Hot Movies, Softwares, Themes, Games, E-book

masterpiece movie
superduper movie
best movie
my fucking movie
cool movie
wow movie











by Gary Sundt on March 12, 2009

Watchmen is not an action film. The advertisements seem to spin the story that way, and I think it’s important that you know how misleading that is. I still need to do an official count, but I’d estimate about five major action sequences in the nearly three-hour running time of the film, none of them especially spectacular in the vein of The Dark Knight or Iron Man. But they have the same amount of emotional weight, which is really what the movie is about. Indeed, Watchmen could be the most philosophical of the great graphic novels and their film adaptations.

Watchmen takes place in a parallel universe of 1985 America, where Nixon has been elected for a third term as president and masked superheroes have helped to shape history. The story begins with the murder of Edward Blake, a.k.a. The Comedian (Jeffery Dean Morgan), a former member of a team of superheroes who were disbanded when Nixon outlawed masked vigilantism. Another of the old team, a sociopath by the name of Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), suspects Blake’s death was part of a larger plot to take out the old costumed heroes.

Rorschach spreads the word for the other former heroes to be on guard. Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), the indestructible man, has little to worry about, being indestructible and whatnot. His girlfriend, Laurie Jupiter, a.k.a. Silk Spectre II (Malin Akerman), lives with him on the heavily-guarded military base where he conducts his research. Dan Dreiberg, a.k.a. Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson), keeps to himself with his gadgets and old hover craft in his New York apartment. And Adrian Veidt, a.k.a. Ozymandias (Matthew Goode) lives with his former identity out in the open, and reaps the financial and celebrity rewards of being the world’s smartest man. None of them seem to be especially concerned with Rorschach’s “mask-killer” theory, because the impending threat of nuclear war seems more prevalent (this does take place during The Cold War, after all).

Watchmen is a meditation on the nature of the superhero archetypes we know and have found new love for in the recent explosion of comic-book adaptations. The popular 1987 source material by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons was as appropriate at the time of its printing to the comic book medium as the movie adaptation is to comic book cinema today. What does the superhero mean in a world with consequences? And at what point do we draw the line when dealing with powerful and god-like individuals? The characters in Watchmen do not have powers with the exception of Dr. Manhattan, who has perhaps all the great powers in the superhero lexicon, but their unnatural strength and speed does make them a force to be reckoned with. How long can society put faith in something they cannot control?

I started this review by discussing the advertisements for the film. Director Zack Snyder has a flawed masterpiece with Watchmen, in the same way that the source material had its unfortunate idiosyncrasies. There are some minor plot inconsistencies, but they seem to be as old as the graphic novel, and many won’t notice or care if they do. Some of the performances were weaker than they could have been, and the die-hard fans of the book will be disappointed by the deletions in the film.

However, the flaws are not nearly as glaring when one takes into account the sheer magnitude of the considerations Watchmen, even in the abridged film adaptation, presents to the audience. I agree with many that the movie is long (nearly three hours), but I don’t agree that it feels that way. I think the movie is designed for a certain type of moviegoer; they aren’t anymore educated or correct in their opinions, but they think about the films they see. A friend of mine told me, “People who like to keep the movie in the theater when they leave won’t enjoy Watchmen.” Snyder also directed 300. I think it is of note that Watchmen is not for the 300 crowd, and those who went crazy for that film might leave this one wondering, “What was with all the (expletive) talking?”

I simply do not have enough space to discuss my feelings regarding the philosophical and thematic impact the story of Watchmen lays before the audience. I have read the graphic novel, but do not think it is necessary reading for those uninitiated as long as they care about the story in front of them. The audience may feel disconnected from the characters, but that might have more to do with the characters themselves being disconnected from the world they live in. Enjoying Watchmen has more to do with absorbing and reflecting on the story as a whole, which may or may not be what you’re looking for.

In my case, I’ve seen the film twice: The first to watch and analyze, the second to experience. Watchmen had a profound impact on me as a viewer, particularly the second time, and I will definitely be seeing it again.