The Many Faces Behind Watchmen (the film)

Lately Zack Snyder's 'Watchmen' has been on my mind. When I saw it and reviewed it in March of this year I gave it four-stars, but was somewhat unsure if it really deserved it. As time has passed and I've watched a couple different versions of the film I'm now very assured that it does deserve that rating and I find it stronger and better now than before.

Partly because I shed all the pre-viewing conjured up beliefs of what the film 'will' be like and tried blending it with what the film was like. It was thick. It was specularly un-P.C. and against the grain of mainstream comic cinema, but has those draw backs of still trying to be fairly accessible to the '300' crowd. Recently when thinking the whole piece over again I went back through the graphic novel to see how I felt about that. My feelings hadn't changed much. It's a dynamic and intelligent book with things I love and things that rub me the wrong way. The movie has that same quality, but does different things that rub me the wrong way. Parts of the ending fight sequence for example and the uneven soundtrack and score.

On the other hand I feel like the performances and writing hit the satirical note they were going for and there are some perfect, awe inspiring sequences. I also thought about the many film makers who came close to making this. Among the ones I'd still love to see would be Ridley Scott's version. Not just because I like Scott, but because of the timing it would've been made would have been after 'Blade Runner' and 'Legend' so I feel like it would've been part of an unofficial series of his. Also in many ways 'United 93' and 'The Bourne Ultimatum' director Paul Greengrass (who came extremely close to making it in 2003). I think seeing his style in this universe might have been something very unique and never before seen.

However then I think of two other filmmakers who I like, but am very glad they didn't get the job. First is Darren Aronofsky director of 'Pi', 'Requiem for a Dream', 'The Fountain' and 'The Wrestler'. From my understanding he worked hard to change several elements from the story and according to an interview with 'Watchmen' co-creator Dave Gibbons he never really understood the book and it's themes. Something I find interesting given his body of work. However in a way he has a silent and underrated gem of his own creative mind that demands more attention in 'The Fountain'. The other is Terry Gilliam. I've read tons of Gilliam interviews and go through stints of watching just his films. As much as I like the core majority of them I do not think he could've produced a film adaptation of 'Watchmen' that captured much dramatic edge and seriousness. I also find it funny that he's criticized people like Spielberg and Kubrick for not having films that take risks and making movies that give answers nicely packages.

This is funny to me because in all of his films he rarely deals with serious or edgy subject manner and the few times he does, it's performed more like a dance of manic humor around the dark material as if he's too scared to really dig in sans for a brief moment, like in 'The Fisher King'. Along with that I don't believe Gilliam can really do seriousness. He's made subtle attempts, but many times it either falls flat or seems too uneven within the confines of the whole picture. Further more rarely does a Gilliam picture actually ask you a question or to really question much of anything. There's no Earth shattering logic or philosophy in 'Time Bandits' and many of the points 'Brazil' makes are so muddled up with trillions of characters, set pieces and sequences of irreverent lunacy that it at times seems like there was no point to begin with. And I don't consider a film 'edgy' because it has a sad or unfavorable ending either. Again I do like a lot of his films and love a few however I'm a firm believer in not throwing stones when you live in a glass house or at least admitting you are in a glass house as Gilliam is and has been in for decades now.

This brings me to Snyder's version(s) which I think is as close to the book as you can get movie wise. I think it also hinges on how much you like the book. I love it, but don't think it's perfect and I feel that way about the movie. What's there is a lot of character and a lot of depth into the story, events and a lot of the nuances while still having Snyder make it in his style. I'm a firm believer in an artists choice to stylize content the way they deem fit whether the public likes it or not. So while I loathe 'The Boondock Saints', I respect Troy Duffy's choice to edit it the way he did.

This Christmas the ultimate 'Watchmen' DVD gets released which will have all three versions of the film and a slew of extras. I own the two disc and love the behind scenes doc, but left me really wanting more (not unlike the two disc of 'The Dark Knight'). From the looks of it this will fill that void. But in any case this was something on my mind recently and I felt the need to share.