Re-Viewing: “Watchmen” (2009)

“What, in life, does not deserve celebrating?”

- Adrian Veidt/Ozymandias

Hi there. When I "Re-View" films, it actually means that I am RE-Viewing them. Thus giving me the opportunity to share my reflections on a film I have by then viewed more than once. Some may seem better, some may seem worse. Instant hit doesn't mean classic, standing the test of time does.

“Watchmen” (2009)

Directed by Zach Snyder. This film is famous for making teenagers everywhere snicker at “blue balls” for entirely new reasons.

“Watchmen” was far from the failure it could have been. It enjoyed a quite handsome Box Office succes for something that starred no Hollywood A-listers and was based on a not too famous property. Likewise, the critical reception was actually quite fair for a work that was so uncinematic.

Hold on, did I just say uncinematic? Yes I did. The graphic novel “Watchmen” was praised for being cinematic in it’s visual style. That is, until it’s writer Alan Moore came out and said thinking that was completely missing the point (Moore never being one to hold his tongue when it comes to how his work is treated).

Much of the visual profoundity, details and symbolism that the graphic novel was praised for hiding within each panel comes off as heavy-handed when the movie tries to replicate them. I espescially thinking of a certain “snow angel” in the final act.

Much criticism was raised at the choice of Zack Snyder for the director’s chair. But while his action-heavy style (which must, in part, have been there for market appeal) did deflate some of the feelings of vulnerability and dread in the original work, there is no denying that he loves the source material.

Watchmen was, at this time, a film which would never completely satisfy anyone. The hardcore fans would criticize any change made to the source material, and the generel audience… well what about them really?

 

What time is it one the Doomsday Clock?

I believe the thing that it really didn’t have going for itself was its timing. Like a 9/11 joke in December of 2001 it was simply “too soon”.

The original graphic novel would never have achieved anywhere the praise it did if it wasn’t for the fact that it had roughly speaking 60 years of comic book history behind it. The specifics of the history didn’t really matter – what matters was that Watchmen could splatter that image like a symmetrical inkblot.

The superhero genre (which is essentially what we are discussing when we say “comic books”) only really made it onto the big screen with “X-Men” in 2000. And only a few franchises really hit it big, though many were launched. That means that “Watchmen” – the movie – has at best a history of 10 years to deconstruct. And no matter how well that deconstruction was, it wasn’t gonna have as much impact as if we had been watching “straight” superhero movies for a least another half decade.

And even then we would have had films like “The Dark Knight” upping the ante, changing the game. Calling for new subject matter to be twisted and subverted.

Perhaps cinema had been better served with a completely different story to deconstruct “superhero movies” like “Watchmen” (the graphic novel) did for superhero comics.

Nonetheless, “Watchmen” is probably the closest thing we’ll ever get to seeing the graphic novel translated faithfully to the screen. This will hopefully satisfy the more reasonable fanbase, and pleasure the slightly-openminded general audience. After all Snyder’s hand gives them a lot of reason to pop this disc into the player as well.