Frame from graphic novel "Watchmen"

This animated movie is a spinoff of a comic book within the graphic novel Watchmen. The movie does an excellent job of keeping true to the core of this (fictitiuos) comic book. We watch the hero go through stomach turning atrocities that ultimately transform him from an honorable ship captain to a hallucinated madman.

It lacks, however, any tie-ins with Watchmen, as it strives to be a stand-alone entity. But, unfortunately, it’s hard to justify any film clocking in under 30 minutes of reel time with a price tag of $30 retail. Gerald Butler (King Leonidus from 300) is a sexy guy and a great voice-over, but not that good.

The movie starts off right in the middle of a bloody naval battle between a monstrous black ship and what seems to be an honest naval ship (maybe British). It would have been nice to see some homage to the spinoff’s roots, visa vi a prologue of the fanboy reading “Tales of the Black Freighter” at a newsstand in NYC. After all, that’s how readers followed the comic: the fanboy would talk to the newsstand vendor, then we would get a glimpse of Freighter and the action would perfectly coincide with the discussion fanboy was having–but with a really twisted, gory perversion of the conversation.

All-in-all it’s interesting, but not worth the dough. Maybe if nothing interesting is on your Netflix list you should give this DVD a shot, but don’t expect to be pulled into the story for long. I recommend the graphic novel instead.

Movie:
Director: Zack Snyder
Starring: Malin Akerman, Billy Crudup, Matthew Goode, Jackie Earle Haley, Jeffrey Morgan, Patrick Wilson
Release: March 2009

You don’t have to look too hard before finding somebody that worships DC Comics’ Watchmen. Its popularity has survived tests of time, and one could argue that Watchmen is the lynchpin of the graphic novel’s (and comic book’s) credibility as “serious” literature. Had it been made into a motion picture in the late 80s or even 90s, the lack of computer graphics and special effects may have tarnished the experience. But, now that movies almost have too much computer animation, it is safe to attempt this seminal work. Or is it? Afterall, with great success comes even greater expectation…and criticism. Watchmen fanboys are going to be, umm…watching, with scrutiny for any miscues. So, how did Zack Snyder fare in recreating this cult hit?

Before judging the movie’s accuracy, it is important to remember just how hard it is to recreate Alan Moore’s Watchmen on-screen. It is a very dense, convoluted story. Watchmen bounces between the 1940s, 50s, 60s, and 70s (or 1939 for the Watchmen police). Many characters share the spotlight as the story juggles a love triangle, global hysteria, gumshoe detective work, and more. And, Moore created additional content like “Tales of the Black Freighter“, a comic book within his novel; excerpts from characters’ autobiographies or published essays; psychiatric profiles, and other references. Oh, and did I mention that there is at least one flashback in the majority of Watchmen’s chapters? Simply put, Synder had his work cut out for him.

Tunnel Vision
Snyder did a solid job focusing on Watchmen’s core. Though skipping through the golden years of the masked heroes, flashbacks, and other peripheral content kills the novel’s charm, the movie does an excellent job of staying true to the content it does focus on. To counter-balance the decades Watchmen builds up over, the movie runs through the first 29 years: the inception of the masked hero; heroes selling out; outlawing masked heroes; and disbanding of the Minutemen (first organized group of masked heroes) in the opening credits. For those who haven’t read the graphic novel, this part of the movie could be easily overlooked as a cute montage of throwback heroes-but in fact it is vital back-story. In fact, it would be fair to say that Watchmen the movie was made for Watchmen students-not the passive viewer.

To explain further, Synder fully utilized the “A picture says a thousand words” proverb in the movie’s prologue. Still-frame and slow-frame fragments of the graphic novel are summarized, yet succinctly understood.

A Place In History
The time period of Watchmen shuts out the audience somewhat. This is not Snyder’s fault, of course. But again, for a younger audience the context of the story can be confusing. For instance, we see a lot of Richard Nixon as he weighs the Soviet nuclear threat. So, without any knowledge of the Cold War and the arms race, a viewer is already partially blind. There are many other examples to support this. If you take a look at the cast and credits you’ll see that a serious number of iconic figures from the 60s and 70s are captured in the movie. (Dr. Manhattan…first man on the moon? Too cool.)

