review: Watchmen (2009)

1 Comment

I’ve been disgracefully lax of late. I’ve actually seen quite a few new films in the weeks since I reviewed My Bloody Valentine 3D. Well, new to me anyway. In case you’re interested they were… The Wrestler, Frost/Nixon, Confessions of a Shopaholic, The Notebook, The Devil Wears Prada, Bolt 3D, Anvil! The Story of Anvil and Friday the 13th (the latest one). I haven’t written reviews for any of them yet. I do intend to write reviews of some of them at some point… I’m just not sure when. In case you are wondering… The Notebook was the best of them (what can I say, I am a sap!) and Friday the 13th was the worst.

Anyway, this isn’t a review of any of those films… the film I saw last night was Watchmen. For those of you who may not have heard, Watchmen is based on the Alan Moore comic book series of the same name. That series has been much lauded by critics… and indeed by everyone I know who’s read it. Apparently it is quite the seminal work in comic books.

Sounds great but I haven’t read it. I’ve nothing against comic books, I just haven’t read it. When I heard the film was coming out I thought about picking it up, not least because it was staring prettily at me in every book shop I’ve been to in the last few months. In the end I didn’t; I’ve heard that phrase “It’s not as good as the book” said far too many times about films to risk ruining a film that looked like I could really enjoy it.

It would seem that I was right to avoid the book first. Quite a few reviews I have skimmed through mentioned that it’s so caught up in looking like the comic that it misses what the comic was actually saying. Phew! Glad I didn’t have to experience that disappointment. I really liked this film. Thought it was great. I suppose by not reading the comic I can take the themes and the story at face value. This makes for an interesting film, particularly compared to some of the crap I’ve seen recently (see list above. they weren’t all crap though).

So we’ve established that I’m in the pro-Watchmen-the-film camp. That’s not to say that I thought it was a brilliant film. I thought it looked great, that it was interesting story and in parts it was stunning… but it’s a long film and I’d be lying if I said that every one of the 163 minutes was used to its full potential. It’s patchy in parts, especially around the middle. In fact not many films that long avoid patchiness and sagging. It’s also not to say that I think it should have been shorter. One of the things I hate is adaptations that insist on updating and abridging their source material, artifically transplanting in some modern day setting to make it “relevent”. What a load of bollocks. If a story is relevent you don’t to change its setting. Your audience should be able to draw their own parallels. Bah, I’m sick of films that try to spoon feed you.

…Sorry, I got off the point there. I admire that Watchmen stayed true to its source material, even if it was to its alleged detriment. I’d rather watch a long somewhat flawed adaptation than a half assed cutdown version that bears scant resemblance to the original it’s trying to update. Though… I’m not saying all adaptations are bad… I’m just saying that if you’re out there saying that you’re telling a certain story, you should tell the story

I got well off track there. Right. Patchy, yes. Watchmen starts out great, the opening montage was really excellent, we’re quickly brought up to speed with how this alternate timeline has progressed so far. To be honest this really is the best bit of the film. As the film goes on it gets a little muddled in places. It’s as those the scenes don’t entirely flow together. This is probably the problem that those who’ve read the comics are talking about. I didn’t find it that troubling but it did serve to… I suppose hold up the story telling. It’s not that I thought it was disjointed or hard to follow. That’s not the case. It was just kind of like things were being left unsaid but you couldn’t tell what they were.

I guess in a comic or a book you tend to fill in the blanks with your own emotions and interpretations, you read at your own pace according to what you’re reading. With a film you’re in a more receptive state. A film tells you its story on its terms and you process it afterwards. The best films stay with you, thinking about what you’ve experienced. Or maybe I’m just talking a load of shite but it seems to explain the gaps in this film to me. Or maybe Gilliam was right and it really should have been a mini-series. Perhaps 163 mins wasn’t long enough to engage us with the situations and characters in Watchmen and that’s why it felt patchy, they didn’t have enough time to make us invest in the full story. Actually I’m sure Gilliam was right but I don’t think it means that this was a bad film. Just not a brilliant film.

I want to quickly highlight a couple of the more jarring things. That great montage I mentioned does ominously forbode one of the things that Snyder should have stayed away from. While I enjoyed the songs, they were very obvious. A director shouldn’t really get the soundtrack to tell us what’s going on… that’s that screen is for. It was annoying. Also there was a few scenes that could have been dealt with better, less could have been more. I gather they were fairly faithful recreations of scenes in the comic however what probably works as a series of panels in a comic don’t necessarily work when you actually film the whole scene with those reference points.

I haven’t really dwelt on what I liked in particular about the film because I liked in general really. Oh, I particularly liked the nod to Dr. Strangelove, I always like it when people reference Dr. Strangelove. And how can you not when you’re telling this kind of story? Aside from that… the characters, the look, the story, all good… and all from the comic. I guess I’ll like the comic when I read it.

Anyway this was a particularly long ramble so I’ll finish up by saying it’s well worth a look if you haven’t read the comic. If you have I can’t really tell you if it is or not though I would lean to saying you should. If only so that you get to see some beautiful images on screen. Oh, also I heard the end was completely different from the comic so I went and looked it up. Personally I don’t think this new ending is any better or worse than the comic. Just different. I think it worked in the context of the film and I have to say that it is eminently more acceptable to the average cinemagoer. I wouldn’t have minded myself but I think that a lot of people who’ll never read it would have had a problem with the comic book end.

All’s left to say is, that I still would have loved to see Terry Gilliam’s mini-series version. Here’s hoping.

