Watchmen VS. Watchmen

Watchmen Review Part 1

The original Watchmen is a graphic novel written by Alan Moore and drawn by Dave Gibbons. The 1986 comic book series was a dissection of the super-hero concept; a realistic, stark, psychological study of famous characters, themes, and archetypes.

The film adaptation of Watchmen, directed by Zack Snyder with screenplay credit to Alex Tse and David Hayter, is a misguided cash-in that deviates from the entire point of the 12-part graphic novel and decides that style over substance is the only way to get ahead in Hollywood, even when it sacrifices the very fundamentals of what made the source material compelling to begin with.

Let me start off by saying that I really do want to judge Watchmen the film on it's on credits. I should state, though, that I do have an unavoidable bias towards an intellectual property's original medium. I will always compare and contrast, no matter what. In this review, in fact, you will hear plenty of comparisons.

However, I am only keen to compare and contrast what's truly important; the very rudimentary values that were established in the books that should not have been changed. Honestly, I'm hardly even bothered by the change in the ending. They very well could have made a giant monster and called it an alien, but using Dr. Manhattan as a scapegoat serves it's purpose just as well.

No, what bothers me is that the film seems to ignore most of the entire purpose behind Watchmen, which was to portray the various social, psychological, and moral impacts of vigilantism, along with the struggle of a super-human to relate to the people around him.

First, let's address the issue of violence in film. Watchmen, the graphic novel, is in no way gentle. The content within it is meant to shock you with it's depictions of violence; to arrest you with the reality of these character's actions. The film, however, seems intent on entertaining you with it's violence; lingering shots of blood and gore becoming glorifying and exploitative, not damning and tragic.

My first example would be the fight in the alleyway. Laurie and Daniel are caught in a fight with a gang. In the comic, it's somewhat violent, but it's two trained fighters basically taking down a bunch of thugs in self defense. In the movie, it's over-kill to a degree that's not only over-the-top, but totally against character. These guys are not supposed to be killers, especially Daniel. He should be the first guy trying not to murder these punks, yet in the movie, they both leave at least a couple of them dead and dying on the pavement.

Furthermore, the action is here is totally over-choreographed, which itself becomes a dire issue with this movie. It breaks the realism and turns a couple of real-to-life characters into something out of a kung-fu flick. It goes against the entire point of the story and themes. It feels utterly pointless, as well.

Speaking of utterly pointless action scenes in this movie, how about the prison-break? I once saw a reviewer tell me it was one of the best additions to the movie. I felt like it was drawn out, over-the-top, and packed to the gills with over-used slow-mo and needless acrobatics. These are SUPPOSED to be real people, but again, this plays out more like a stereotypical comic-book.

There's a certain amount of irony there.

Part 2 to follow!