Watchmen: In Motion
I read Watchmen some fifteen or twenty years ago when I was basically just a kid and remember almost nothing about it. What I do remember is that I was expecting something on the order of Batman, or Superman or The X-Men and it certainly wasn’t anything like that. Unfortunately, despite seeing it on many critic’s ‘best of’ lists (including Time magazine’s best English-language novels of the 20th Century), I never got around to taking a closer look at it.
So I’ve been really interested in it in the last few months as publicity ramps up for the movie. The previews for the film (opens this Friday) look fascinating and I’ve been torn on whether or not I wanted to re-read it before seeing the film or just watch the film and judge it on its own merit.
I think I’ve found a happy medium though. DC Comics and Warner have release what they call a ‘motion comic’ version. It’s a presentation of the graphic novel using the original artwork and text but they’ve added some dramatic motion to the frames along with music and a very well done audio reading. The entire graphic novel is presented in 12 half-hour episodes that are available from both iTunes and Amazon.
After watching the first couple of chapters I was in the bookstore today and flipped through the actual book wondering how closely the motion comic matched it. The motion version does seem to be somewhat abridged. Despite that though, I’d highly recommend checking out the first chapter if you are wondering what all the buzz is about or if you are on the fence as to whether or not it’s something that interests you.
The deeper I get into it, the more fascinated I am. Although I have yet to finish, it’s already apparent that it’s a great work of speculative fiction. Chapter two in particular is a brilliant conglomerate of word, music, and image. Without having finished it, it’s difficult to express exactly what it’s about because, like most great science-fiction, its themes tackle everything from morality, to politics, to the nature of evil, to personal identity.
The jury is still out on the movie but I hope to see it this weekend. If you are interested, check out the motion comic.
Click here for Watchmen: The Motion Comic
A.S. Peterson has crafted a work of compelling historical fiction which begs the question, “Can this really be a debut novel?” With dogged fidelity, Peterson captures the spirit, manners, and social conditions present during the American Revolutionary War. We meet colorful, credible characters who navigate the high seas of life and love, dependence and independence, war and peace, truth and consequence, and despite forays into dark places, The Fiddler’s Gun is beautiful, lyrical, and redemptive.
Walt Wangerin, Jr. strikes again.
Janner Igiby lives in Glipwood, a nothing little village in the land of Skree, on the edge of the Dark Sea of Darkness. Manhood is on the horizon, but Janner finds it hard to feel much hope for the future. Skree is ruled by foreign oppressors, snake men called the Fangs of Dang, servants of a shadowy emperor named Gnag the Nameless. The Skreeans are weak and weaponless. They’re even tool-less. Any Skreean who needs to use a hoe has to borrow one from the Fangs (and fill out the requisite paperwork). And from time to time, the Black Carriage arrives in Glipwood to carry young Skreeans toward an unknown fate across the Dark Sea.
I am not a fan of Civil War literature; in fact, I have always thought of it as one of those weird sub-genres for obsessive types. They’re almost like Trekkies with their re-enactments and maniacal devotion to detail. It’s just not my thing (although I’m secretly jealous that they get to dress up and shoot cannons).
A Randall Goodgame song is like a great independent movie. Characters deliver lines like they were lifted from a break room, a truck stop, or a downtown diner. Seemingly incongruent scenes are juxtaposed and plot isn’t obvious; in fact, narrative–a good story–is often more evident than linear plot lines. An indie movie, like a Randall Goodgame song, seems to tell itself. Rather than being rudely yanked by a chain through a sequence of contrived events, with a Randall Goodgame song, I have the sense that I’m being allowed a willing, but vicarious sneak peak into the real lives of his real characters.
Sara Groves irritates me just a little bit. With each album she makes, she moves from strength to strength and is always raising the bar with the quality, depth, and lyrical ambition of her work. And as a fellow artist, that’s just a little irritating since it means the rest of us are going to have to work harder if we hope to keep up.
I am outside on my front porch. The yellowed leaves are methodically falling from the black walnut in the yard, my breath is chalky visible in the recent cold snap, and lately I have been exploring the unpleasant nuances of the dark night of a soul - my own, to be exact. It is a strange passion we live out on this over-glorified orb of rock hurtling through space at some rate that I’m sure would astound me were I to know what it was. It is an odd series of days, I am realizing, when you question your own faith more than you question your own doubt. And, indeed, it is these nagging questions which have prompted me to share my thoughts on Andrew Peterson’s 2003 album, Love and Thunder.
