something refreshing.
And as someone else mentioned, Jackie Earle Haley's performance was astounding.
As a casual fan of the novel, I really dig the movie. I thought it was very dense and true to the source material while still able to hold up as a stand alone movie. Some people complain about the ending, but I didn't think the change was a huge deal. The general idea is the same for the casual fans.
I saw it, and it caused me to have a severe psychotic episode afterwards. I have a hard time dealing with depictions of such in-your-face graphic violence, chaos, and evil. I had a similar reaction to The Dark Knight and Sweeny Todd. Had I known Watchmen was going to be so gory, I wouldn't have gone to see it.
The movie itself was okay. The ethical question it posed was interesting and thought-provoking, but it's not meant for dense people who are looking for a straight-forward superhero movie. I felt it insulted my intelligence a little, too. I found the overall film to be very choppy, and I couldn't relate to any of the characters except Rorschach. They were all very two-dimensional. Rorschach carried the entire movie, and I would've considered it a "wait-until-it's-on-cable" flick without his performance.
I liked it.
@methodElevated@xanga - my friend said the same thing about the violence...but i told her she should have done her research...it was rated R for a reason. i mean you cant really blame the movie for your own queasiness (not meant as an insult...sorry if it seems like one :))
i disagree with your other points...i thought the movie had an excellent flow, just the right amount of sex and violence and pretty strong performances save for silk spectre
how did it insult your intelligence? hmmm interesting point
btw ive never read the GN but am going to now
@manishmathur@datingish - It's not queasiness in my case. It's schizophrenia. I have to avoid triggers like that. I didn't go see RockNRolla because the synopsis said it was gritty and had torture scenes, but then when my boyfriend rented it, there was hardly anything at all that would've given me problems. I can't really trust a synopsis or rating anymore.
The sex scene in the "Owl" was good, but the music was terrible. They didn't mesh very well. I thought the violence was gratuitous. Did I really need to see a woman (an extra, no less) get shot through the calf? The movie would've been just fine without things like that.
It assumed I didn't know that the entire thing was about an impending apocalypse (which was a significantly different ending than the books). They kept literally reminding me of that point again and again in case I missed it all those other times. It would've been better if there was just that impending sense of doom rather than spelling it out for me.
I was also a little confused at the end of the movie whether or not the people of Earth were ultimately happy because of what they thought Dr. Manhattan did, or if they all were united against him and vehemently hated him despite the outcome. It wasn't clear. I assumed since he felt the need to flee the galaxy, they were angrily united against him, but I'm still not sure.
"The graphic novel Watchmen that many have called unfilmable is in fact entirely filmable and is even better in some ways as a movie."
Incorrect.
"Most of the performances are spot on....Matthew Goode as Ozymandias...."
Incorrect.
"As for the theme and meaning of the book, I believe that they translated perfectly to the big screen version."
Horribly Incorrect.
They trumped up the action scenes and in the process lost the feel of that these are regular people dressed up in costumes.
They had to cut out the Black Frigate parallel storyline (which I knew going in and somewhat understood, but still...an example of how the graphic novel was impossible to fit into one movie), which provided one of the main themes of the graphic novel (*spoiler alert*): Has Ozymandias truly saved the world from itself? Or has he become like the man in the Black Frigate storyline- killing those who would get in the way of his trying to save the ones he loves, only to realize at the very end of things they never needed to be saved in the first place and a realization of how he has lost his sanity and decency in the process. The dialogue between him and Jon at the end of the book was my favorite part. In the movie it was reduced to a one line or two exchange between everyone. And that's another reason why this movie was "Meh."
"Yes, Watchmen certainly strives to be much more then just a
comic book movie and like the graphic novel on which it is based it
completely succeeds."
No.
The only changes they made were either minor, or for time reasons. And Jon's "new ability" to make people view the world as he sees it, was a lame movie shortcut to introduce a series of flashbacks. They could have stuff to how it was done in the graphic novel and be fine. The ending (*spoiler alert*) was passable- i knew they had changed it going in and understood why they kinda had to for time reasons, since a good explanation of the original ending would've added another hour or more. But, does it really make sense? A god-like being is apparently killing them now.....so they can unite against him and do what???? Nothing. All hope is lost, they're fucked. With a fake alien invasion at least there is a reason to unite because they don't know if it will be possible to fight them off or not. With Dr. Manhattan they should already know there is no chance. But oh well, I don't have any other ideas on how to change the ending (besides well, don't make into a single movie in the first place. Go for a 2 part movie, or better yet, a 6-10 episode release (1 hr each) done on HBO or showtime.
I loved it, what a great movie!
I havent watched it yet but deffinitely looking forward to!
i want to watch it.
Chuck Norris watches over the Watchmen. That's who.
lol I haven't seen it yet, but it does look like a wicked cool movie.
I saw it. I thought it was long, but it kept my attention. I liked it overall, but would not read the graphic novel at this point because I fear I will be disappointed (at the movie, not the book). The actress from 27 Dresses...I don't buy her character at all, but other than that I thought it was good.
I saw it. It was ... unforgettable, to say the least. I'm not going to forget this one in a long time.
The people who don't like it were expecting a non-thought provoking purely action movie.. like every other super-hero movie out there. Even Batman, which I consider to be pretty thought-provoking for the 'comic to movie' genre, is more action driven than mental insanity to process. The other people who generally don't like it are the super-hardcore fans.... which would probably have never been pleased without a 6 hour long movie in which nothing was changed and everything was thoroughly explained. It's not possible to do in one movie.
You have to think when you see it. There are so many messages in this movie. Amazing ones. It's one of those movies that will tell you something new every single time you watch it, whether it's the first time or the 100th.
This movie is truly epic.
@hellowookie@xanga - I disagree.
I hoped for more thought provoking substance and I am not a hardcore fan.
This movie had a few good lines but it fell short.
It never really drove anything home.
Plus all the blue dong was annoying as hell.
I saw it and thought that it was ok. The trailers made it seem like it would have a lot more action than it did. It was more like a super hero murder mystery. And honestly, I was somewhat disturbed by the blue guy that hardly ever wore clothes.