A different sort of superhero film

Rating: 9/10 (1 July 2009)

To say that Watchmen is a film that I have anticipated for a long time would be a bit of an understatement. I, like many others, am an enormous fan of the graphic novel and was extremely conflicted about the prospect of a big screen adaptation: excited about it finally happening and deeply worried that whichever director eventually got the gig would screw it up.
There were two main concerns about the adaptation: that it would miss a lot of detail out that was in the novel and that some of the roles had been miscast. Neither of these are true, and in terms of transplanting the novel to the screen it's brilliant, very faithful, visually perfect and clearly the work of someone who respects the material as much as I do. There are a few niggles which I will come to in a while, but mostly everything is almost spot on.
For those who have been living in a cave for the last year, Watchmen is set in an alternative 1985 where Nixon is still president, the world is on the brink of thermonuclear war and costumed heroes have been outlawed. When one of these heroes The Comedian is outlawed, Rorschach (who refused to turn himself in) contacts his former colleagues and they begin investigating the murder, stumbling upon a vast conspiracy to assassinate former heroes in the process .
The main thing that should be stressed is that the central performances are, on the whole, excellent. Jack Earl Haley is an absolute revelation as Rorschach, a psychopathic vigilante with a warped sense of absolutist morality. He's practically Travis Bickle in a mask, complete with bitter misanthropic voice-over and misplaced sense of nobility. Also especially excellent is Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian, an amoral mercenary who had been employed by the government to carry out black ops. Imagine if Captain America was a symbol not of freedom, but of American imperialism and you're halfway there. The Comedian is in theory a totally reprehensible character, selfish, violent, sexist etc, so it is a tribute to Morgan that he ultimately becomes sympathetic.
Rounding out the Crimebusters are Nite Owl, Silk Spectre and Ozymandias. Patrick Wilson as Nite Owl is doomed to be overshadowed by the larger characters played by Morgan and Haley, but deserves just as much recognition as the other two. He really nails the character of Dan Dryberg, a nerdy, slightly overweight loser who longs to be a hero again. Dryberg is much more Clark Kent than superman, a slightly awkward, but noble character, who is probably the only character in the film who comes across as both normal and likable.
Malin Akerman's Silk Spectre is regrettably the weakest link. She's very attractive and looks great in the costume, but she's not a very good actress and doesn't really convince on any of her line readings. Also, in the key emotional scenes where Carla Gugino plays her mother (the first Slik Spectre) she isn't very believable and all you think is that Gugino is a much better actress.
Finally, we have Matthew Goode as Ozymandias, in many ways the hardest of the characters to portray as he is meant to be basically perfect: hyper intelligent, very athletic and confident without being arrogant. Goode's casting was widely criticised before the film was released but to be honest, he does a pretty fine job. He definitely looks the part, and while I don't necessarily agree with his affected accent or quite how aloof he portrayed Adrian, it is to his credit that I still felt I was watching the character rather than an actor and if anything, my frustration was that there weren't enough scenes to properly establish Veidt as there could have been.
Visually, the film is stunning, and is very close to the graphic novel bringing all the stunning aspects (Manhatten's crystal Mars palace, Karnak, the Comedian's death) to life. The sets, direction and cinematography are all wonderful realisations of Gibbon's artwork while the action sequences are actually in many cases better than the book, especially the assassination of The Comedian, the attempted hit on Ozymandias and the whole last act in Karnak.
But by far the best part of the film is the opening credits. Now, I know that sounds like an insult, but it isn't, as Snyder presents us with a visual history of superheroes in the watchmen universe from the foundation of the first heroes in 1940 to 1985 when the story takes place. This sequence is a montage of beautiful slow motion images that are almost like moving photographs, a shimmering 50s style gleam standing against the darkness of what the images actually mean, all scored to Dylan's "the times they are a-changing". It's a brilliant combination of myth and history and condenses almost all the novels back-story fantastically, which allows the rest of the film to concentrate on the main plot without interruption or digression.
So, what are the problems with Watchmen? Well, the main one was actually prophesied by Alan Moore. Whereas in the comic you could flip back to a previous page if you were confused about something, the film is pretty fast moving and while those who have read the book will have no problem following the labyrinthine plot, newbies to Watchmen may be confused, especially about some of the things on the periphery which aren't really explained, such as why the heroes were outlawed and the nature of Bubastis (Ozymandias' genetically engineered pet lynx). The first 3/4 are pretty much perfect, but the end is handled a little too quickly and is potentially confusing.
Overall though, it's a very faithful, fantastically realised adaptation of an incredible novel. If you are a fan anyway, you'll probably love it. If not, still an amazing experience, but probably worth investing in the novel too.
I really look forward to the extended cut on DVD.