"Watchmen" movie review by Ben Kenber

Here’s the thing with film adaptations of a famous book; you are basically looking at one person’s interpretation of that book. Everyone has their own take on that book, and their admiration or vicious hatred of the film it is based on how they saw it in their heads when they read it. The success of the movie is more or less based on that, and the task of transferring the printed page onto the silver screen can be a thankless job. Some will say that it differs too much from the source material, and others will say that it is way too faithful to it (e.g. the first two “Harry Potter” movies). No one can seem to make up their damn minds after witnessing a film like this, and this is another great reason why we should abandon all expectations before the coming attractions stop and the film starts.

In the end, we should be thankful that any film came out of the Hugo award winning graphic novel “Watchmen,” and that’s even if you are Alan Moore. Alan has all but disowned the film version of the novel to where his name is not even mentioned in the opening credits (it instead lists co-creator Dave Gibbons). Is the perfect translation of the graphic novel to the big screen? We’ll never know, and it ain’t worth pondering what could have been. While it may seem a little too faithful to the graphic novel, “Watchmen” is in many ways a fantastic movie brought vividly to life by “300” director Zack Snyder who is a diehard fan of the book. Even with a length of almost 3 hours, the movie is a terrific accomplishment that combines special effects, great sound (you feel those punches), and some terrific performances as well.

I have never really gotten into graphic novels myself, but a friend a work gave me his copy to read, and he was prepared to give his copy to anyone else who had not read it. I ended up buying my own company to make it a little easier on him to do that. Let me put it this way; it is one of the few books that I desperately want to reread. “Watchmen” works on so many different levels, and there is so much to take in that reading it once is not enough. The same goes for the movie which works so well on a visual level that you need to watch it again to take in all the thematic elements. What I really have to give Snyder and screenwriters David Hayter and Alex Tse is that they manage to get a lot of the book into the movie without making you feel overwhelmed by all that is going on. I was afraid it would end up like one of those Woody Allen movies where so many things got discussed to where I got a massive headache and got all worn out.

The movie, like the book itself, takes place in an alternate 1985, one that’s even worse than what Doc Brown and Marty McFly experienced in “Back To The Future Part II:”

“It’s like we’re in hell or something!”

“No, no, no, this is 1985 alright although I can’t imagine hell being much worse!”

Richard Nixon is still President of the United States, and is now serving his 5^th term in the office thanks to us staying in Vietnam instead of leaving it like we did. I do have to say that I would have loved to see Frank Langella play the President like he did brilliantly in “Frost/Nixon.” Instead, we have Robert Wisden playing Nixon as the caricature we know him. At the same time, Wisden doesn’t overdo it, so he keeps it from being a completely laughable performance. It’s just that Wisden has the bad luck of playing Nixon after we saw Langella in the same role just a month or two earlier.

Anyway, this alternate reality has the US still fighting the Cold War with Russia, and the threat of nuclear war is in the air with the feeling of apocalyptic doom getting stronger and stronger. In the midst of all this, the Comedian/Edward Blake (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is murdered. This ends up reuniting the Watchmen who have (like “The Incredibles”) been banned from doing superhero work ever again, and Rorschach/Walter Kovacs (Jackie Earle Haley) is the first to do an in depth investigation of the Comedian’s murder as he feels an attack against him is an attack against all the costumed heroes.

There are no real Boy Scouts or a Superman to be found among these “superheroes.” They are damaged goods in one way or another, some even worse off than others. Rorschach himself is a sociopath, seeking justice in a world he has come to deeply despise. The Comedian is a vicious man who believes he is living the American dream even as he kills the enemy with no mercy. Dr. Manhattan seems so alienated from the rest of humanity, and seems uncaring about his general appearance, especially with his throbbing python of love on full display.

It looks like “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” really did break through the barrier of showing a male penis on the big screen. People have been more afraid of a penis than they are of a gun in a movie let alone television or the news. It’s about time some one addresses this endlessly hypocritical issue. Still, I wonder how much of the budget went into enhancing Billy Crudup’s supporting player. One word for you – priceless!

