A Very Special Geek Beat: Watchmen
Filed under: New Releases, Fandom, The Geek Beat

There are reading experiences that stay with you for your entire life. I don't want to sound overblown and fanatical, but one of these was Watchmen. I was in college, reading a borrowed copy, and was racing to finish it because the lender wanted it back by the end of spring break. (He owned multiple copies, and the Absolute edition, but wanted every copy in his possession at all times. This is the devotion Watchmen inspires.) I knew very little about the story. I knew it was set in the 80s, I knew it was dark and depressing, and I knew there was a sequence on Mars.
I found myself racing through the book not just because I had a deadline, but because of the countdown of the doomsday clock. Every chapter tightened the screw, and I knew something bad was coming ... but this was a comic book. Nothing bad truly happens in a comic book. I remember very distinctly that the giant squid landed as I was sitting in the optometrist's office, and that Rorschach was a smear on the snow when I left. It haunted me for the rest of the day. I felt like I shouldn't be shopping in sunny Boulder while New York was covered in blood and corpses.
I give you all of this background because when the film started ... I was right back in that optometrist's office. I experienced the same sense of claustrophobia and dread, feeling like I needed a shower after walking the grimy New York street, all mingled with the geek's thrill of seeing the panels come to life. It was the book. People were eating in the Gunga Diner. There was the newspaper vendor, breathing and talking. The spaces between the panels were colored in with living people. Dr. Manhattan finally had a voice. (He was the one character I could never really hear as I read it. But there's no doubt he should sound like a distant, hollow Billy Crudup.)
I found myself racing through the book not just because I had a deadline, but because of the countdown of the doomsday clock. Every chapter tightened the screw, and I knew something bad was coming ... but this was a comic book. Nothing bad truly happens in a comic book. I remember very distinctly that the giant squid landed as I was sitting in the optometrist's office, and that Rorschach was a smear on the snow when I left. It haunted me for the rest of the day. I felt like I shouldn't be shopping in sunny Boulder while New York was covered in blood and corpses.
I give you all of this background because when the film started ... I was right back in that optometrist's office. I experienced the same sense of claustrophobia and dread, feeling like I needed a shower after walking the grimy New York street, all mingled with the geek's thrill of seeing the panels come to life. It was the book. People were eating in the Gunga Diner. There was the newspaper vendor, breathing and talking. The spaces between the panels were colored in with living people. Dr. Manhattan finally had a voice. (He was the one character I could never really hear as I read it. But there's no doubt he should sound like a distant, hollow Billy Crudup.)
It wasn't perfect. Malin Akerman and Matthew Goode's performances left much to be desired. Some of the dialogue is stilted, although that's has much to do with Moore's purple prose, which reads well, but speaks poorly. The slow-motion, which I defended in 300, was extremely distracting and overdone. (One of my friends said "If he had just played those at normal speed, he could have saved some running time." Indeed. We might have had time for a little more of Rorschach's background.) Some of the edits feel like a giant Insert More Footage Here sign, which is just to be expected in a post-LOTR era. In that respect it's more of a tour through the book, taking you to rest on the biggest points of the story, stopping to rest at Dan's atomic nightmare or the dinner between him and Laurie. Where it lingers, it's especially wonderful, but at times it feels like a checklist to please the fans and the running time. I wish there had been more chances to linger, explore, get to know everyone, and see the pieces of the end come together. The credits sequence achieved that brilliantly though, and possibly makes the film feel a little more breathless than it actually is.
It's the ending that suffers the most. It's a sucker punch with no trail of breadcrumbs to go back and find, but instead is broadcast by every cool flicker of Ozymandias' face. It's the biggest problem the film has, not because they removed the squid, but because it comes up so fast, and with so little emotion. The enormity and the horror of Ozymandias' plot isn't felt. It's not a sucker punch, it's like a slap on the knuckles. It's here where Watchmen splits into Zack Snyder's and Alan Moore's. Snyder's Watchmen is zeroed on the costumed adventurers, and he eliminates the electric cars and the opium pipes to bring them into a sharper focus. The sucker punch of his ending lies not in the destruction of major cities but in Rorschach's death. He's the loss, not New York, and in reality that's how you measure tragedy. You don't mourn for the faceless, but for the ones you know. By the time Rorschach died in Moore's book, I was emotionally beaten. I couldn't feel bad for him, because I was still sickened by the deaths of the newspaper man, the psychiatrist and his wife, and Gail the cab driver. He was just one more face to the count. It was too much. It's supposed to be.
