Oh, dear God, where do I begin? It became extremely apparent to me as I watched "Watchmen" that I should've read the book to understand this movie. However, I decided not to read it before seeing this (despite having a feeling months ago that it was a good idea to do so) because I wanted to come into the movie completely ignorant. I was there to be entertained and a good adaptation entertains the audience without requiring it to read the source material. I was hoping "Watchmen" would be like that.
Boy, was I wrong.
I can't sit here and critique the changes in the story because I DID NOT READ THE BOOK. I can, however, critique the movie based on my definition of an adaptation. For the first hour or so, I knew pretty much what was going on. Less than an hour later, I was completely lost. What happened to completely lose me, you ask? I couldn't tell you. There were several little things that were never explained (What's wrong with Moloch's ears? Where did that cat come from that follows Ozymandias around? Why does Nixon have a penis-nose?) and even more major events and climactic changes that made NO sense in general. The movie began with a constant flip between present (1985) and past (1940s-1950s, Vietnam War), introducing all the characters and showing the influence on everyone's lives of The Comedian (charmingly played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan), whose murder kick-starts the film. This was easy to follow and understand and it set up a compelling mystery that I wanted to watch unfold. It was interesting and entertaining.
It wasn't until after the story of Dr. Manhattan (played in a sort of strained manner by Billy Crudup) is revealed that things get really confusing. The mystery of who killed The Comedian becomes more fragmented and the film seems to lose track of itself, introducing more and more convoluted theories pertaining to nuclear war and the future. The film becomes a chore to watch as piecing it together becomes harder and harder. By the time it ends, there are still so many questions left unanswered. Because of this, the ending seems inconceivable because it's too hard to logically get to it based on what was presented as "reason" to the audience. I spoke to my friend who read the comic and she said that the movie ending was different from the comic ending and it was unsatisfying. To me, a Watchmen virgin, I just thought it was unsatisfying and nonsensical.
This movie was not a complete failure, though. The special effects are INCREDIBLE, but this is to be expected because of all the hype heaped on this film. The most visibly interesting moments are the scenes with Dr. Manhattan (especially his back story) and the ever-changing image on the mask of Rorschach (played by a stunning Jackie Earle Haley). The fight scenes are fun to watch, incorporating slow motion, zoom-ins, and more gore than a Resident Evil game (if I may digress for a moment, I must mention just how VIOLENT this movie was. This is NOT for the kiddies, and I actually had some children sitting in front of me the whole time. Between the violence and the inevitable sex scenes, I was not confident those children would sleep well later that night).
The effects didn't save this movie for me, however, because I was expecting them to be good. It was the performances of Morgan and Haley that kept me watching. The Comedian was more prominent in the first hour, but he was the best part of that hour. Every scene he was in was irresistibly raunchy, cringe-worthy, and just plain awesome. He was the character one loved to hate and hated to love, and I personally hated how his death was what started the movie. He should've been alive during the film so he could be shown more because he stole the first half of the movie.
The second half of the movie was all Rorschach's. What an incredible performance. He was, by far, my favorite character (my friend told me everyone's favorite character is Rorschach). There is so much I could say about him but I would spoil the story if I did. In short, he is the show-stealer, being interesting while The Comedian is stealing scenes and remaining incredible after The Comedian ceases to be shown. The Comedian may be the man to watch in the beginning, but Rorschach is the man to pay attention to in the whole movie.
All-in-all, I can't hate this movie. I understand that it was obviously not for people like me, who didn't read the book, and I'm disappointed by this. A good adaptation is one that anyone can understand. "Watchmen" was supposed to be the magnum opus of the comic book movie genre, but I believe it falls short of "The Dark Knight," a far superior movie that is accessible to EVERYONE, from hardcore Batman fans to people who've never even heard of the batty vigilante. The story is way too convoluted for a Watchmen virgin to understand, but the stellar performances by Morgan and Haley, along with the special effects, save this movie from being a complete failure. Think of it this way: Terry Gilliam was originally set to direct a "Watchmen" film once in 1989, then in 1996, but read the book and said it was impossible to get everything into a two-hour movie. If Terry Gilliam won't touch it, it MUST be complicated. Watchmen virgins, be warned: if you want to understand, read the book first.