Both the movie and the book of “Watchmen” deconstructs how we see those masked heroes, and the important question said throughout the movie remains the same; Who watches the watchmen? Should there indeed be a supervisor over these people who have self-appointed themselves as our guardians of justice? Won’t these dudes become a little too power hungry? Or are we just too lazy to take matters into our hands and want other people to handle the dirty work we are too cowardly to handle on our own?

One of the big themes of “Watchmen” however is how true to ourselves can we really be? When do we end up compromising what we believe in, and should we? The movie’s climax, which is unlike any in the comic book genre, tests the characters’ morals and of what they feel should be done. It’s a haunting conclusion that stays with you long after it’s all over, as each of the characters has a good point to make in some respects. What happens in the end is horrifying, but it produces results that are not easily foreseen. Is it worth it for the truth to be exposed, or are we better off letting people live a lie? Somehow, the truth does always seem to win out.

There were many other filmmakers who so wanted to bring Alan Moore’s magnum opus to the silver screen and some wanted to modernize the events. Instead of Nixon still being President, some wanted to focus on Bush and the current wars we are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Frankly, I’m glad that Zack Snyder didn’t go that route as we are constantly given constant updates in regards to how we are doing over there, and all it gives us a lot of anxiety and depression. There’s a reason why movies like “Rendition,” “In The Valley of Elah,” and “Stop Loss” met with largely empty theaters and low box office returns. There is only so much of this war business we can take. By sticking with the book’s imagined timeline of events, Snyder keeps things from being too current, and it shows just how respectful he is to the original text.

The thought of Nixon having more than two terms is not all that far fetched even with what happened at Watergate. I’m sure if any President (Democrat or Republican) had a chance to serve more than two terms, they just might take the chance (except of course for George W. who was so desperate to get outta there). It may seem unfathomable to us, but then again, how many of us ever get to be President of the United States?

In terms of the performances, one of the best ones comes from Billy Crudup as Dr. Manhattan / Jon Osterman. As a man who is transformed from a regular human being into a supernatural being who feels largely disconnected from the world around him, I think Billy has the toughest role to play. His character has to seem almost completely uncaring about planet Earth, but you have to believe that there is a part of this man who still cares about what happens to it. Billy Crudup is still a very accomplished actor, and he is still one of the most underrated actors working today. I don’t think many people even realize what a brilliant actor he can be.

But for me, the best performance in this movie belongs to Jackie Earle Haley who plays the titular antihero Rorschach. So brilliant he was as the feared pedophile in “Little Children,” Jackie finds the core of this man who was wounded by experiences that no child should ever have to experience. We can see why he feels about the world around him. The world and the people who were supposed to love him treated him like leftover garbage, and now he is treating the world in exactly the same way. Jackie’s performance is kind of like “Taxi Driver’s” Travis Bickle as a superhero of the most unwelcome kind. He makes you believe that Rorschach is a man to be feared even when he is in prison surrounded by people he put there. Jackie’s second act in show business is a deserved one, and I am eager to see what he will do next.

“Watchmen” is not a perfect movie, and it does drag in some spots which got me a little restless (I didn’t look at my watch though, and that’s a plus). But when all is said and done, I think that this adaptation of the graphic novel is the best we could hope for. While some of us may wonder what Terry Gilliam or Paul Greengrass may have done with this material, I think it is perfectly suited to the talents of Zack Snyder who burst into the directing scene with “Dawn Of The Dead,” one of the few genuinely good horror movie remakes of the past few years. You at least got to give Zack points for having the guts to even an attempt an adaptation of this acclaimed book. Having read it, I think the movie ended up in good hands.

Now, if only Alan Moore would take the time to see it. Then again, the movie doesn’t really need his seal of approval at this point.

***1/2 out of ****