By narrowing it down, I think Snyder stressed the film as a cinematic superhero deconstruction, and where he played the most to non-fans, as opposed to those clamoring for a giant squid. Moore's was a distinctly literary one (and will always be the richer for it), and Snyder was faithful to it while trying to chuck some bombs at the latex trappings of our movie superheroes. Snyder knows that his newbie audience expected a film where the bomb stops at 0:01 because Dr. Manhattan saved the day. Evil plots are not supposed to succeed, heroes are not supposed to compromise in the face of Armageddon, and if they die, they die as the Spartans did in 300. They are not supposed to end up as a bloody smear on the snow, destroyed for a convenient and temporary lie by one of their comrades.
Many people are screaming that Snyder didn't "get" it, and pointing to the slow-motion, the gore, and the squidless ending. But if he hadn't gotten it, he'd have opted for the Sam Hamm script, or insisted on seeing Ozymandias killed in retribution by Nite Owl. He got it. and he made a film that's a thematic companion to The Dark Knight. That film also ends with peace that's built on a lie, and the sacrifice of Batman, and Nolan's Gotham is one where Batman may be driven forever underground, and never be admired again. But where The Dark Knight glorifies the sacrifice, Watchmen makes it something tawdry – and you find yourself rooting for The New Frontiersman to destroy the lie, even if the peace goes with it.
If I had my doubts that newcomers might not pick up on that, they were quickly dispelled in my audience. Someone behind me audibly gasped when Rorschach's journal appeared on the crank file – the kind of "Oh! from someone who didn't know the story, and who were now experiencing a satisfied thrill that Rorschach gets the final word. I don't think this person will be alone. So, I think the film succeeded, and I think Snyder deserves a hell of a lot of credit for what he managed to do. Because if nothing else, it was the work of a fan, and directed to the fans. Once the frenzy and the emotion dissipates, I hope more of them will realize and appreciate that. Even where the film fails, it's still pretty amazing. It's Watchmen.
Now bring me the director's cut and an Owl Ship toy. And may this pave the way for a ballsy Preacher.
Follow me on Twitter!










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
3-08-2009 @ 8:21PM
Kate said...
This is very reassuring to read. I really enjoy 'Watchmen', but the ending always pissed me off because I'm conditioned to expect Oxymandias should be punished, things end well, etc.
(And say what you want about the slow-mo, but Comedian jumping down to shoot up the protesters got me all flustered.)
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:03PM
mezzanine said...
I think Ozymandias did have some sort of punishment in the novel. It's been a while since I read it, but I think it went along the lines of him asking Dr. Manhattan if what he did was right, and Manhattan is just like "Hell if I know, dude, but this wasn't really your call anyway." And Ozymandias just has this sad confused look on his face and he is left alone. In the movie he just seemed like a butthole, start to finish.
3-08-2009 @ 8:39PM
Ben said...
Great column, Elizabeth. I actually didn't mind the new ending so much, if only because it seemed to tie in with the rest of the plot that had come before it a tad better than the original's (I still love the squid, don't worry). I'll concede that the slow-motion was a tad arduous, and Malin Ankerman was distractingly bad. But man, oh, man–were there some great, wonderful, beautiful moments along the way. The opening fight between the Comedian and ???; the opening titles sequence; the prison fight; the Dr. Manhattan flashback; the haunting, moving conversation that Manhattan and Silk Spectre share on Mars ("Air to gold..."); the death of Rorschach. Yes, the movie wasn't perfect...but God in heaven, did I love it anyway.
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:11PM
Steve said...
I really enjoyed Watchmen though having not read the Comic I can't comment on the differences, however I have to say that I found some of the music choices a little odd and kinda took me out of the movie a bit, particularly the one at the end of the scene on Mars, I can't remember what the song was.
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:13PM
Julie said...