11-year old Reuben Land, a character in the 2001 book Peace Like a River, provides narration that is clear-eyed and insightful, yet retains the magic, wonder, and innocence of youth. I found it easy to entrust my imagination to the author’s clever method of telling the story through the sensibilities of a pre-teen boy. An author with lesser skill would have either made the boy too smart-alecky for his own good or impossibly cute.
I just finished a book that upon closing it, I felt like it finished me in a sense. A quiet meditative book that reached down and stirred the deep waters in me. It’s Marilynne Robinson’s 2005 Pulitzer prize winner Gilead, given to me by my friend Andrew Peterson.
Eric Peters’s body of work addresses a diverse range of topics, but hope is a recurring theme that gently percolates in the midst of it all. And yet, somewhere between the 2001 masterpiece Land of the Living, and Scarce, the flavor of hope that Peters’s work emits has evolved closer to a tone that is more resolute than what came before. And though the complexion of hope has a broad range, the lyrics from Scarce–while intermittently contrite and timorous as in previous efforts, are now strengthened and bolstered by roots that have grown deeper, radiating an underlying grit and security.
Having read The Great Divorce many times over the years, I’ve found this classic from the great C.S. Lewis to be full of startling clarity and depth on the differences between Heaven and Hell. The only thing both have in common is that both begin in the human will; we can either let Heaven enter us and rule in us to blossom into love and goodness, or allow Hell to infect and reign in our hearts by the daily refusal to submit to Heaven.
Even if you haven’t heard Room to Breathe, its still likely you’ve heard Andy Gullahorn. He’s what I’d call a heavy lifter by trade. He writes lyrics, plays guitar, arranges vocals and adds production help to the work of artists like Jill Phillips and Andrew Peterson.
Allow me to preface this by telling you that I am a great despiser of gushing reviews. I’d much rather write (or read) a scathing dismemberment of the latest Brett Ratner film or Terry Goodkind book than suffer through four hundred words of overblown hyperbole about even the best of things. But when asked to write some thoughts on Frederick Buechner’s Godric, no amount of distaste for high praise was able to intervene. I hope you’ll take what I say with the understanding that I do not say it readily or lightly.
Regardless of the movie, you need to re-read the book without the abridgment! There are college courses taught on this book. 25 years later people are still debating the meaning of the story, the ethics of the characters… There are so many layers beyond the superhero thing.
I’ve read a spoilery review that said the movie gets some of it spot on, but other parts are woefully wrong. The new ending that I’ve read makes it sound like they missed the philosophical point entirely. The pirate comics seem to be gone. Some of the texture from the text pieces was excised. The analyst is pulled back to one scene. And the fact that Nite Owl isn’t noticeably overweight breaks my heart.
See the movie if you must, but don’t expect it to be the book.
Pete,
Why did I know you would post about this movie? Thanks. I”m curious about the content, but will not see the film.
I’ll pass simply because my local paper (the AJC – not a conservative publication) is warning parents. The movie posters and displays are making this look like any other comic book movie (Spiderman, Batman, etc.). The genre of films that preceded it (Sin City, 300) and rating is enough for me to take a pass, but I’m glad the AJC is pointing this out so mom and dad don’t get surprised when they take the kids or let the kids go to this film.
You stated clearly and quite well your position on this type of matter in your review of “The Wrestler.” I appreciate that and am glad you are here in this place pushing stodgy dudes like me to consider these works. But, I still have to be stodgy to complete the picture.
However, I will check out the link. Thanks bro!
Yes, re-read the book. It doesn’t take that long to get through. I was talking with a friend yesterday, one of my favorite authors, and he said he realized recently how much this book shaped his thinking and how many things he writes about were first awakened in his mind while reading The Watchman.
As for the movie… I was blown away. I may actually like it more than The Dark Night. It is an amazing piece of filmmaking. The scenes with Dylan’s The Times They Are A-Changin’ and Simon & Garfunkel’s The Sound Of Silence playing above the montages are brilliant. One thing I was scared would be left on the editing floor was the silences, the slow scenes, and I was relived to see they aren’t afraid of slow pacing where it is needed.
