Nick Reviews ‘Watchmen’

SPOILERS AHEAD. Consider yourself warned.

By all means, please go see this movie. The fact that it exists is a cause for celebration. The ambition it takes to make something like WATCHMEN is admirable, indeed, and it begs to be seen on the big screen. Bravo to those involved with this production, especially director Zack Snyder and producer Lawrence Gordon. This wouldn’t exist without their involvement.

If you are tired of the same old, same old and yearn for something new, well, here it is.

It has been said that the comic could never be made into a film. Let me assure you that blanket statements are almost always unfounded. I would argue, especially with the advent of digital technology and computer graphic effects, that if you can imagine something, then it can be filmed.

There are great moments in this film that are examples of filmmakers at the top of their craft.

So, having gotten pure adoration out of the way…

‘Watchmen’ is a good – but not great – movie.

Don’t get caught up in the hyperbole, this is not cinema’s heir to CITIZEN KANE, though that is not to say that the film is in any way a dud. Quite the opposite.

Besides, when did “good” become not good enough?

Let me quote one of the producers, Deborah Snyder, in regards to the strengths of this particular version of the ‘Watchmen’ story:

“Our hope is that whoever sees the film discovers or rediscovers the graphic novel because there’s so much more than we can possibly get on the screen.”

That’s my sentiments exactly and it is spot on for how I felt when I left the theater. I wanted nothing more than to read the comic again.

Snyder’s film is an ambitious adaptation, for sure, and when it succeeds it does so with aplomb.

When it stumbles, and it does, it is heartbreaking because it is so close to greatness.

The film’s biggest triumph is in the execution of Dr. Manhattan’s origin story, told simultaneously with his excursion to Mars and the building of his massive, crystal palace. Everything works here, especially the sublime acting and voice-over by Billy Crudup. The editing is effortless, marrying nostalgia, melancholy, fear and awe to an otherworldly soundtrack. The whole experience is set to Philip Glass’ “Pruit Igoe & Prophecies,” which is as perfect an accompaniment as one could hope. The sequence is the crowning achievement of Snyder’s adaptation and little else in the film comes close to its sense of wonderment.

The film has a flawless visual aesthetic. The world it inhabits is completely realized from top to bottom. Every detail you can find in the comic book can be found within the frames of the film. Production designer Alex McDowell has consistently delivered on every film he has been a part of and ‘Watchmen’ is another film to add to his considerable list of achievements. He pulls Dave Gibbon’s imagination from the page and gives it flesh and blood.

Likewise, costume design by Michael Wilkinson is impeccable. Using Gibbon’s illustrations, Wilkinson finds a way to stay true to the comic and at the same time find a way to integrate his own design flourishes so that the costumed heroes look natural in the real world. His greatest contribution may be that of Dan Dreiberg’s Nite Owl II costume. It never deviates from the source so much that it becomes unrecognizable but Wilkinson imbues his take with design elements that recall the later ‘Batman’ costumes. It looks like something that might stop bullets, as opposed to the typical spandex look so popular among comic’s superheroes.

Then there is the matter of visual effects. John DesJardin was the VFX supervisor on ‘Watchmen’ and the work done under his watch is truly remarkable. Dr. Manhattan’s character immediately comes to mind. He could very well have been nothing more than a blue man with an ethereal glow. Instead, his body is pulsing with life and light just beneath the skin. His eyes look like they may contain small, bursting universes. It is a mesmerizing trick.

DP Larry Fong, who was Snyder’s collaborator on the successful ‘300,’ wonderfully captures all of this. Fong utilizes much of the comic’s color palette in his lighting schemes. It is a vivid, colorful comic book world and it is lit like a film noir, Mario Bava colors shadowed like an old RKO picture.

I cannot imagine another adaptation of ‘Watchmen’ looking any better.

Then there is the matter of performance. I have previously mentioned Billy Crudup and stand by my assertion that his rendition of Dr. Manhattan is utterly flawless, but how do the other cast members fair?

The real star of the show is Jeffrey Dean Morgan as Edward Blake, aka The Comedian. Morgan is magnetic as the destructive Blake and he commands the screen every time he shows up. Every movement, his vocal intonations and the way he carries himself all point to a total commitment to the role. As flawless as Crudup’s performance as Dr. Manhattan may be, it still lacks the tragic immediacy of Morgan’s Comedian. Unfortunately, his character has limited screen time.

Thankfully, Jackie Earle Haley’s rendition of Walter Kovacs, aka Rorschach, is there to fill the void. Although ‘Watchmen’ is an ensemble piece, it is Rorschach that supplies much of the narrative drive and Haley really nails the character. His performance is all the more remarkable considering for how much of the film his character’s face is hidden by a mask. Haley’s growling voice is very akin to Christian Bale’s vocal work as the ‘Batman’ character, yet Haley’s tone and diction sounds more natural, comfortable than Bale’s forced delivery. It could be the difference between someone who plays a part and someone who lives it. Rorschach is most certainly a living, breathing sociopath.

After that, however, the performances fail to mesmerize. Matthew Goode looks fantastic in the Ozymandias costume but is mostly ineffectual in the role. He exudes cold, calculating logic but fails to ever feel menacing or engaging.

Patrick Wilson is serviceable as Dan Dreiberg, aka Nite Owl II, but he suffers in much of the same way as Goode. Both men look the part but they don’t really “own” the part. It is not hard to imagine the roles being played the same way by any number of actors. They are neither remarkable nor unremarkable. They simply exist as nothing more than actors reciting dialogue, which is boring to watch regardless of how wonderful everything around them looks.