8/10

NB: Now that I’ve written my own review I’m reading a few of other reviews out there. I’ve noticed a lot of critics referring to The Dark Knight and how The Dark Knight is vastly superior. Then I went back and noticed that I never wrote a review of it myself. If I had I would have said that it was ok, not great. Actually it would have been a lot like my review of Quantum of Solace. Though I would have given it a 8/10. I really don’t understand the raving about it, I mean it was an entertaining couple of hours and Heath Ledger was outstanding but it doesn’t make you think for more than about 5 minutes after it. It was tiring, obsessively realistic and it languished in bleak, gritty darkness, much like Batman himself. Watchmen didn’t flow as well The Dark Knight and the acting wasn’t of the same caliber but I enjoyed just as much, if not more

Read More  

review: The Spirit (2008)

No Comment

I’d never really heard of The Spirit (the film or the comics) until I started seeing the tv ads about a week before it came out… I like the visual style and I’m interested in films of comic book stories but mostly what swung it was that it had Samuel L. Jackson in it. I’ll watch anything with Samuel L. Jackson in it. So I booked the tickets.

I decided to go look it up a little before I saw it… it’s very unusual for me to hear nothing about a film before it comes out particularly one that’s an adaptation. I never read reviews before seeing a film but I’ll cast my eye over IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes to get some idea of what I’m in for. The early signs weren’t good (5.4 on IMDb and 15% on RT) but nothing will stop me seeing a film if I want to see it… I like to make up my own mind.

To be perfectly honest the critics aren’t really wrong… there are lots of things to dislike about The Spirit. I mean seriously, it is terrible… in a way. The dialogue is awful and I don’t where they found Gabriel Macht but they should put him back.

It’s actually hard to describe what’s bad about it because what’s bad is what makes it great. My criticism of it is that some of the dialogue is repetitive, that always annoys me, and it stutters to start. It’s completely outlandish but it takes a while to get to that point. It’s as though Frank Miller started off thinking he’d make serious film noir then realised that there was no hope of that so chose to go careening off the rails.

Sure, it’s annoying but I can’t agree with what Rotten Tomatoes surmised from the critics – that it doesn’t make sense and the characters are unmemorable. It has a very simple plot and the characters are all great fun. Ok, they’re not characters in the sense they have no particular substance, they’re more like interesting props. And they’re all just so odd, it’s great. Samuel L. Jackson is brilliant and for once I didn’t find Scarlett Johansson annoying at all. To be honest herself and Eva Mendes weren’t in it enough I would have liked to laugh at them a little longer. The one character we could have done without was Lorelei Rox (played by Jaime King) I don’t know what was going on there. I can only assume it something from the comics that they felt they had to put in…

I can only thank Frank Miller for going off the rails on this, it is a fun film. It is however, doomed to be a cult classic, if even. There just aren’t that many people out there are who are going to stick with all the madness and there are even less out there who’ll appreciate it. Personally I’ve never seen so many people leave a theatre (that said, I rarely notice people leaving the cinema – I usually watch the film) and it’s a pity because the film does deserve to be seen. At the very least it looks class.

Anyway I, for one, am glad I saw it.

8/10.

PS – I just had a look at the Roger Ebert review of this and he gave it one star. Which is fair enough, his accusations aren’t unfounded, but… he’s got the plot wrong. I don’t know how someone can get the plot wrong – it’s really very simple, you’d have to stop watching the film to get confused… so I gotta say, a little down in my estimation there…

Read More  

review: Iron Man (2008)

2 Comments

My my, I have been lax lately, I really need to write more reviews… it’s not like I haven’t seen any films lately… it’s just that I haven’t had a chance to write any reviews…

Anyway so… I saw Iron Man the other day. You may have heard of it, it’s directed by the multi-talented Jon Favreau (Jon Favreau is great, you should watch Swingers, everyone should watch Swingers.) and one Mr. Robery Downey Jr. as Tony Stark – inventor, industrialist, womaniser and part-time superhero, Iron Man.

It’s important to note part-time there…

Look, don’t get me wrong, I liked Iron Man. It was an entertaining film. I enjoyed it, I thought it was good. It’s just that it was no Transformers. I loved Transformers, it really set a standard for me… Transformers was everything a film with giant robots should be… and may I point out that there pretty much is a giant robot in Iron Man.

To be entirely fair to Iron Man though (because it just can’t compare to Transformersedit re: comment – and yeah, it’s not really the same kind of film) I’ll put it on the scale with some other superhero films… It was vastly better than all the Spider-Man films, not to mention what little I saw of Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer before I fell asleep. It was also better than Superman Returns and Batman Begins but no way was it as good as the X-Men films. I’d say it was on par with Hellboy. Entertaining but not amazing.

I hate to say it because I’m not all about the huge action scenes and great effects but Iron Man could have done with bigger and better action scene and special effects. There’s nothing wrong with an origin story, everyone likes a good origin story, but mostly what we saw was a guy hanging out in a cave building a suit… then hanging out in a basement building a suit… this is not an origin story, it’s a guy building a suit. Tell us a bit about his dad, tell us a bit more about the villains… you could even tell us a bit more about Pepper Potts! I mean I couldn’t really give a crap about her but maybe if you’d told me something I might, she was as bad as Rachel Dawes. I just thought that there could have been more to Iron Man… watch it again and tell me where the actual story was because I certainly didn’t see it… and if I’m not getting a story with real characters and emotion then damnit, I wanna to see big explosions!

Anyway whatever, it just didn’t do it for me… I realise there are lots of people out there who did think it was great and I’d love to hear what you liked about it… so please… let me know!

Oh I forgot to mention one thing that was amazing about this film. The car – the Audi R8… what a car… seriously, where can I win one…?

7/10

Read More  

Back to Top