The critics have spoken, and most are underwhelmed and put off by Watchmen: So far, it’s notched a score of 49 (out of 100) on Metacritic, and a 64% at Rotten Tomatoes. That’s called a failing grade.
Yes, “there are … flashes of visual brilliance,” as Peter Travers accurately observes in his review for Rolling Stone.”(Creator Alan) Moore recalled his four years of toil on the 12-issue DC Comics series as ‘slam-dancing with a bunch of rhinos.’ That description also fits watching the movie, which stumbles and sometimes falls on its top-heavy ambitions.”
But Anthony Lane, the far more insightful critic for The New Yorker, gets to the heart of what’s wrong with this bombastic, overcooked turkey: “The problem is that (director Zack) Snyder, following Moore, is so insanely aroused by the look of vengeance, and by the stylized application of physical power, that the film ends up twice as fascistic as the forces it wishes to lampoon.” Lane’s review.
Below is my review.
———-
WATCHMEN
Stars Patrick Wilson, Jackie Earle Haley, Matthew Goode, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Malin Akerman, Carla Gugino, Matt Frewer. Directed by Zack Snyder. Written by David Hayter and Alex Tse. 160 minutes. Rated R.
Grade: C-
Call me crazy. But I’m guessing that reading the graphic novel Watchmen is a prerequisite for fully appreciating the lovingly and expertly photographed brutality of the film adaptation.
On display: A prisoner’s arms are lopped off by a chainsaw; a child murderer’s skull is repeatedly hacked with an axe; vicious dogs fight over the remains of a little girl’s leg; a group of thugs are blown apart in a nightclub, their guts exploding and then left dripping from the ceiling; a female superhero’s face is bloodied and her body bruised during an attempted rape. Not to mention the repeat shots of one motion-capture character’s blue-tinted, dangling, uh, appendage.
Those are among the startling, strikingly ugly images that creep across the screen in Watchmen, directed by Zack Snyder (300) and written by David Hayter and Alex Tse with an overabundance of reverence for the original work, acclaimed for its complexity, smarts and use of imagination.
Its author, Alan Moore, probably won’t appreciate all that effort — Moore, who has called his comic book “unfilmable” and disassociated himself from the movie, said, in response to an update on the production, “Do we need any more sh—y films in this world?”
That’s a good question to ask about Watchmen, as Snyder’s skewed-superhero movie, at 160 minutes, is overlong, loud, grim, often nonsensical and willing to place beloved pop, rock and folk songs — Bob Dylan’s “The Times They Are A-Changin’,” Jimi Hendrix’s “All Along the Watchtower,” Simon & Garfunkel’s “The Sounds of Silence” — into odd settings, benefitting neither the songs nor the film.
Aside from hardcore fans of the graphic novel, and 18-to-25-year-old guys looking for nearly three hours’ worth of extreme violence and raunchy sex at the local cineplex, who, exactly, was this movie made for?
The credit sequence, following an impressively photographed fight marked by whooshing sound effects and capped with a spectacular slow-motion crash through plate glass and a short fall from a high-rise, suggests good things to come.
Snyder unfurls a series of still shots and clips that track the progress of the Minutemen, a group of crime-fighters, from their beginnings in the 1940s — when they organized in response to masked gangs of villains — through the present, 1985.
The story’s alternative history has it that the U.S. won the Vietnam War, and Nixon (Robert Wisden), having won a third term in 1976, is still in office. The Watchmen, the Minutemen’s superhero successors, are experiencing various degrees of dysfunction.
Although the plot spins off in a dozen or so rather incongruous directions, the story halfway focuses on a central mystery: Who killed the Comedian, born Eddie Blake (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), the trigger-happy, woman-abusing least likable of the Watchmen, and are his old colleagues next on the list?
Potential suspects include all of the superfriends, er, superfrenemies. On the nice-guy end of the spectrum is Nite Owl II, known to his intimates as Dan (Patrick Wilson), an aw-shucks fellow who spends much time taking off his Clark Kent glasses and wiping them clean, and occasionally goes down to his Bat Cave-like basement to admire his old, rubbery, Batman-like costume.
