The problem with The Watchmen

watchmen-copy

The problem with ‘The Watchmen’ film is not found in the ham-fisted way in which the film has been slick-streamed via Hollywood big-budget production values and directing. No, the real issue with The Watchmen is much simpler. The problem is with it’s brevity. And, in fact the films arguably greatest tribute, the near word for word adaption of the original text.

Now, I have seen The Watchmen. And, I have seen The Watchmen with friends who saw ‘The Watchmen’, instead. Those, in other words, who have not read the comic. The first time I saw the film, I wondered what it was that made me feel uneasy when I left the cinema. The second time I saw the film, I understood.

In the preamble to the comic adaption of Neverwhere, writer Mike Carey discusses the difficulty in bridging text across mediums. Specifically, he focuses on what changes he made from the original Neil Gaiman television series and then novelisation, and why. While stating the fact that no one text may be perfectly transcribed from one medium to another without careful arrangement and minor alterations to some of the core elements, he describes the way in which one character was removed, and another added or combined, in order to maintain the flow and ensure all the relevant information is conveyed to the reader. Changes are necessary, in fact, to ensure that the tale contained within the graphic novel is a whole unto itself.

(I would copy the text out directly, but alas I have returned the copy of Neverwhere I had borrowed. New I should have taken notes before handing it back. Sigh.)

I have read the original Alan Moore graphic novel, The Watchmen. It is an extremely rich text, broaching many dark subjects regarding the nature of humanity and it’s inevitable spiral towards self-destruction should we be left to our own devices.

In order for the reader to come to grips and understand in fullness Moore’s concept, he develops extremely deep and flawed central characters, in addition to a supporting cast of less extroverted individuals that too come to understand the nature of themselves through their interactions with the masked crusaders. Careful illustration and page layout adds to the depth. Pages featuring Rorschach, for instance, are often extremely harmonious and symmetrical.

Days of reading, reflecting, studying the carefully illustrated pages force you to absorb all the minute details. The comic form itself provides the perfect medium through which to experience the extraordinary, too, such as the sudden transportation of Dr. Manhattan to the red planet. As I read a story of “real” superheroes, I accept this somewhat exaggerated exposition.

‘The Watchmen film’, as directed by Zack Snyder, is not a complete text unto itself. And, it is a film that does not seek to adapt the original graphic novel and it’s various ideas into another medium, it attempts to parrot the source material precisely without contributing anything new to the text except a second logical conclusion that only vaguely helps the audience understand what exactly is going on.

Such a rich narrative that relies wholly on the strength of the characters and their various interactions, and not just SIMPLY the fact that Nixon is an ugly fucker with a huge nose leading the Western democratic world into Black Isle’s interpretation of such an event, CANNOT be condensed into two hours and forty minutes worth of footage. At least, it cannot be condensed in such a way that someone walking into the cinema with no prior knowledge of the core text can understand it in a meaningful way.

Without understanding that Dr. Manhattan can manipulate the world at an atomic level and can do what he wishes, might “WTF?” when the naked blue guy pops up on Mars. Seriously, a good number of people in the audience snickered, giggled or began asking their more knowledgeable neighbour just what the hell was that all about.

More to the point, you can’t genuinely understand Ozymandias methodology without experiencing his extended soliloquy explaining how he threw everything away to follow in the footsteps of Alexander of Mesopotamia who nearly united the entire world under forceful conquer and rule.

Getting back to what Carey said earlier, the film adaption of The Watchmen fails specifically because it relies so heavily on the original text without providing the audience with a true understanding of the whole. Not enough time is provided to the audience in one sitting, or two, to reflect on the events that have occurred, to absorb the visual imagery, to mentally put the pieces together before the conclusion. Even if you make use of the time it takes for the credits to roll.

Many leave the cinema confused and bewildered by events that have taken place, though they may feel they should have an understanding because all the elements have been crammed in here or there without regarding the differences in the medium. For instance, lengthy soliloquy just don’t translate that well to film, and not more than once a film either. The film is not long enough, nor well enough adapted, to speak to an audience clearly and with authority. In addition, Snyder lavishes the opportunity to shock through violence and gore, when the time wasted on fisticuffs would be better exploring the shocking impact Rorschach has on a fat counselor, that realises his entire existence, his nature and all he’s learned has done nothing for anyone. He lives a delusion.