Excellent! Really well written. I loved the film. It was as if I had waved a wand over the book and brought it to life, only even better, it was as beautiful as it was grimy. Could you really ask more than that opening sequence! After that I wondered how there could be any film left. I walked out with that same jangled and jarring sensation I had when I finished reading the book. Walking out feeling as if my head was heavy with thick oppressive fog. And I couldn't get that red smear of snow out of my mind. The ending felt like the ending as it always should have been, but I never was a fan of the giant squid. I keep thinking that when that director's cut comes out, and all the bits I was missing are put back, like the death of Hollis, and all those familiar faces from the newstand, it will be damn near perfect.
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:40PM
Alaina Hall said...
I agree with everything you're saying...and I to can't wait to see the Ultimate Watchmen cut (which will be the one with the black freighter in it)..Zack Snyder said it will be about 3 hours and 25 minutes but I think it will be even better then the one we saw in the theaters..because the only things I didn't like about the movie was how they didn't delve in to the story between Bernard the news stand owner and Bernie, the kid reading the Black Freighter..as well as Hollis' death..and I understand they had to cut the stuff so the people who have not read the graphic novel would not complain about an almost 3 and a half hour movie. So I think it will be my alltime favourite film once I get to see that version. As of now it's in my top 3.
3-08-2009 @ 9:39PM
Chet said...
I loved the slow-motion. I thought it was a wonderful way to convey the iconography of the graphic novel. I am very happy that the director chose to give us so many moments of stare-at-it think-on-it gorgeousness. It would have been so easy to cram in more plot points and quick-cut them along -- and so wrong.
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:42PM
andrew said...
great write-up/review. i totally agree that this was the watchmen experience captured in film form. loved every second of it and had the biggest grin through the whole movie. i knew he was being faithful and respectful of the material right from the very first shot of the movie which captures the first page of the book. i was so flipping out at its awesomness throughout the whole movie. bravo snyder! also don't want to sound like a nitpicker but the cab driver u mentioned along with the psychiatrist and news vendor guy, her name's actually "joey" or josephine. i'm pretty sure but i could be wrong. anyways nice job!
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:45PM
Kaeli said...
You know, I had a similar conversation with the people I saw the movie with. I remember when I read the book, and Adrian explains that he set his plan into motion "thirty-five minutes ago," you could have pushed me over with a feather.
I hoped that moment would have that same sort of weight in the movie... I didn't feel it, and I asked my companions (who hadn't read the book) if they did... I think we saw New York blow up so many times in all the trailers, because the general consensus was that they were pretty sure the heroes were going to fail.
So that's disappointing. I did feel a twinge when I saw the newspaper guy and his unlikely friend the comic reader (I'm sure they have names, but I don't recall them. I'm not a Watchmen encyclopedia. :P) watching the oncoming blast wave... but I thought, "Well that's a shame... if you haven't read the book, you have absolutely no idea who these guys are," and you put it pretty succinctly here. I think the film's audience isn't as floored by the final sequence of events because even though we know who the heroes are, we're never really introduced to the people they're trying to protect, so we don't really feel anything when their protectors fail them here.
But I could nitpick the ending all day. The final scene between Rorshach and Manhattan was flawless, and the fact that you heard gasps when the journal turned up at the New Frontiersman tells me that maybe there was an impact after all.
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:51PM
Christopher Johnson said...
Great review. Agreed on so many levels.
My thoughts were posted here earlier today http://is.gd/mpC5
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 9:58PM
YouFaceTheTick said...
"The enormity and the horror of Ozymandias' plot isn't felt."
It wasn't felt in the book either. It's a tired concept and I'll never get why people feel this was an earth-shattering ending. It's an old concept. So a hero plots to destroy something so it will be better in the long run...and...where's the shocking part?
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 9:01AM
Kevin said...
Agreed. Hell even I, Robot (the crappy movie) had the whole "I must destroy you to protect you" aspect to it, so I don't get how this is such a shocking and telling ending. Maybe when the GN came out 20 years ago it was earth shattering, but the moral dilemma brought about by debating whether the ends justify the means in that situation has been played out a hundred times in my 27 years on this earth, so its almost a cliche at this point.
3-08-2009 @ 10:16PM
Joshi said...