As Ebert says in his review, “The film is rich enough to be seen more than once. I plan to see it again, this time on IMAX, and will have more to say about it. I’m not sure I understood all the nuances and implications, but I am sure I had a powerful experience.”
I heard a philosopher mention the Voltaire quote last week that says, “If God did not exist, we would create him,” and that’s what I was thinking as I walked out of the theatre.
It should be mentioned that the film is rated R. I’d recommend looking up the reasons for the rating to decide if you should see it, as the rating is deserved.
Pete, thanks for surprising me with another unexpected topic in the Rabbit Room.
I’m planning to see the movie, but I’m planning to be a little disappointed. We’ll see what happens, but here’s why I think this won’t be as good as it deserves…
I’ve been keeping my eye on previews since they were available, and was intrigued. I had a few comics I read in the early 90s, but I had never heard of the Watchmen series until this year. But I’m a sucker for superhero movies, and knew that I’d want to check this one out. On Sunday, I decided to buy the comic and see what it was all about.
I was very impressed by the comic. The writing and the illustrating is pretty brilliant. As I read, I noted repeating images, like the clock, the smiley, Rorshach-like reflections. There’s also a story-within-the-story called “The Black Freighter” which foreshadows the journey of some of the characters. When Rorshach is analyzed, I noted the way the analyst’s journal went from optimistic to a much more grim tone. Dr. Manhattan bounces through memories in a way that would confuse even a fan of LOST. Then there’s the use of “supplemental” material: between each chapter is an excerpt from a book or newspaper article or something that provides backstory. It was really fun to read, and I’ll probably go through it again after seeing the movie.
Alan Moore, one of the co-creators, has been very vocal that he’ll never see the movie, because he feels that many of the elements that made the comic book great were specific to that media: they won’t translate well onto the screen. I agree. We’re going to miss a lot of the artistic nuances and the pace of the story simply because it’s in a 2.75-hour film instead of a 12-volume comic book.
So I’m planning on being a little disappointed in the film, but I want to see how closely they can pull it off.
And Tony read correctly: this is not your typical superhero movie. This series redefined a genre because it imagined its characters as TRULY flawed. Rorshach had a disturbing childhood that leads to a disturbing persona. Nite Owl 2 doesn’t know how to relate to others when he’s himself. Silk Spectre 2 resents her mom for bringing her up to be her protege. The Comedian is mired in cynicism and cruelty. The result is that at times you cheer for the characters, and at other times you abhor them. That’s part of the reason this series was such a breakthrough, I think: these superheroes have serious problems, which makes them more plausible than Superman or Spiderman, who are squeaky clean good guys by comparison.
This movie will be bloody, and disturbing, and there are a few sex scenes, and the viewer should know how much this could prove to be a stumbling block before buying a ticket. I’m not looking forward to that, but I am looking forward to seeing how well the filmmakers can translate this art from one medium to another.
Like Tony, I was pretty certain that this would show up here as a Pete topic. The concept and history sound fascinating, and I may actually get around to reading the original, even though I’ll probably skip the film for reasons already mentioned.
Bret said: “Alan Moore, one of the co-creators, has been very vocal that he’ll never see the movie…”
Well, Moore has also been very vocal about how he hates all film adaptations of his work and that he refuses to see them.
Stephen: Quite true. I don’t blame him, I guess. Moore also wrote “V for Vendetta” and “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen,” both of which I didn’t enjoy on the big screen. I imagine the original of those would be better than the film versions. So he’s definitely got a point that, in these cases, the art is diminished when it moves from print to screen.
i’m also expecting to be a bit disappointed, but i’m sure it will be entertaining it its own right - you have to take Moore’s lack of approval seriously when considering the work in general.
the Black Freighter stuff will be added to the DVD release, most likely incorporated into the film and making it a 4-hour extravaganza. hopefully that will help the movie to flow more like the novel, but that won’t salvage what i’ve heard about the ending…
Wow. I never knew that Moore wrote “V for Vendetta” or “League…”. I saw one movie (V…) and was not impressed, with the exception of way that V speaks. It’s almost slam poetry at times. I’ll have to see if I can find those two.