Readers of the original text, on the other hand, feel cheated because the film offers them nothing new. It is, without hesitation, the original panels brought to life. It does nothing to enhance the substance of the comics other than to mangle the conclusion, provide soft-core porn and a decent soundtrack.

The biggest shame, however, is that now ‘The Watchmen’ has been finally brought to the big screen, and so faithfully, I doubt there will ever be another opportunity for someone to step up, tear it to pieces, and try for a trilogy, which it deserves, at the least.

7 Responses to “The problem with The Watchmen”

  1. L.B. Jeffries Says:

    A friend of mine echoed a similar concern. He said it reminded him of that remake of Pyscho with Vince Vaughn. If you’re going to do a shot for shot recreation of the source material and add nothing yourself, what is the point? The source material will always be superior.

  2. Gerard Says:

    I do agree with you that it is not the best possible adaptation however I found the film to be rich in meaning independent of its relationship to the source material. I have only casually encountered the original text and do not presume to have made a detailed reading of it but I disagree that this adaptation is devoid of providing some message and meaning.

    It is an odd film, and contains elements that typically would not hang together in a standard A -> B film narrative. But I do not think they exist entirely to its detriment. Film has never been about holding a single type of convention static, I mean there a time when jump cuts were considered a jarring act in cinema that exposed the artifice.

    My impression of the original text was that it aimed to show that we cannot buy into the perfection of a superheroes image because these people are still human. I think this reading, whilst simplistic, can be translated with ease to the film itself. The casting of lesser known actors means that they were not beholden to their star image as strongly as an actor like Brad Pitt might be. Instead they are, at least initially, considered in terms of their hero image and we are then shown how this can affect who they are as a human, or expose it.

    I feel the presence of motion in the film not only adds gravity to certain violent moments, but also provides for a better contrast between certain scenes. The examination of the impotence of Nite Owl II shows he only has his mojo when he is a “hero” with the composition of the scene emphasizing this explicitly. The roving camera in the actual sex scene contrasts the static almost shy elements that give the (possible film literate) audience a greater insight into his point of view through the techniques of cinema.

    I have yet to give the film a planned second viewing but I had some thoughts on the choice of soundtrack which at time seemed jarring and I have a thought I wish to explore soon that might class this movie as a new extreme in postmodern cinema, where the collision of ideas, images and sounds has lost so much meaning that it is becoming absurd.

    Just my response and I enjoyed reading yours

  3. Gerard Says:

    I need to reread my comments before submitting….sorry for some of the odd grammar :S

  4. TheGameCritique Says:

    I think the problem with the movie was the oppostie of your stance. I think the problem comes from what it doesn’t take from the book or mangles from the book. These people are suppose to hide their inadequecies behind their constumed identities and yet they are all bad asses. As good as Rorschoch was they missed some key elements about him. Also he did make alteration to the story, forget the ending that’s a whole different argument, but characters were saying other character’s dialouge while the other character was standing right there. Scenes were altered to the detriment of flow and the whole focus of the movie was thrown off. The action of the comic is basically a murder mystery, but that is lost somewhere in its transition to film and it has nothing to do with the medium, but rather how it was handled. Zach Snyder was good at 300, because 300 is essence is a very shallow work, Watchmen is not a shallow work and putting a shallow director in charage of it was a mistake. I could go on, but this is long enough.

  5. GHG Says:

    good to see you finally admitted that is infact a crap movie. I still like my explanation of it better though; constant annoying voice overs, either incredibly personality-less characters or extremely violent characters (which you just wish would die), extremely violent pointless scenes with very little to make you keep watching and completely random scenes that appear to have been put there just to take advantage of the special effects team. No seriously though… annoying voice overs that take up more than 50% of teh movie are bad enough in a 90 minute film, let alone a 3 hour one!!

    …walked out once… would have left completely within the first hour if i didn’t have to give a friend a lift home. Good thing tetris and messaging friends kept me sane throughout the second and third hours!

  6. c_roy_brown Says:

    you guys are all exceptionally retarded. watchmen is easily the best comic /graphic novel film to date. and who doesn”t like violence? now i remember, great big pussies.

  7. Richard Terrell (KirbyKid) Says:

    Great post. Surprisingly thorough and evenly paced.

Leave a Reply


Bad Behavior has blocked 360 access attempts in the last 7 days.