Well, it was "Watchmen," but...

Rating: 7/10 (18 March 2009)

I liked "Watchmen." It was a very authentic adaptation of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' seminal 1985 twelve-issue D.C. Comics maxi-series (not a graphic novel!), painstakingly put together by auteur Zack Snyder, but in the end, I feel like it was just a movie that didn't really need to be made.
Warner Bros. spent in excess of $120 million to make "Watchmen." This could've been better spent on a sequel to Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns," or any of Warner's long-gestating D.C. Comics-based films like "Wonder Woman" or next year's "Green Lantern." Warner Bros. will take a financial beating on "Watchmen" when they could've made a "real" superhero movie and captured a windfall like they did with last year's "The Dark Knight." But, enough financializing. "Watchmen" features nice performances, particularly Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach, most people's favorite character from the original comic's, and perhaps, the most psychologically damaged. Haley deserves at least an Oscar nod for this role, but won't get one. Patrick Wilson is also very good as Dan Dreiberg, the second Night Owl, as is the lovely Malin Ackerman as Laurie Jupiter, the second Silk Spectre. However, Laurie's dramatic arc from the comic feels forced and put upon here in the film. But, that's really what happens when you compress a twelve-issue series down into a two-and-a-half movie.
Jeffrey Dean Morgan is never quite believable as Edward Blake, the Comedian. He has the chops, but just really doesn't pull off being the real scumbag the Blake is. Matthew Goode is fairly forgettable as Ozymandias. He brings little to this, perhaps, the most pivotal role in the story. And the ending is a total cop-out, once again feeling forced and rushed. I like Carla Gugino as Sally Jupiter, the original Silk Spectre, but I like seeing her in just about anything. She isn't given much to do here, and her old-age make-up is pretty atrocious.
Billy Crudup makes a fine Doctor Manhattan, but his origin story depicted in the film slows the whole thing down considerably, as does Crudup's dead-pan, monotonic delivery of Osterman/Manhattan's lines. The SFX used to bring he blue, nude living atomic reactor to life is adequate, but not sufficient enough. The CGI Doctor's lips often do not match his lines, which is a bit off-putting.
The SFX for the film as a whole was well-done, and the set direction was spot-on to Mister Gibbons' original artwork. Much has been said about the fast-moving, incredibly choreographed fight scenes. What can I say? I liked them. It shows that these people are well trained and thoroughly experienced enough to be costumed crime fighters. What more do you want? All in all, "Watchmen" is a good movie, but ultimately forgettable. I still think this was money best spent elsewhere on true superheroes like the Man or Steel, the Amazing Amazon, or the Emerald Gladiator.
Recommended.