Saturday 7 March 2009

Having Watched the Watchmen

Warning. Spoilers follow, for both the film and the graphic novel.

On the off chance that anyone's actually reading this, is thinking of watching the film and doesn't want any spoilers, here's a short presentation before the main feature.



There. That should have forced the guts of this piece off the front page.

One theory about the recent rise of comic derived movies is that movie people look at a comic and see a whole load of storyboards. This could certainly be true of Zack Synder who seems to have gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure that all the significant scenes from the comic actually appear in the film. The murder of Edward Blake comes first as a scene in it's own right, but then we cut to a rather remarkable realisation of the first page of the comic - the Comedian's button lying in a pool of blood, zooming out to show the 'End of the World is Nigh' signboard walking down the street and even the Pyramid Transcontinental van heading away. When the funeral opened with a close up on a carved angel's head (the less famous opening of issue two) I did wonder if the film was going to contain every issue cover. Which might have been an interesting easter egg for sad gonks like me, but probably wouldn't have help the rest of the world appreciate the film.

Though saying that, this is not a film aimed at the rest of the world. It's a slavish hymn of praise to Alan Moore and Dave Gibbon's original, aimed squarely at those of us who know the original backwards. Sure, there are differences, but the only one that actually counts is swapping out the giant space squid, that didn't really make much sense, for an ending that hangs together a bit better, and various characters make a point of using the word watchmen to describe themselves, but it's all straight from the books.

The major cut from the book is the Black Freighter, which wouldn't have added to the narrative, so no great less. There are a few other minor cuts, but what's less appealing is what Synder felt the need to put in. Violence. Lots of violence.

It's not like there's no violence within the Watchmen comic, but with the exception of Rorschach, the violence is generally implied, and let's be honest incompetent. Nite Owl is a plump kid with the coolest toys on the block. Here's he's a kick ass martial artist who's not only capable of breaking a mugger's am, he's able to shatter that arm in a spray of blood. In the same fight we see Laurie kill two of the muggers and laugh about it later. It's wrong. Laurie shouldn't be a casual killer. It's just not her. In the flashback of Jon's brief crimefighting career, OK he can blow up mobsters with a glance, but do we really need to see their entrails hanging from the ceiling? In the prison riot a man is killed because Rorschach has tied him up to deny access to a door. In the comic there is a sput of blood from off panel. The brutality is implied and because of that more powerful. Synder thinks we need to see both his arms cut off with an angle grinder. In slow motion.

Essentially what we have here is a very accurate use of the comics as storyboards, by a director who's instincts are for horror movies. He adds very little to the story, and little of that is an improvement. It looks wonderful though, I expect he's a lot happier with it than I'm ever likely to be. I have no idea whether someone who hasn't read and reread the story over the last 25 years is actually going to get all the clever stuff, since most of that's about splendidly recreating individual comic panels on film. Then again, they're less likely to be annoyed by the silly little things that bug me. Dan witnessing Rorschach and Manhattan's final confrontation? Why?

Still, as a (still) plump (former) kid without all the best toys, I've wanted an Owlship of my own for a very long time. This film just makes me want one more.

Who wants to watch the Watchmen?

It was the summer of 1986, and I'd come back from the late lamented Rainbow's End, the best comic shop in Oxford, to sulk upstairs and read what, within half an issue, was obviously the greatest comic ever published.

After finishing The Dark Knight Returns I started on the first issue of Watchmen. It was perhaps the shortest ever reign as greatest comic ever. Watchmen was like nothing else at all. Sure, Dark Knight was wonderful, even if the bad guy was someone I'd never heard of, Two Face never having appeared on the Adam West TV show, but Watchmen was more. One was nothing but style, the other had both style and substance.
So then there was the increasingly painful slow trickle of Watchmen issues coming out, leading up to the frankly anti-climatic ending. It changed people's expectations of comics, with the rapid collected edition it changed the medium forever.

About fifteen minutes after the TPB came out the word began to get round that Terry Gilliam, former python, was to make Watchmen the movie. And so the story went for at least a decade without ever showing the slightest sign of becoming reality. The story kept bubbling along, a script would apparently be written, some funding would be secured, or lost, but in the end it seemed that the idea of a Gilliam directed Watchmen was something hard core fans of both wanted rather more that Hollywood, Moore, or the general public would want. And I was certainly with the general public on that one.

Why after all would you really want to make a film of Watchmen? It's too big, too sprawling to be crammed down into two and a half hours without stripping everything away. The whole thing demolishes the idea of superheroes, but without ever straying away from the iconography of the four colour comic. Film goers don't have that kind of vocabulary, the whole thing would surely need to be dumbed down. You could make a very bad film and call it Watchmen if you really wanted to, but would be be possible to make a good film?

Things have changed a bit over the years of course. It's no longer surprising to want to make a comic from a film, and some of them have even been quite good. It used to be that a superhero movie would have to be nothing but origin story, sixty minutes of introducing you to Peter Parker, his friends and family, and only showing a costume in the last half. Though it should be remembered that Watchmen is little but an extended origin story, even if it is one told entirely in flashback. It's no longer a mad idea to do a watchmen movie, but it still seems a touch meh.

Is it the case that a book has only really 'arrived' when there's a film made of it? I don't think I've every heard of anyone making a film of Paradise Lost, nor the Night's Dawn trilogy. Works of literature can be great works of literature without needing to be translated into other media.