"Watchmen" is interesting, but never involving

Rating: 5/10 (22 March 2011)

** out of (****)
"Watchmen", written by Alan Moore, is an iconic graphic novel which conveys a politically significant message, but taken in such a highly stylistic, but never artificial direction. How does the film compare? Well considering Snyder's lackluster, and simply moronic "300", there isn't too much good to be found. The Good News: It's a notch about "300". The Bad: It's still never involving. With a bloated running time, and a few substandard performers, "Watchmen" doesn't live up to its hype.
There's no denying that this film has the best cinematography I've seen to date. The CGI is just simply mind-blowing, and all the set designs are plastered, and saturated in its finest texture. Snyder is a very visual presenter. That's fun and all, but what's behind the pretty picture? The answer is nothing. Malin Akerman's performance was one of the most irritable, and hard to watch. She's very stale, and has a lack of enthusiasm as each scene progresses. How anyone can find her a great actress in this film is beyond me. Furthermore, the film's pace is very incoherent. Some scenes run longer than others, and other scenes run shorter than others.
Also, the slow-mo got distracting. We don't need slow-mo in every action sequence. I must confess though that this was a pretty unique experience. The script wasn't too bad, the visual style was breathtaking, and the film always kept me thinking.
All in all, "Watchmen" is a film that's designed to earn cult status, and maybe it will, but it certainly isn't a good film. Snyder needs to mature as a director. He's too concerned finding the newest trick in the book without concentrating on what's most important. The movie. "Watchmen" is interesting, but never involving.