Thank you. Thank you for pointing out to me something that should have been obvious before but wasn't. I'd always felt (well... "always" being "since Friday") that the comic book ending resonated with me a lot more than the movie one. I think it's mainly because the book did allow us to invest in the lives of the psychiatrist, the cab driver, the newspaper salesman and so on, and to see, not even the event itself, but the aftermath of it, was something that will live with me for a long long time, and Snyder's won't.
That said, I think Snyder, while not getting the ending down pat, earned the eventual ended he gave us and it was truly amazing.
P.S If the beginning of this comment comes off as sarcastic, I assure you that wasn't my intention.
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 10:53PM
Kyle said...
"So, I think the film succeeded, and I think Snyder deserves a hell of a lot of credit for what he managed to do. Because if nothing else, it was the work of a fan, and directed to the fans."
Well said. It frustrates me reading reviews from CNN and EW talking about how the film was "too faithful" and that they were frustrated the film did not cater to the general movie going audience. Shouldn't those faithful to the graphic novel be rewarded and not have to suffer seeing their favorite novel bastardized to appease the masses who could care less about a plot that intellectually stimulates and challenges the audience with moral relativism? I'm glad others agree.
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 9:08AM
Kevin said...
Thank you for pointing out what most fans of this graphic novel seem so terrifed and incapable of doing; this was not a good movie, it was a fans movie. It was made for people who loved the GN and not many others. Every glowing review that I read of it gushes about the GN and how great it was to see these characters on screen, and theres nothing wrong with loving a movie because of its source material (in fact, its kinda great that someone in Hollywood didn't dumb something down and just throw in a bunch of explosions to try and sell it to the masses). But having said that, those attitudes don't make this a good movie. Every person I have spoken to who went into the film without having read the GN HATED this movie, with a passion generally. Not because they were stupid, but because without the right background this film doesn't succeed. You need to have read the GN in a way that you did not need to have read LotR, or the Killing Joke, or Shawshank Redemption to really love the film. So if you read the GN and loved it, then saw the movie and loved it, then why is it so wrong to just admit that you loved the latter because you loved the former first?
3-09-2009 @ 12:08AM
mike green said...
I think Mailin Ackerman was good, the character is the problem, any actress would have the same problems with Laurie
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 12:39AM
Andy said...
Thank God the heretofore silent majority of us who LOVE this film are speaking out. The roar of this film's snobby naysayers was beginning to really grate. Yes, I loved the book. Yes my expectations were WAY too high for this film ... and to have them not only met but exceeded was a thrill. I haven't been this overwhelmed by a piece of cinematic entertainment since Titanic.
Check out my review at either ...
Examiner.com
http://www.examiner.com/x-4121-Pop-Culture-News-Examiner~y2009m3d7-Watchmen-Review--Epic-Masterpiece
or The Wordslinger
http://www.thewordslinger.com/posts.php?id=245
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 1:50AM
mike green said...
that's because most people are stupid, Watchmen packs enough ideas and narrative threads for 5 movies and most people can't keep up
on this article it is mentioned the ending of the dark knight when batman takes the rap to prevent people from loosing all hope, well, 90% of the people who saw and liked the movie completely missed that, they just remember the joker being bad ass, the bat bike and not much else
mainstream audience can't take more that one idea at the time, prove of this that almost no review or comment made written by someone unfamiliar with the material mentions the dilema at the end, because at that point they just want ssomeone get beat up and some nig CGI scenes, they can't process new narrative
sad but true
3-09-2009 @ 2:07AM
viewdrix said...
As someone who hasn't read past Chapter II of the graphic novel yet (only Chapter I when I saw the film earlier today), I'll saw the film did pull an emotional punch in the ending. Not because of Rorschach's death, really, but because it was a natural evolution - the nukes, Jon's analysis of the worth of a human life, or the life of all mankind, versus the universe - culminating in a twist ending. Ozymandias's plot wasn't a huge punch in the way of faceless death, sure, but his seemingly inhuman reasoning that previously only belonged to the actually inhuman Jon, and how revealing his hand in the destruction of American cities would actually destroy peace... it threw me. Completely. It's a messed up, complete spin on regular conventions.
That said, obviously I need to read the rest of the graphic novel.
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 11:20AM
Kaeli said...
Really glad to see this. The ending was, of course, softer for me because I knew what was coming, it's nice to hear someone coming in fresh did have this sort of reaction.
I hope you enjoy the rest of the book!