Very good adaptation

Rating: 8/10 (22 March 2009)

This might be the only movie that interested me so much with its previews that I read the book on which it was based before the movie was released. I had always heard about Watchmen, and, though not a comic book guy, I checked it out. It was good, quite good, though I balk, more than just a little, whenever anyone refers to it as great literature. That it was included in Time magazine's top 100 best novels of the 20th Century seems ludicrous to me. I found it rather sloppy overall and so in tune with its non-literary medium that I don't think it was an especially good work of literature. But I did like it. Now I've finally seen the movie. And I liked it. Very much, in fact. I thought it was a cracking adaptation of the comic book, and it moved along seamlessly. Its screenplay is surprisingly well adapted. Many of the film's flaws are inherent in the source material. There are some incredibly stupid scenes, like the sex scene and Dr. Manhattan's interview. Both are identical in the book. I might complain that the violence is a little more in focus in the movie. I wonder how well someone who hasn't read the original would understand this. The friend I saw it with said he had no problems, so maybe it's just in the details that it becomes obscure. The end of this film is far better than that of the original work, which comes out of left field and makes little sense. Actually, I did kind of like that, because it was enjoyably weird, but the film version works much better. As for the cast, I was surprised by how well Patrick Wilson played Night Owl II  I didn't think he had it in him. As everyone seems to agree, the weakest link was Malin Akerman as Laurie Jupiter. Akerman comes off as kind of a bimbo, at least with how she speaks, which is nothing like the book's Jupiter.