Like every other geek on the internet, I went to see Watchmen this weekend. I'm actually old enough to have bought and read the original series as it hit the newsstands every month - every month except for that long delay between issues late in the series' run (funny what had been strange and maddening then has become commonplace now, and rarely with a payoff as worthwhile as Moore and Gibbon's work). When the first rumors of a movie adaptation had started in the early 90's, I was pretty excited at the idea of a project helmed by Terry Gilliam and starring the likes of Kevin Costner, Jamie Lee Curtis, and Gary Busey(!). Years down the line and with production finally getting past the development stage, I found myself uninterested in the whole idea.
Because at that point, I had realized that what made Watchmen great isn't easily transferable to film. The interplay between words and pictures, detailed-filled panels that were meant to be lingered over, text pieces that added so much to the story - these elements and more were combined in a way that is impossible to duplicate in any other medium. Watchmen wasn't pulp with pictures or movies on paper, it was one of the first works to take full advantage of the comics medium, and one of the few books to actually deserve the title of "graphic novel".
A filmmaker is denied most of this comic's great strengths and is left with only the story, the least of Watchmen's charms, the outermost layer of the onion. Even then, time constraints require most of the character development and subplots to be jettisoned, weakening the original even further. A good director could still make the project work, adding his own imprimatur, maybe updating certain aspects so that Watchmen the film could comment on its time in the same way Watchmen the comic did.
Zack Snyder is not that director. About all he added was more sex and violence, in one case at least doing so to the disservice of the characters and story. Having Laurie casually knife a mugger strips away an important difference between her and Dan and the likes of Rorschach and the Comedian, and makes a mockery of her conversations with Dr. Manhattan regarding the importance of human life. It speaks volumes about Snyder's grasp of the nuance and subtlety of the original work, as do many other of the minor changes he makes. Bits are kept or jettisoned based on their "cool" factor and not their importance to the narrative. Snyder is like a child reciting Shakespeare from rote, parroting the words without true understanding, without really appreciating the poetry he has memorized.
What we are left with is a movie where all the actors look exactly like their comic counterparts, where all the major plot points are hit faithfully and on time, and where nothing new or challenging occurs. This may describe some comic fans' idea of a perfect movie adaptation, but I was bored watching the film. So much was lost, and nothing of substance was added. It was like listening to a friend describe to you in detail a book you have already read without adding any insight of his own. At some point, you're better off walking away to re-read the damn thing yourself.
0 comments:
Post a Comment