Movie Night 109: Watchmen (2009)

Director: Zak Snyder

Cast: Malin Akerman, Matthew Goode, Billy Crudip, Jackie Earle Haley, Jeffery Dean Morgan, Patrick Wilson

Plot: Based on the amazing graphic novel (12-issue series) written by Alan Moore and featuring artwork by Dave Gibbons, Watchmen is about a group of “retired” superheroes in an alternative reality 1985 where Nixon is on his third term for president, and America is in the middle of the Cold War with Russia. When one of their old teammates, The Comedian, is murdered, Rorschach – the only team member still practicing crime fighting – begins investigating who would want to kill off masked heroes. And more importantly, why.

Filled with unique characters (an impotent superhero, the daughter of a celebrity super hero, a murdering vigilante, a sociopathic soldier, the “American superman,” and the smartest man alive), Watchmen is not a conventional superhero tale by any means. Which is what makes it unique. Movie-going audiences may have misconceptions in their heads, though, especially if unfamiliar with the source material (there was a lot of adolescent giggling whenever Dr. Manhattan’s penis was on screen). My fear is that a lot of people thought that this would be the next “Dark Knight,” and it’s not. It’s not an action movie, and it carries a very strong R-rating (ie: strong sexual content, male and female nudity, adult themes such as rape and murder, bloody violence and tons of gore, etc).

Overall, the movie was enjoyable, even though it deviates from the source material liberally (more on that, below). I like to say that the comic was a piece of art, but that the movie lacked the same poetry that made it special and unique. I realize that the work was a labor of love from Snyder (he had been quoted in many interviews that the movie was going to be made no matter what, and that the script that was turned into him was a terrible piece of work – which he since changed), but like all works based on Alan Moore stories, it falls short of capturing the brilliance and majesty. But I think my experience would have been better if the audience had been more mature.

I enjoy going to the movies to see a flick, but always fear the audience talking during the movie or being distracting. You want to go and be immersed in another world, and whenever you’re taken out of that world it tends to tick me off. I even went to go see the movie twice (as the first time I was plagued by giggling children so often that it prompted me to shout out, “Grow up and shut your mouths!” The second time, I sat in front of a group of Latino youths that couldn’t stop talking like they were watching a football game in their living room), just to see if the change in audience would change my experience overall. In my opinion, Hollywood’s problem of lower ticket sales has less to do with movie piracy and the economy, and more to do with the culture about going to the movies. It used to be an event, but now it’s far too commercial and casual. People go thinking that they’re in their own living rooms, talking on normal volume and ruining the experience for those around them. There’s no courtesy anymore, and that really burns me.

While I haven’t given up on going to the movies, I’m certainly steamed about the dumbasses that are also allowed to watch a movie in the same theater as me. There should be two theaters – one where people go to talk and be obnoxious, and one where people go to actually watch the movie.

Comparison: As stated above, there are very liberal differences between the film and the source material (and as a purist, I believe not for the better). Like anything based on something else, the source material tends to be better, and Watchmen is no exception. There are many pieces that one could nit-pick (like Rorschach’s treatment of the child molester, changing his character from a vigilante with a sense of justice – like in the comic – into a cold blooded serial killer, no different from the low-lifes that he brings to justice), but the main concern of mine was the change in the ending.

Without giving away any spoilers, the ending in the graphic novel was flawless and well thought out. There was no question that the resolution was going to work, even if it was not the traditional happy ending (which is why the comic is so revered). However, the ending that they put together for the film is sloppy and raises too many questions. It detracts from the third party enemy in the movie, and takes a character associated with a country to try to fill that role – an emotional character who wouldn’t allow his own reputation to be sullied like that without taking some form of revenge. With that political affiliation, the nations of the world wouldn’t come together – they would band together and exact revenge on the country of origin. So the “ultimate solution” that was presented so brilliantly in the comic, came out as very flawed to me in the movie.

That’s my opinion, and I’m sticking to it.

Don’t let it distract you from seeing the movie, but be sure to check out the comic. While the last 20 minutes in the film are okay, the last 22 pages of the comic book are jaw-dropping awesome on every page.