|
|
Director Zack Snyder is a hot property having made a hit out of Frank Miller's graphic novel "300", which was a good training ground for tackling this project. "Watchmen" also has the distinction of being the only graphic novel to have been included on the Times 100 best novels list. On the other hand, it's been in development hell for almost 20 years with directors like Terry Gilliam, Darren Aronofsky and Paul Greengrass attached to it at various times. A lengthy legal battle over ownership rights to the property was waged between FOX and Warner Bros. The graphic novel's writer, Alan Moore, has condemned the project from the outset after being dissatisfied with previous adaptations of his work like "V For Vendetta" by the Wachowski brothers. The source text has been declared un-filmable. There's no A-list actor to attract audiences. Hardly anyone knows the graphic novel and the film is over 160 minutes long. Finally, the filmmakers and studio took a chance with their willingness to go for an R-rating in the US, which by now seems more of a stigma as it excludes the "family audience" watered-down PG-13 flicks target. And it features a naked blue guy. None of that spells successful film and, well, so so far it hasn't been. On a financial level. Where it does succeed is as a film, ironically just because of its apparent drawbacks as a potential blockbuster.
"Watchmen" is set in an alternate universe. It's 1980s America, but Ronald Reagan or Gordon Gekko-type yuppies are nowhere to be seen. The US has won the Vietnam War and Richard Nixon has been re-elected. The Cold War is hotter than ever and the world is on the brink of a nuclear war that promises to wipe out the planet. The superheroes who made these events possible have been outlawed in the US after they turned into vigilantes. The former Watchmen, as their group was called, have either retired or work for the government. Only Rorschach prowls the night-time NY streets secretly and dispenses his own version of justice. When the Comedian, one of the former Watchmen, is found murdered, Rorschach sets out to find the killer and in the process uncovers events that will decide the fate of the world. This set-up definitely sounds like a superhero comic and the cast of characters fits the bill as well. The actors are mainly unknowns, with the exception of Billy Crudup as Dr Manhattan, but any known face would have only distracted too much. Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach delivers an effective and chilling performance and Jeffrey Dean Morgan is gleefully detestable as the anti-hero of anti-heroes, The Comedian. Matthew Goode as Ozymandias, Malin Akerman as Silk Spectre II and Patrick Wilson as Night Owl II round out the set of main characters and give good performances each.
The plot is intriguingly complex and goes beyond the mere good guy versus bad guy set-up. If anything, there are no good guys or bad guys, one of the main themes of the film. That is precisely the strength of the story and the film, which subverts the genre of superheroes and turns its conventions on its head. Issues of morality, ideals of masculinity and the notion of a hero are explored as well as the medium of superhero films itself (watch out for the love scene). The choice of source music appears quite horrible at first, but goes with the ironic undertones of the film. Keeping with the subversive element of the film - much has been made of the changed ending and particularly fans of the comic seem to dislike it. But as it stands, it's much more organic and logical than the original ending and fits the overall themes better. Talking about the ending, I also have to mention the beginning, but the title sequence alone was worth seeing the film. The only drawback of the film might be the inaccessibility of the complicated story that had to be fit into 160+ minutes as well as the sheer amount of issues that are dealt with. There is enough for two films in here and that might turn some viewers off. One also cannot go into this expecting another superhero flick or trying to enjoy it on the surface level only. It might just try to tackle too much for its genre. Genres tend to go through cycles - modest beginnings and decent efforts give way to a high time of the genre before it declines and goes out of favour with audiences and studios. Superhero films are the rage at the moment. "The Dark Knight" broke all box office records and Marvel Pictures has about 20 more superhero films planned for the near future. Franchises like Batman that seemed dead have been re-animated and the market abounds with sequels, prequels and spin-offs. In that sense, it might surprise that "Watchmen" doesn't look like a huge financial success, which seems to be the only way a film is measured. But maybe this tale subverting superhero tales is one of those examples of a film being ahead of its time and in that way, a look forward to a time when more serious treatments of the subject matter are attempted and will find an audience for them. Until then, we have "Watchmen", which is surprisingly layered and quite brave in literally unmasking the masked heroes. images © Warner Bros. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
