Watchmen
March 11, 2009
The immediate joy of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' graphic novel “Watchmen” is how beautifully the images translate in cinematic terms, each successive panel a masterfully edited and framed companion to the last, telling a sprawling, multi-planed story with a post-modern visual aggressiveness, both ironic and sincere, subverting fifty years of comic book myth and storytelling in one gloriously anarchic, blood-filled treatise. Always revered as an important literary touchstone, but one that, despite its cinematic qualities, was thought to be impossible to adapt to live action film without looking cheap or silly, and for over two decades it was, but with advanced computer technology finally caught up to the book's special effects, most notably, the atomic blue superman, Dr. Manhattan, the film adaptation has finally been accomplished, and for shear audacity and validity to its source material, it works. But what doesn't work, unfortunately, is that initial shock and awe of watching the still images blend themselves into a flowing mise-en-scene, and as much as director Zach Snyder (“300”) tries to replicate that kind of motion-in-space with tedious shots of slow-mo action, it just looks old hat on screen. Of course there is more to adapting the book than just replicating the panel-for-panel motion of the characters and action, and Snyder doesn't do a bad job in cramming Moore's immense narrative, which uses flashbacks, journal entries, newspaper clippings, classified documents, and comic book threads, into a coherent, albeit long (160 minutes) examination of heroism, social anarchy, and the responsibility of complete and total power. And the look of the production is certainly worth the reported $200 million it took to complete, especially the flawless execution of Manhattan (Billy Crudup), the book's most engaging and fantastical creation, but somehow the actors drown in the production values, coming off less as individuals crafting a persona than as mimics reading text buried in costume, make-up, and green-screen backdrops. Snyder's film is ambitious and admirable, and in obvious reverence to its hallowed source material, but there's a reason Moore disowns visual adaptations of his graphic masterpieces, and the overly stylized brutality and clunky pacing of this film is a good example of it.
By Adam Suraf