My feelings toward Malin Akerman’s portrayal of Laurie Jupiter are slightly better. Her character has an interesting arc and her relationship with Dr. Manhattan is engaging. She’s a mortal woman clinging to the vestiges of an intimate relationship with the omnipotent Manhattan, a man that is slowly forgetting what it is to be a member of the human race. Their moments together are emotional highlights of the film.

One of the biggest problems in ‘Watchmen’ is the soundtrack. Some of it works, like “Pruit Igo & Prophecies.” A large majority of it does not. Bob Dylan’s “Desolation Row” works well in conjunction with the opening credits, while stuff like Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah” and Jimi Hendrix’s “All Along The Watchtower” just feel like they are shoehorned in. The most heinous example I can remember is the use of “99 Luftballoons” by Nena. It simply dominates the scene it plays against, though it shouldn’t, and it completely takes you out of the movie. And yes, I know that “All Along The Watchtower” is referenced in the comic but I also know that not everything that works on the page will work on the screen.

Concurrently, the score for this movie is horrible. Tyler Bates is more capable than what is on display throughout ‘Watchmen’ and the movie deserves something better, something epic. What passes for a film score in this movie is utterly forgettable. For people that are sensitive to music, a bad score can ruin a movie. Bates score does little to bolster ‘Watchmen’ for me. If you are a fan of film scores, then get ready to be underwhelmed.

Then there is the third act.

“Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends.”

That line of dialogue is monumentally important to the end of the graphic novel. It encapsulates so much of the driving theme and it is a searing admonishment for Adrian Veidt, aka Ozymandias, a man that is looking to Dr. Manhattan for some kind of vindication. You see, this “Watchman” has done something horrific in the name of peace, something unthinkable. Ozymandias wants to know if this horrific act was a just course of action, he wants to know that his decision was not made in vain. He wants to know that he did the right thing.

“Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends,” Dr. Manhattan tells him.

Ozymandias is left with no justification for his Machiavellian ways. His actions are mired in ambiguity. Even worse, his solution is told to him to be nothing more than temporary.

It is one of the most damning and integral exchanges in the whole ‘Watchmen’ comic.

It does not appear in the film.

The visual notifiers, clocks and smiling faces, are littered throughout the movie. Deeper meanings, whose philosophical importance exists between the frames of the comic, those have a tendency to get lost. Not entirely, mind you, because the screenwriters have made sure to supplant whole chunks of dialogue from the page to the screen.

There are people that would argue that the importance is the line of dialogue itself, not who says it or how it is delivered. How very little a person must understand of the nature of drama to make a statement like that.

Instead of the exchange as depicted in the comic, Dr. Manhattan’s line is merely alluded to in a conversation during the film’s epilogue and is delivered by Laurie Jupiter, aka Silk Spectre II, in an exchange with Dan Dreiberg, aka Nite Owl. It is a complete throwaway moment when it should be anything but.

How strange, the people responsible for this motion picture adaptation had been so faithful to the source material, slavishly even. In any multitude of interviews and behind the scenes media, allusions to the importance of remaining true to the original comic are hammered upon again and again. What were they remaining true to, I wonder? I suppose that they must have meant that they were being true to what could be physically seen on the page: text, symbolist imagery and the framing of particular scenes.

This is not being “nitpicky” as much as I feel like I am voicing a very serious flaw concerning the film’s narrative. Also, the fact that this line is excised from the film doesn’t mean that the movie is terrible, though I do feel as if it weakens the emotional impact of the climax, itself already hampered by choices in “translation.”

The ending of this film has been a point of contention amongst fans of the comic since the film was in production.

At the comic’s climax, Ozymandias orchestrates the death of millions of New Yorkers to look like an alien attack. It is a catastrophic event that brings about world peace. The Watchmen decide to keep mum about the whole thing in the hopes that peace will continue unabated. End of story.

In the film’s climax, Ozymandias orchestrates the deaths of millions of people around the world to look like an attack by Dr. Manhattan. It is a catastrophic event that brings about world peace. The Watchmen decide to keep mum about the whole thing in the hopes†¦ you get the idea.

So, the “MacGuffin” is completely different, though the action and the outcome are pretty much the same from comic to film. Still, it is a change that doesn’t sit well with many fans and those people will probably not like this movie.

Snider and Co. not only found a way to make their ending work but also managed to tie it closer to the characters. Bravo. Good for them. I am sure that was: A) not easy to do, and B) not an easy choice to make.

Changing the MacGuffin from squid to Dr. Manhattan works in regards to the language of film’s narrative structure, which should always be tied to your central characters in some way, shape or form. Please note, I am not saying that the ending to the comic is somehow lesser or cheaper. I am saying, per respect to the two different mediums, that both endings work.

I do not, however, concede to believe that the film’s ending is more satisfying than Moore and Gibbon’s original. Within the confines of a script, the ending works, but on the screen it has almost no emotional impact. There is an explosion seen from afar, a bright light, some faceless people disintegrate into nothing. Something that should be an emotional punch to the gut has been turned into a serviceable special effect.

Where is the aftermath? The carnage? The dead, familiar faces? We see the ruins of a city, only ruins, and then it is off to the third act confrontation. All this horrible death is treated as a footnote. And as for the comic’s familiar ancillary characters, they have nearly been cut completely from the film. I suppose this was done in the hopes of releasing a film with a manageable running time. I can understand that, to a point. Watchmen cost a reported $120 million. Money has to be made. Too bad it is at the expense of an emotional payoff. Veidt’s holocaust is rendered painless to the audience, when it should be devastating, a guileless choice to have made in a film full of such bold storytelling. It flatlines the movie.

Watchmen is so good on so many levels but I must admit that I do not believe that this is the definitive masterpiece we were hoping for.

It’s good, but not great.

Maybe next time.

[Overall: 3.5 stars out of 5]