WARNING: This article contains spoilers for the “Watchmen” movie.
PORT ST. LUCIE, Fla. – In the mid ‘90s, the prospect of Hollywood CGI effects bringing to life Marvel’s favorite comic book heroes – Spiderman, Wolverine, the Phoenix (you know, not those one-dimensional DC Comic characters with the pseudo-abilities) – spurred childhood fantasies.
Jean-Claude Van Damme would play Wolverine; Whoopi Goldberg would star as Storm. Admittedly, amidst all those school-yard daydreams and rumors, never did I imagine the prospect of a tale like “Watchmen.” (Related: "What's different about "Watchmen.")
This near X-rated, live-action theatrical release of the post-modern comic book series bearing the same title raised the specter of the graphic novel to a place I’m not certain many – including traditional comic book fans – would want it to go.
Vulgar language or nudity has never upset my sensibilities at any movie – until now. “Watchmen” featured about as many F-bombs as an episode of “The Sopranos,” about as much gore as any of the recent slasher flicks and sex scenes and frontal nudity to rival an episode of “Sex and The City.” Vulgar language or nudity has never upset my sensibilities at any movie – until now.Unfamiliar with the “Watchmen” universe, it’s fair to say I did not expect this. (In fact, I didn’t realize the movie was rated R until roughly a quarter of the way through the film. I wonder how many parents who brought their kids to the showing suffered the same realization.)
In my estimation, Warner Brothers not only locked itself out of getting the pre-teen and teenage crowd with its 17-and-up rating, but the young males within the movie’s key demo would be less likely to drag their significant other to “Watchmen” because of its excessive carnage.
This story could have been told in PG-13 fashion. (The first step would have been easy: slip a Speedo on Dr. Manhattan for the entire film. It was inexplicable why he wore a Speedo in the flashbacks but not later on in the story.)
Much like a Disney film, these rated-R elements are not what I want in a comic book movie, especially one with special effects that were not all that special, whose superheroes really didn’t have superpowers and whose story went about 45 minutes too long.
Instead of opting for a narrative opening explaining this alternate comic book universe (where the United States won the Vietnam War due to its God-like superhero, Dr. Manhattan, Richard Nixon has been elected to more than four terms as president and the Cold War still rages with the Russians) “Watchmen” intersperses a series of flashbacks. Initially, those rewinds were welcomed as decent action sequences, but they eventually ended up prolonging an otherwise uninspiring film.
“Watchmen” proved to be one of the more poorly executed comic book series on the silver screen. Although movies like “The Fantastic Four” and “Electra” had the complexity and depth of a backyard, makeshift kiddy pool, their pace and storytelling surpassed “Watchmen.”
The story lines in “Watchmen” appeared incongruent and drawn out at times, and the authors failed to satisfactorily tie together all of the elements in the climax. In the end, there is no doubt that any number of scenes could have been left on the cutting room floor – or at least reserved as extras on the DVD for the true fans who crave the back story.
But after watching “Watchmen,” I’m still no fan.
But after watching “Watchmen,” I’m still no fan. I would have hoped the writers would have delved into the theme of “Who will watch the Watchmen?” which appeared scrawled on protestors’ placards during the film and actually became a key element of the movie. I would have preferred a decent explanation of why the world turned on the “Watchmen.” And who were the “Watchmen’s” classic villains, who we only saw slight shades of in the movie?
The one bright spot in the film was the masked, ink-blotted character: Rorschach. His gritty, take-no-nonsense demeanor was the linchpin for the film (at least until he disappeared for about a half-hour at one point).
A sequel of “Watchmen” is – for the most part – not in the foreseeable realm of possibilities, but this comic book fan would welcome a Rorschach prequel any day.
Just tone it down next time, guys. [Front page image from Watchmen official site]Dwayne Robinsonis TheSequitur.com's executive editor and a law student at the University of Florida.