I sat in Borders over the course of a couple weeks and read through “The Watchmen.” I was especially excited about his foreshadowing through tiny mundane details in the artwork (i.e., “The Day the Earth Stood Still” is playing at a theatre in the city, and the band playing at Madison Square Garden is called The Four Horsemen). Plus, I love that the heroes (or anti-heroes) are all reaching for a better world, even if they are paving the road to Hell with good intentions. I don’t think I’ll make the effort to see this one. I’ve been far too disappointed with so many recent film translations. Call me jaded, but I’m planning to sit this one out.
And if they changed the ending, well…
Moore also wrote one of the BEST Batman pieces available - ‘the Killing Joke.’ it was recently re-released with the original penciler providing his own inks and colors, and it looks amazing. check that out while you’re looking for ‘V’ and ‘League’… and beware, ‘League’ in graphic novel form is indeed graphic with regard to the female characters.
David wrote: “but that won’t salvage what i’ve heard about the ending…”
Yeah, I forgot about that. I’ve heard they totally change and simplify it, which just blows my mind! I wonder how they’re going to pull it off? It seems like such a crucial element for what the main antagonist tries to accomplish. (I’m trying to speak in vague language for those who don’t know the ending and don’t want it spoiled.)
By the way, Stephen, thanks for posting Ebert’s review. It was interesting to hear his take.
whipple: I’ve read that the V for Vendetta movie bears only a slight resemblance to the book. As in, the whole philosophy behind it is changed.
Bret: From what I’ve heard about the new ending, they’ve made it MORE complicated and LESS believable, which is hard to imagine. Also, they’ve apparently simplified and gorified Rorshach’s turning point (the fire).
[...] Pete Peterson at Rabbit Room links a Motion Comic of [...]
Here’s the best review I’ve read of Watchman.
A couple excerpts:
“[T]aken on its own, Zack Snyder’s “Watchmen” is a profound work of art, a beautiful, deliriously weird, meditative spin on a genre that is as American as jazz. It is adult, sober-minded entertainment, visually ravishing and loaded with more ideas with a typical Oscar-season, and even when it doesn’t work, the ambition and the density of it is breathtaking.”
“But more than anything, what I found most bracing about the experience of finally seeing this onscreen is that it pushes the genre further than it’s ever been pushed before. It demands more of viewers than any superherho movie previously released. It sets up a moral question at the end of the film that can’t be easily answered, and it doesn’t even try. It expects you to have your own reaction, and it treats viewers like adults, a rarity from any Hollywood film, much less one featuring characters with names like Nite Owl and Hooded Justice. And, amazingly, it works as a movie. It has its own rhythm, taking its time to lay out this complicated story, but it constantly delights with details both small and grand, and the cumulative impact is far more emotional than I would have expected. This isn’t a case of a film being “good enough,” and I’m not “just glad there’s some version of it finally.” It is a triumph, a movie that amazes on its own terms, and a major jump forward for Snyder as a filmmaker. He’s on a very short list now of guys I would trust with world-building on an epic scale, and from this point forward, whatever Snyder’s got in store for us, I’m onboard.”
OK, the movie rocks.
The novel is fantastic, of course. And this movie is great.
’nuff said.
just got back from seeing it…
can’t really jump in and agree with it “rocking,” since i’ll never be able to listen to Jeff Buckley or Lincoln Brewster sing “Hallelujah” again… at least, not in the same way…
the scene i’m referencing was as close to softcore as there is in an R-rated movie, and i’m disappointed with how drawn out it is in the movie. (be warned, any who can admit their visual temptations)
i do agree that Snyder built a self-contained world, convincing in its own right and certainly epic in scale, but it’s not as consistently immersive a world as the graphic novel can build.
i’m interested to watch the ‘collector’s DVD’ that integrates the Black Freighter into the film. i didn’t like the film enough to buy it, necessarily, but i’d like to watch it again in its “entirety” if possible.
Rorshach and Nite Owl II - spot on casting. Crudup as Dr. Manhattan was different from how i read the character, but very interesting.
overall, i think i have to let the themes from the film marinate a bit in my jumbled mind before i can say anything really conclusive about it. i’m certainly not in a place to say it rocked, but i won’t say it DIDN’T rock, either…
David~
I actually did read “The Killing Joke” - I think.
