- (no subject)
-

sokth
- March 13th, 12:06
Well, I suppose as it's well into spring now, I should be resurrected in some form or another. Life chugs on as usual, and isn't really worth talking about in depth. However, WATCHMEN is.
I saw Watchmen twice yesterday. I'd like to note that I didn't think it was that incredible, but I went with two different groups of people, and didn't really mind seeing it twice (especially since I didn't pay for either trip). I'd been looking forward to it - I've not read the graphic novel (!!!) and was a little put off by Time magazine declaring it was one of the "best novels of all time". It may be good (indeed, excellent), and to some extent display features more commonly associated with literature (allusion, symbolism, artistic self-awareness, allegory - I think - etc), calling it a novel is simply wrong. Graphic novels do what is said on the tin; the visual art is an essential part of the experience, unlike in a novel. Furthermore, grouping a graphic novel with novels is, I think, to devalue the role of the graphic novel. It seems to imply that the graphic novel can never be accepted as a form of "high art" (O, modernism, where art thou?), and so the anomalous(debatable) achievement cannot be a graphic novel in the usual sense. Anyway! I hadn't read it, but, after reading some critic reviews that labeled it as difficult for people who had not read the graphic novel, I'll admit I dipped into the wikipedia synopsis.
I shouldn't have - it was completely unnecessary. The film is lovely. It's what comic book (graphic novel, whatever) movies should be like. Comic strips tend to make good storyboards, but there's more to that. Sin City was lovingly adapted, but remained a little too removed for me. I know that was kind of the point, but I couldn't help thinking that it lacked something. Watchmen does not have this problem. Essentially, it is a grimy thriller more than a superhero film - grimy in a way that makes Batman look like a fairytale. These 'superheroes' are real people, flesh and blood, and Watchmen gives a 'realist' account of their development - mental illnesses abound. However, it manages to retain a twist of wonderful, bittersweet and incredibly dark humour. Not to mention a plentiful serving of blood and guts. Also, the ending is so totally not like the usual boring Hollywood resolution. I thought the performances were generally good all round, despite labouring under a script that flagged at times (script straight from speech bubbles? anyone?). The exception was the Richard Nixon actor (a small part) - I wasn't particularly impressed by him, but I think I was just expecting something on par with the wonderful neanderthal autocratic Nixon (played by Frank Langella) of Frost/Nixon.
In conclusion, yes. Good film. Also, watch out for references to Nietzsche (Human, All Too Human) and (possibly?) Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five.