Very sick film. Why would men pay money to have a dong in front of them? should adult content be kept in adult films?..Why is there praise for a film, because as americans we can introduce mor filth into a film that is rated R that should be X. DONT GO SEE IT, DONT PROMOTE IT. This is not a good thing, enough filth out there. If you want too see things like that it should be in ADULT (X, XX, XXX) movies. TONS OF CHILDREN HAVE BEEN TO THIS CRAP MOVIE. Pay attention to whats going on people. You want more penise? gore? rape? PLEASE keep it in its place. I dont want to pay money as an adult and end up seeing crap like that, unless i knew it was coming. AND YES, AN R RATING DOESNT HAVE TO HAVE IT.
Posted by Goldy, on 03/16/2009 at 22:39
WTF?!?! This might be the single most retarded movie review I've ever read. Dude, have you lived in a cave for the last 20 years? You'd think a person reviewing a movie would know SOME basic elements about the film before they see it.
Posted by Gordon, on 03/09/2009 at 14:17
I could understand your shock and disappointment. It would be like going to see Full Metal Jacket expecting it to be Hogan's Heros. That being the case, I would hope that you would put aside your preconceived ideas of what it should be, and see it for what it is, a gritty, brilliant, well directed film. The story telling by flashback was a wonderful device that worked well in the graphic novel as well as the movie. Formulaic it is not, and that can be unsettling for many viewers. But really, the story is meant to be unsettling.
Posted by Nathan Wilson, on 03/09/2009 at 11:47
For me, pretty much everything Robinson disliked about the movie is what I loved. This movie is groundbreaking exactly because it is rated R (and I would agree, it is nearly X). Comic books are regarded as children's drivel by Americans. We hear superheroes, we think happy-sunny-good-guys always triumphing over clear-cut villains. This movie is throwing that cliche in the blender and showing the general public that graphic novels aren't just for kids.
Posted by Steph, on 03/09/2009 at 10:07
i have not had the chance to see the movie because of the shite cinema we have down here but the idiot who did this reveiw has actualy reiforced that i must go and watch this film because now it sounds like it is faithfull to the novel which i highly enjoyed this guy is full of shit just another person expecting a normal run of the mill film people should have realised by now that comic books not always as nice as you perseive them when done right they can indeed be quite chilling why do we have to tone it all down for big screen just because you guys cant stand a penis or gore , and the biggest piss take is when you go on about classic villians wtf watchmen isnt about the villian,s u obviously didnt understand it
Posted by leigh, on 03/09/2009 at 08:57
[i][/i]This movie was awesome. This reviewer isn't. Jokes aside, htis is an actual, real, good ol' fashioned R-rated MOVIE! It's true, this isn't Xmen or Fantastic 4 or Superman or even Batman (thank God, don't we have enough of those?). You are right, some people might mistake it for that cuz, well, it's wrapped like those others and of course WB is marketing it as such to get the money. But for people dieing for a movie that actually makes you think during and well after you see it, this is such a welcome relief. And all the surprises were great! Another problem with movies today is they are too predictable and formulaic. This definitely was NOT. Ha ha! I LOVE THIS MOVIE!
Posted by Steve-O, on 03/09/2009 at 05:16
This article is completely ridiculous. First of all...the reviewer seems genuinely terrified of the nudity in Watchmen. NOOOOOOOOO not a penis and some boobs. How terrible and unnatural. Please. Second, there are about 8 F words the entire movie. IF that. Third, of COURSE this movie is rated R. Watchmen could have never ever in a billion million years been PG 13. Zack Snyder wanted to make a film as close to the graphic novel as possible...a novel that is clearly adult in nature. (Though not nearly as X rated as this reviewer implies.) Next, the idea that the film should have focused on the Watchmen's back stories and their nemeses is ludicrous. The Watchmen graphic novel (a revelation and masterpiece which I highly recommend) isn't even really ABOUT costumed heroes. The superheroes are just a narrative device used to tell a story about greater things like humanity, politics, power and society and provide commentary on themes of morality, war, existence,hope, fear. Even though the movie admittedly might not execute such rich storytelling as well as the graphic novel, it is still a unique, sweeping, visceral experience with interesting and relevant ideas. Plus, it is not '45 minutes too long.' And the reviewer will be pleased, I'm sure, when the extended director's cut is unleashed on DVD and pushes the run time to over 5 hours.
Bonnaroo News 
.jpg)
