This is a special feature. I don’t intend to do this often, but I have an abundance of thoughts, and they are very relevant to cinema.
So what is ‘Watchmen’?
It’s primarily a graphic novel, by British author Alan Moore. He is considered a legend in the comic book world. ‘Watchmen’, winner of the prestigious Hugo Award, is considered his best work. It was released in 1986, and along with Frank Miller’s ‘The Dark Knight Returns’, dramatically changed the face of comics forever. In the truest sense a superhero epic, it chronicles the lives of truly dysfunctional costumed vigilantes in a dystopian, alternate 1985. A complex and innovative narrative bobs and weaves through eras and viewpoints, as the world approaches nuclear war. The basic action-idea (central driving plot) is that someone is killing off these vigilantes, possibly to prevent them from interfering in… something. By the time it is all over, everyone is morally challenged and forced to embrace a horrific reality, as the whole world changes. But is it for the better?
If you happen to care, there are many plot spoilers throughout this review.
I read ‘Watchmen’, you see, out of curiosity that was piqued by the coming of Zack Snyder’s adaption to the screen. I heard many say it was visionary, challenging, and the best graphic novel ever made. I figured I should read it before I saw the film.
After reading it, I can guarantee that I have no desire to see the film. Not because the film will not be enough. It will be too much. ‘Watchmen’ is not just a challenge of comic book clichés, but also of classic morals. Brutality, murder, misogyny and explicit sexuality are laced throughout the work. This only serves to undermine the wealth of philosophical and psychological depth in the story. It comes off as cheap, gratuitous, and unnecessary. As I stated in my review of the film ‘Jaws’, an implication is enough. The audience does not need to experience everything the characters experience in order to sympathize with them.
‘Watchmen’ is a structural masterpiece. If you haven’t read it, I don’t know how to describe it to you. It’s like nothing I’ve seen before. An excellent sense of art, symbolism, pacing, dialog… nearly everything. It is the story, not the structure, that makes ‘Watchmen’ a failure.
Alan Moore is something of an extreme left-winger. As such, he tends to engineer his stories (most notably “V for Vendetta”, another graphic novel-turned-film) as, well, thinly veiled propaganda. I don’t wish to be unreasonable in suggesting this is the case. After all, C.S. Lewis once said (I’m paraphrasing, of course) that his own views “bubbled up” into his stories. It’s natural. You wouldn’t be human if that didn’t happen. Regardless of this, there is a point that you cross that makes a work more about your specific messages than the strength of the narrative. It is a hard line to walk. ‘Watchmen’ is strange (for Moore), in that it contains, not so much propaganda, as much as a clear agenda. Moore’s agenda, reasonably, is to make us question the superhero genre, through an intricate set of moral dilemmas. The problem with Moore is that he’s great at asking questions but terrible about answering them. One could argue that this is point: asking questions, for the sake of asking them. In a strictly dramatic presentation, though, I find this deeply unsatisfying. The reason we ask questions is for answers. As it is absolutely vital that a dramatic work bring its audience to catharsis (emotional satisfaction and release), unanswered questions seem to fly directly in the face of classical dramatic structure. I’m sure that some absolutely love ‘Watchmen’, and honestly, I can understand why. It is very well made.
The reason I hate ‘Watchmen’ is that, well, I’m an idealist. Essentially. I believe that people are created in the image of a noble, wise God, with a great capacity for good. I don’t think we are the results of a dramatic cosmic accident. We are icons of God on Earth. Yes, we’ve fallen far, but there is redemption through Christ. I don’t say this to preach. I say this to illustrate how different my philosophy is from that of Alan Moore. I get the impression Moore doesn’t know what he believes, hence the unanswered questions. ‘Watchmen’ reflects a distinctly fatalistic worldview. In ‘Watchmen’, the universe is a clock without a clockmaker. There is no greater meaning. Morality is relative to the end that is achieved… sometimes. Or maybe, all the time. We are never presented with a character that grasps the end of humanity, who understands a grander meaning. Nobody is at peace with himself. The ending is very open to multiple possibilities, to a fault. We’re left unsure. Certainly, this is by design. Depending on the story that precedes such an ending, I may not mind. In this case I do.
The off-kilter philosophy, the brutalizing of the audience through gratuitous content, the failure of the ending to tie up loose ends, make this graphic novel, supposedly the greatest of all time, a work I regret reading. Needless to say, I won’t be watching the ‘Watchmen’ film. I don’t need more of Moore.