Watchmen: A Review

Watchmen: A Review

A review of Watchmen. An abstract form and a full length.

Review Opinion
By KnightofOhtori - Apr 06, 2009 12:04 AM EST
Filed Under: Watchmen
Source: Knight of Ohtori

(If you want the short version please scroll down to the near bottom)

Who watches the Watchmen? I do!

by: Haku Archangelo Vinevaldi

I recently veiwed Watchmen the second time. Again, I was utterly impressed. It had great visuals, nice score, and stunning directing. I had not recognized any of the actors previously, and in my eyes, they all did a god job portraying their character. But it was not perfect. No where near it.

(Before I get into depth on this, I must say this about adaptations. I do not judge a movie by its differences or similarities to the book. It simply is not fair to the director. Mainly because they cannot make everyone happy. When you read something as complexed as Watchmen, you either believe to be unfilmable, or have a picture in your head previously on how it would be portrayed. This includes actors, directors, concept designers, etc. Differences in the film and book are not necessarily a bad thing, because you must factor in the general audience's understanding of the movie. And if they are smart it will be an opening to read the comic. Example: I viewed Akira before reading the manga. There are many, many differences, but overall I liked the manga better. However, no one can say the movie is bad (the movie is great), they are simply different.)

Now for the real review:
After the first viewing of Watchmen the first reaction was shock. No, not because of the Sex or Violence or Nudity, but simply registering what I had just viewed.

After a few days thinking over what I saw, This week I saw it again so I could write a review. My best advice for confusion in during a film is rewatching key moments. So I rewatched Watchmen.

Then after momentarily rereading the novel I formed a final opinion.
I loved the movie it self, as a movie. Not as much a comic book film.

I was not disapointed with anything in particular, but there were certain things I wished they had included. For one, more of Rorshach's orgin, more of Bubastis etc. But those are nothing to fully change my opinion. And there were things I could've lived without. For example, the lenghy sex scene to me seemed overdone and unnecessary.

I enjoyed viewing the recreation of scenes. Such as: Rorshach's cleaver killing, his interview, and more. Nite Owl and Silk Spectre's Explosive vision, and the Death of Comedian.

Overall, the directing was very good, and I think Zack Synder was a good pic for the film. For once, he didn't overuse the fast forward/slow mo thing,and he used it during appropriate times. There were also many impressive shots and angles. And the opening scene especially with the redone versions of historical events were done well.

As for the Actors and their Visual and interpretation of characters.

Rorshach. Basically in my eyes him and the Comedian were done best. The actor brought much depth, and he has a very fitting voice for the role, which brought out a new aspect. His costume was similar, and they upped his death up to fit him. They biggest difference was the absensce of the 'possible homosexual' line. And not to mention the fact that he met with Veidt, and more. But overall he was very well done, and I think they capture his psychoogy well.

Nite Owl. I liked his reduxed costume, and besides that his personality and looks were captured well. I thought the comparision between him and Batman we're pretty lame. Bats..birds..of course they'll look a little similar, but they didn't copy anything.

Silk Spectre 2. Once again, nice costume remake. At first the actress mildly got on my nerves, but after the second viewing I realized she fit Laurie well. My only pet peeve was that she seemed much younger than Laurie would be. But that's about it. As for the sex..well.. see what I said above.

Dr. Manhattan. Not much to say...except he was very much like the comic.Kudos.

The Comedian. He was portrayed very well. Basically captured his essence. My only Fault with him is that I wished they showed more of his psychological side. Because I honestly did not hate him in the comic. I couldn't. But in the film he came off as the evil Sex Fiend from hell. It didn't really go as much into his character. But I liked that they pointed out that no matter how many evil things he did, no one could truly say they were better than him. I wonder how Rorshach's comment on Adrian's 'The man was practically a Nazi' would've been if they included it.

Ozymandias. He was probably the most talked about for how the acting went. I think he did a very good job. Why?
Because he pulled off what is possibly the hardest character in the novel. After all we never know what he is thinking. And I think they realized that his previous incarnation on the big screen would look unrealistic, and cheesy. So they amped it up, and redid his look, but keeping true to the roots themselves. And in place of his purple costume, Bubastis was purple. A cool turnaround if you ask me. No, I did not pick up the vibe that he was entirely gay. Mainly because there he portrayed a flamboyant character, and there were parts in the novel where Ozymandias was so... pimpin' to the point of humor. This redone keep the roots, but made it believable. And I enjoyed the accent changes, personally.

Now for a more philosophical side of the movie. My main problem with the film is that certain things will drive viewers away from its original source. And then there's the infamous, "Blue D**k" of Watchmen. But During the fim itself I saw roots from Hindu and Buddhist metaphysics, well done symbolism, and nice imagery to package it all. But if you're focusing on the blue penis and absence of the squid you may miss it.

So overall, what was my opinion?

8.5 out of 10 As a movie.

7.5 out of 10 As a book to movie adaptation.

Now to conclude my opinion:
They did what they could. I think they added and took out what they thought was necessary. Remember, even if they did want to add things, they probably could not because it was already over 3 hours long. I think it was a good movie. And if they added, they added for the general audience, and I can deal with that to a point. I liked it a lot, and I respect what they did with it.

Quis custodiet
ipsos custodes

It would be a stronger world, a stronger, loving world to die in
-John Cale

WATCHMEN PART II Trailer And Cover Art Tease The Epic Conclusion To Animated Adaptation Of Classic Story
Related:

WATCHMEN PART II Trailer And Cover Art Tease The Epic Conclusion To Animated Adaptation Of Classic Story

WATCHMEN CHAPTER I Clip Recreates Two Big Scenes From Alan Moore And Dave Gibbons' Iconic Graphic Novel
Recommended For You:

WATCHMEN CHAPTER I Clip Recreates Two Big Scenes From Alan Moore And Dave Gibbons' Iconic Graphic Novel

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Be the first to comment and get the conversation going!

View Recorder