Review of Watchmen (2009) by Jon G — 16 Jun 2018

Watchmen was a socially-relevant, very gritty graphic novel from the late 80s written by one of the most original comic book writers of the time (or any time), Alan Moore.

Many of Alan's books have been made into movies. From Hell. V for Vendetta. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. And he refuses to put his name on any of them because he thinks movies are pointless drivel.

So, for over 20 years, people have been trying to prove Alan wrong and find a way to put his "masterpiece," Watchmen, into film form. And no one had the balls, or technology, to accomplish it.

Until now.

First off, Zack Snyder has done the PERFECT translation of Watchmen into film. There is no way it could have ever been done better. Ever. By anyone.

However, that still doesn't mean the book translates to film well. It doesn't. At all.

Zack is very aware of how much it is possible to forever ruin Watchmen by making it into a cheesy movie, so he sticks to the source material almost verbatim. This makes for an interesting viewing experience, if you've read the book. It's like the book is being read to you.

However, it's like the book is being read to you.

It doesn't have a movie flow. It has a book flow. The film struggles to emotionally connect you with any character, except for Rorschach, who is the highlight of the film. PERFECT casting. And being so distant from the era of the cold war, even though we are seeing hints of it again, it's incredibly difficult to feel what the book made readers feel in the 80s when the cold war was so prevalent.

From the perspective of being faithful to the book, Zack should be commended and, in that respect, the film is perfect, even if they replaced the giant squid with nuclear explosions. It's a 5 star film.

However, from a film-watcher's perspective, it was too long (and, yes, I realize it had to be), it was too dated (and, yes, I realize it had to be), it was too boring and it did not flow well at all, though I think it picked up in the last half hour.

If you were a fan of the book, you HAVE to see it. If you have no idea about the book, do not waste your 3 hours and $15.

Side note: I was a huge comic book reader in the 1980s. What made Watchmen important was that, at the time, in the era of Ronald Reagan and the Cold War, what was weird was that comic book writers would not tackle the subject of nuclear war. It was almost like a silent rule that even though super heroes are supposed to save us from everything, we all know writing that a super hero could stop nuclear war is just dumb and unrealistic (even though the concept of super heroes themselves is dumb and unrealistic). It was very strange. Since no one could figure out a way to have a hero stop EVERY nuclear missile before hitting their targets, they just avoided the subject.

So when Alan Moore decided to tackle the subject head-on, he did it in a very unique way, and probably the only way it would have made sense. In Watchmen, the heroes manipulated mankind from destroying themselves. THAT is the way they saved them. They brought them together by making a common enemy from which they could unite. The heroes didn't have to "stop all the bombs." They simply had to manipulate the leaders from ever wanting to release the bombs.

It was genius.

Alan's disgust of the government, status quo, etc., and his story's descent into chaos are themes in many of Alan's stories. V for Vendetta is another great example (and much better done film). He is a master storyteller though, and superb character developer. Rorschach, in particular, comes across to me as Alan himself, which is why I think the character appeals to the reader so much. Uncompromising and blunt, like Alan himself.