Watchmen induces mixed feelings

Tim Bearden
Editor-in-chief

I really wanted to like the Watchmen, but the movie was more two-dimensional than the comic.

That’s not to say the movie was horrible, because it wasn’t. It’s also not to say the effort wasn’t somewhat of a cinematic achievement, because it was. But director Zach Snyder got stuck in the same pitfall that made 300 less than appealing, the story and characters were flat.

Snyder is most revered for his visual directing style and rightfully so, which is why a 600-word review cannot begin to capture the complexity of the film, much like three hours wasn’t enough to capture the complexity of the book. Or was it?

Peter Jackson accurately portrayed each 500 plus page Lord of the Rings book with a movie that was both enjoyable to fans and beginners alike. Each of the theatrical releases was about three hours in length. He was able to give the characters depth, make the viewer believe this alternate world existed and stay true to the story line while remaining visually compelling.

The “Watchmen” graphic novel was about 100 pages less, but it was arguably more complex than “Lord of the Rings.” Within the graphic novel there are many competing story lines woven into one larger story. Snyder, while staying true to the art of the book, just couldn’t bring a majority of these characters to life or lift the story from the page.

One major problem with his adaptation was the emphasis he put on the superheroes. I can respect he did this for the viewers who had not read “Watchmen,” but at the same time I have to chastise him for it. Superheroes were merely a plot device of the book, not the central focus. The central focus was the contempt mankind had for itself and each other.

To put it historically, the book, set in alternate 1985 New York, was written around the same time Bernhard Goetz had just shot four men who were attempting to mug him in a New York subway. From the acclaim he got for being a vigilante, he became a martyr, which is the same kind of story the Watchmen seemed to convey.

It was that underlying story that made the book a New York Times Bestseller and one of Time Magazines “Top 100 Books of all Time,” not the visuals. If you were to take the comic aspect away from the novel, you would have the same amazing book with the same interesting characters and story.

In order to really criticize the other major flaws with the film, I have to briefly describe the philosophy (which could have been written by Nietzsche himself), psychology (which really captures both sociopathic behavior and the “Peter Pan” syndrome) and human condition (mankind ultimately wanting to destroy itself) without losing the integrity along the way. Much like the film had to do and failed at. See why 600-words can’t do this justice?

But, to his credit, Rorschach and Dr. Manhattan had the depth and complexity they deserved. They were major players in the comic and I like the fact Snyder stayed true to them.

Their separate story lines were just as important in the movie as they were in the novel, but I still didn’t feel as though the alternate 1985 was real, like I did when I read it.

Terry Gilliam is well-known for making an alternate universe feel real (i.e. Brazil, The Fisher King and Tideland) and Watchmen is placed in an alternate 1985. When he attempted not once, but twice to make this film and said he couldn’t do it that should speak volumes. But it didn’t. And just like Gilliam goes over budget, I’m going over word count.

Basically, Snyder, this piece was too big for you when a seasoned filmmaker openly admits defeat, but the fanboy attempt does not go unnoticed (being a fanboy myself), no matter how handicapped or half-hearted that attempt may have seemed.