The object of his affection is Silk Spectre II (Malin Akerman), better known as Laurie, bodacious brunette who enjoys sex with two superheroes. Her most recent main squeeze is that aforementioned blue man, Dr. Manhattan (variously, Billy Crudup and a digital representation of the actor), a fit and trim, wisdom-dispensing fellow who practices nudism; he became an all-powerful being after a terrible accident in a physics lab, and went on to singlehandedly defeat the Vietcong.
Suicide is painless, apparently, for one unfortunate character in the film, but exposition isn’t, as there are two more Watchmen to watch out for.
Rorschach (Jackie Earl Haley, reuniting with Little Children cast member Wilson) is a psycho killer with a bizarre, ever-changing mask and a raspy voice about halfway between Clint Eastwood and the Batman of The Dark Knight; both films, as well as 300, are products of L.A.’s Legendary Pictures. Adrian, also known as Ozymandias (Matthew Goode), is a handsome dressed-for-success guy who prefers an icy HQ and, like the others, may be holding a secret or two.
Watchmen, making liberal use of flashbacks, follows its characters to various homes, haunts and hideouts, and hurls headlong toward a conclusion regarding potential nuclear annihilation.
Along the way, there are sequences set on Mars, at a burning apartment building, and in a prison. There, the creepy, indestructible Rorschach, intensely disliked by the facility’s inmates, gets off one of the script’s best lines: “None of you seem to understand. I’m not locked in here with you. You’re locked in here with me.”
Many viewers will experience a sensation similar to that experienced by Rorschach’s fellow prisoners: Is early release an option?
———-
A variation of the above review appears on the web site of Jacksonville paper Folio Weekly.
4 responses to “Watchmen: Brutal, Fascistic, Overlong (movie review)”
Call me crazy. But I’m guessing that reading the graphic novel Watchmen is a prerequisite for fully appreciating the lovingly and expertly photographed brutality of the film adaptation.
Changing the word “appreciating” to “deploring” might give a more accurate guess, since of the violent imagery you point out, only the attempted rape is actually in the source material — and even there more is done with implication and dialogue than with lingering close-up. Literal faithfulness — as claimed by the director and a few reviewers — need not translate into a true rendering of the *intent*.
(And yes, I am a fan of the original comic, who is increasingly in no hurry to see what appears to be Snyder’s reverence for all the things Moore was attempting — with mixed success — to satirize. If it’s as bad as you make it sound, my condolences.)
Interesting that the source material contained very little of the graphic extreme violence. Thanks for pointing that out.
The best I can say about the movie is that there is impressive cinematography and camera work. IMO, the direction, editing and performances just really don’t serve to create a movie that will be of interest to anyone aside from the Watchmen faithful and some of their comic-loving brethren. Too many characters, too many plot lines that shoot off and don’t really intersect meaningfully, and a payoff/finale that’s too unfocused.
My prediction is that it will do a pretty impressive opening weekend, due to both the loyal Watchmen crowd and the massive publicity machine behind the movie. But after word gets out, I think it will have a huge drop-off.
I could be wrong, though.
Thanks for reading and commenting.
Thanks. Looking back, I may have understated what violence there is in the original — it’s been a long time since I read it, and I don’t have a copy at hand. There are small differences which I find telling (actual killing happening off-screen, as it were) but which you might still feel fall into the trap of glorifying an object of satire. (Speaking of which, Rorschach and Night Owl II were intended by Moore as commentary on two sides of the Batman-type superhero, so the costume is intentional.)
What I’m still sure of is the difference in tone and perhaps in intent. See a review from a fan of the original comic and the genre it comes from:
http://savagecritic.com/2009/02/quis-custodiet-ipsos-custodes-hibbs-on.html
However, without seeing the film I don’t wish to second-guess where it misrepresents, or where it is faithful to a flawed original. I too suspect that takings will drop rapidly, though a year from now who knows how the film’s afterlife on the DVD market will do.
Thanks for the considered reply, by the way.
[…] Tampa Movie Weekend – 3.06.09 By philipb1961 All the hype this week is focused on the splashy arrival of dysfunctional-superhero saga Watchmen, as grim, brutal and overlong a movie as likely to play the multiplexes this year (read my review). […]