So it’s been a few days since I saw Watchmen, and I’ve had some time to reflect on it. I think I did get caught up in the hype a bit and was a bit too undercritical of the movie when I first walked out of the theater (I came pretty close to calling it “better than the Dark Knight”, among other things). Now, I do recognize that some of the character development was a bit glossed over and there really wasn’t a need for so much graphic violence, but I still think it’s a wonderfully interesting and unique movie that deserves a place beside the Dark Knight, even if it’s not above it.
But what are really getting to me now are the reactions that I’ve heard from friends and family and those that I’ve read online. It seems to break down like this:
- Movie critics generally see the movie as a bore, the characters as uninteresting or underdeveloped, and the movie overly ambitious and full of a lot of over-the-top stylistic elements without much substance.
- Watchmen graphic novel fans usually tear the movie apart for omitting or changing what they considered to be key elements of the story, or condemn the movie more generally for not communicating the same themes well enough or not having the same impact as the source material.
- The average movie-goer (unfamiliar with Watchmen at all) was wholly disappointed (this goes back to my expectations post last week). The movie was too boring, didn’t have enough action, was too graphically violent, had too much nudity, not enough story, too many characters, etc., etc. Like I already mentioned, I write a lot of this off as simply people wanting another blockbuster, action-packed superhero movie and becoming rather indignant when they didn’t get it. (I heard at least one report of a parent bringing their 8-12 year-old children along…)
As far as what the movie critics say… they don’t bother me that much. Sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I don’t, and a lot of times they seem to pan a movie simply because they’re much more interested in the artistic and historically literary relevance of the film moreso than its actual entertainment value. So… whatever. For the graphic novel fans, I think they’re being overly critical, but at the same time I understand where they are coming from. I felt much the same way about Dark Knight… while everyone was fawning over the movie, I couldn’t help be feel frustrated with how close they came to finally faithfully representing my interpretation of the Batman mythos while still missing some key elements.
But I guess the reactions from the average movie-goers are what frustrate me the most. Here, we have a movie that is completely unprecedented. It tells a story unlike any that has ever been told in a movie before, and people seem to be disgusted by it simply because it is so different. It wasn’t Yet Another Hollywood Action Movie, and people didn’t like it. When a movie pushes into uncharted territory, I think that it is something to value, even if it isn’t perfect. Kind of like with the Fountain… how many movies do you know of that would qualify as “sci-fi romantic epics”?
Even aside from the originality of the story (as far as cinema is concerned), were the other aspects of the movie really that bad? Was it really that boring, offensive, uninteresting, etc., than any other recent movies, like 300 or sin city? I really don’t think so… but maybe I’m just a freak and it’s just me.
Anyways, I sincerely hope that anyone who reads this and was not wholly impressed by the movie to consider watching it again sometime down the road to give it another chance. Maybe gain a new perspective on the film, one that you can appreciate a bit more. Next time around you’ll know what to expect and maybe you can focus on enjoying the unique themes and story in the movie that you aren’t likely to find anywhere else anytime soon.
