Save yourself some pain; Don't watch The Watchmen

At hubby's insistence, we went to see The Watchmen last night. I will be honest and tell you that hubby gave me a nutshell synopsis of the graphic novel a few weeks ago and I wasn't impressed at the time with the themes and ideas within his description. However, I went into the movie optimistic that my initial impression of the story-arc was due to some misunderstanding, as I didn't read the novel myself.

Alas, my optimism was for naught.

While the film was visually stunning, my problems with it are as follows:

1. Technical: The music choices were incredibly jarring and not fitting with the tone of the scenes in which they were used. According to hubby, the songs were chosen because they were directly quoted at the end of certain issues; however the manner in which they were used was just inappropriate. In particular, the songs during the funeral as well as the sex-scene both had a somewhat comical sound to them and made what should have been sober and serious scenes, respectively, feel incredibly silly instead. Seriously, people in the theater were giggling.

I also have to note that the story is set in an alternate 1985, but aside from the narrative actually stating the date once near the beginning of the film, as well as a few bad hairstyles and a token hoopty or two parked on the street, there's not much to indicate that we're in 1985. That's important because the ideas expressed in the novel were very relevant to that time. It just didn't feel like we were in 1985, and as a result the ideas and ideologies being expressed felt incredibly dated and stale.

Most of the acting was fine with two noted exceptions. The female lead (Silk Spectre II) was terrible. She made me think of Anna Farris from the Scary Movie franchise. Frankly, they probably would have gotten a better performance from Anna Farris. What's worse, some of the most poignant lines in the entire film were given to her to deliver, which was certainly a shame. Matthew Goode, who plays Ozymandias had a weird Germanic accent that came and went. Considering that the climax and resolution of the murder mystery/conspiracy plot-line revolves around him, we see very little of him and get almost no background on his character which would lead us to understand his internal motivations.

2. Story: In my husband's description of the graphic novel, as well as in subsequent conversations we've had about the film, it is apparent that the main goal of the novel was to explore two interlaced themes. The first being an intense psychological study of these fictional super-heroes; who are they and what motivates them to do what they do. The second theme is the exploration of the cultural obsession with hero-worship and the potential results of society placing so much faith and hope on a few individuals who are human beings, just like the rest of us; this theme is directly dependent on the first.

The "main story" (a murder mystery that turns out to be a conspiracy to commit a horrible act) is very thin and is more or less a plot device used to help us explore the first two themes; in other words the journey isn't what's important, it's the discoveries we make along the way (ie, the two themes I've identified) that are the meat and the depth of the novel.

The problem with the movie is that the focus is directly on the main story and the deeper themes are barely grazed in a few scattered flashbacks throughout. Because of my husband's admiration for the graphic novel and his insistence on the depth of the characters, I went into the film expecting substance and instead got a comic book movie that tried to do too much.

Unlike the new and improved "gritty" comic book movies such as Dark Knight, there aren't just one or two main characters to develop but 6-7. It's impossible to do more than scratch the surface of the characters and maintain a good pace as well as keep the film under 3 hours.

It also seems that the director, Zack Snyder was so focused on keeping the camera angles, dialog, etc., so close to the novel that he forgot to maintain the feel of it. For example: According to hubby, each issue ends with a panel showing the Doomsday Clock getting closer to midnight as well as intermittent scenes stressing the mounting tensions between the US and the USSR; obviously a way to show the growing fears over the nuclear war that may be on the horizon. There is little to no emphasis placed on getting that feeling right. In fact, when Laurie and Dr. Manhattan have their conversation on Mars, in which the latter changes his mind at the drop of a hat about "saving the world", I was almost totally lost as to what they were even talking about.

Nuclear annihilation? Huh??? We just spent the last hour watching Silk Spectre II and Nite Owl II bat their eyes at each other and suddenly we're talking about nukes??

Unfortunately, this was not an isolated incident.

So to make a long story short, despite the pretty scenery and nifty special effects the movie itself is largely devoid of the interesting narrative and character studies that my husband insists makes the graphic novel so appealing.