That is, if it’s the one where (not to give away too much) the Joker’s out to get to Gordon and you find out a lot about the Joker’s past (or one of the versions of it), and that he and Batman (according to the Joker, and incidentally, convergent with Dark Knight’s Joker/Batman philosophy) are not all that different.
That’s pretty vague, but I think that’s the one you’re talking about.
I also read through one about the Black Glove and the Joker. Recent release.
The first was fairly good. The second was amazing. I’ll try and pay more attention to graphic novel authors in the future. Apparently, I haven’t given them the respect that I give to prosaic authors (because I can’t remember their names). My apologies.
whipple,
i think you’re referencing Grant Morrison’s work on Batman with the latter… and he’s largely unpopular at the moment. Neil Gaiman is coming in to pen the rest of that particular story arc, and Gaiman is an accomplished graphic novelist as well as prosaic novelist. i’m hopeful for Gaiman’s reclamation of the character.
some great comics writers (all subject to preference, certainly): Brian K. Vaughn (also a writer on Lost), Joss Whedon (also a prolific TV writer), Mark Millar, Ed Brubaker (particularly the Gotham Central book), Neil Gaiman, Alan Moore, and Kurt Busiek (whose Astro City would be an interesting series of screenplays).
i’m sad you didn’t find ‘killing joke’ amazing! but, of course, to each his own.
the watchmen articles at HogsHead.org are great… if anyone hasn’t jumped over to that link, you should.
Yeah I gotta say I didn’t like this movie much at all. The visuals were great as well as some of the elements that you guys are discussing, but the acting was atrocious in some spots (Malin Ackerman as Silk Spectre II) to the point of being distracting and the plot wore thin over the time frame (almost three hours).
i feel a little remiss for not mentioning Frank Miller and Mike Mignola as notable graphic novelists… Mignola’s work has been discussed here in the Rabbit Room before, and i’m sure Miller has been mentioned at some point… just wanted to throw those in there.
Matt - i agree, Ackerman was one of the weak links.
My first words when I walked out of the theatre were, “I don’t even know what to do with that.”
I still feel that way and the more I think about it, the more I’m sure that’s a compliment to the film. Was it perfect? No. Was there some bad acting, bad special effects, bad musical choices, gratuitous sex and violence? Yes to all.
But there was a complexity to the characters, narrative, visual style, symbolism and morality that’s the kind of thing that only comes around once a decade or so. I read in someone’s review that Watchmen does for the Superhero what The Godfather did for the gangster and that is as good an analogy as I can think of.
I can’t compare it directly to the book because I read it so long ago that I scarcely remember it but I after mulling over the changed ending for a while I think that the movie version is superior. I cannot imagine the original ending working in any real way.
The excision of the Black Frieghter storyline was an obvious necessity as well. Things like that just don’t work well in film format.
I think my biggest complaint about the film is that it was too short. It should have been a mini-series. But as it is, wow, just an amazing work of adapting something that I’d have said was unadaptable. Much like The Lord of the Rings, there are things that didn’t translate well, and things that they got wrong, but overwhelmingly the film-maker just got it right and put up his vision of something extra-ordinary in what is probably the best way we will ever see. It’s something of a minor miracle that it works at all, and it doesn’t just work most of the time, it works well.
The kind of storytelling that happens in this movie is my favorite kind. It sets up a world and fills it with broken, flawed people to see what happens and what we might be able to learn from them. The author is smart enough to get out of the way of his creation and let it be its own thing and come to its own resolution. At the end, it’s the viewers job to apply judgment on the characters.
So yeah, I really loved it. I just bought a ticket to see it again on the IMAX this afternoon. It’s definitely the kind of film that requires multiple viewings to really appreciate.
And I just want to say that Rorschach might be one of my favorite characters ever. The ending to his character arc is perfect, inevitable, and fantastically done. Whoever that guy was that played him in the movie nailed it. I thought the girl that played the Silk Spectre did well also (much better that the actress that played her mother). I wanted to smack the guy playing Ozymandias everytime he was on screen, though.
Why do people still have this bizarre idea that ‘comics’ are for kids? Will this finally settle that delusion?
thanks for the wrap-up, pete - i was about to ask you to give your thoughts and here i check and you’ve laid it out! by the end of your post, you decided you loved it… i’m still deciding.
Ditto on Rorschach as a favorite. Haven’t seen the film. But ditto.