It’s not Snyder’s fault for inheriting a script fixed in this time period, but some attention to explanatory dialogue would have been helpful. But, this goes back to staying true to the graphic novel. Besides cutting out peripheral content, the movie is extremely accurate to the graphic novel-almost to a fault. That, my friends, is up to you to decide.

Mirror Image
Where Watchmen really shines as a screen-adaptation is in its representation of Moore’s characters. The graphic novel hosted lovable, turbulent characters, and the movie did the novel justice in getting the cast right and letting the novel shine on. Rorschach (Jackie Earl Haley) was a perfect Rorschach. Billy Crudup played a brilliant Dr. Manhattan. The monotone, apathetic voice enhanced the character (and gives us something to think about in the “Dr. Manhattan/God” theory). Malin Akerman and Patrick Wilson did an excellent rendition of Silk Spectre and Night Owl. The only thing missing was some early-on awkwardness and drooling Night Owl gets caught up in. Matthew Goode didn’t exactly look the part of the square-chinned statuesque Adrian Veidt, AKA Ozymandias, as his frame is more slender. But, the acting performance was brilliant enough to be convince me he was a diabolical, insurmountable hero (or villain…hrm). Jeffrey Dean Morgan played a five-star Comedian. His sarcastic laughs during tense scenes colored in the Comedian’s sick sense of humor and perspective described in the graphic novel.

The supporting cast was excellent as well. Edgar Jacobi played a great Moloch. Robert Wisden is a passable Nixon (though the prosthetics and makeup are a bit obvious). Carla Gugino, though I hate seeing her wearing makeup that ages her, was a cool, casual Sally Jupiter. I truly could not have asked for more from cast. How did you like the casting?

Who’s Watching The…Omissions
Besides shorting us on the extra documents Moore created-which totally help create the illusion the Watchmen’s characters are real people-there are some little snips here and there that could have been good moments for hardcore fans and newbies alike. For instance, we do not see Hollis Mason, the original Night Owl, bite the dust. Also, Rorschach’s social impotence is hardly expressed in the movie. One big thing I would have like to have seen from the graphic novel is the graffiti of the two lovers’ silhouettes outside his apartment. It showed great foreshadowing for the big twist at the end-just a snippet of Moore’s genius that would have been neat to see.

Another cut comes from a flashback we do not see. Though Snyder lets us watch Jon Osterman become Dr. Manhattan, we do not see what makes him tick. This comes in the graphic novel via a flashback to young Osterman tinkering with a watch’s parts, as he is training to follow his father’s watchmaker footsteps. The movie neglects the conversation in which his dad pushes him to be a nuclear physicist, and, well, the rest is history. I’m sure there are other cuts that I missed. Maybe you can help fill in the blanks.

Overall, it’s an accurate portrayal of the graphic novel. The movie often is an exact representation of the novel, frame by frame! I’d say the biggest cuts in the movie came from leaving out some of the peripheral content, especially the “Tales from the Black Freighter.” In general, Moore is a master at doing parallel stories. Black Freighter echoed what was going on in the real world and the comic’s drama perfectly. Brilliant! The other biggest cut was leaving out the (Spoiler Alert!) Ozymandias’ giant alien monsters who supposedly were responsible for nuking the world. I mean, come on, a giant slimy cyclops alien in Times Square-how could Snyder pass that up?! Instead Dr. Manhattan takes the fall for the explosions, which works, I guess.

Movie
Director, Screenplay: Frank Miller
Starring: Gabriel Macht, Samuel L. Jackson, Eva Mendez, Scarlett Johansson
Released: December, 2008
Rated: PG-13

Taking a classic and celebrated body of work such as The Spirit is a touchy thing. Its formula is simple yet so hard to duplicate because of the medium William Eisner chose. Placed in a Sunday newspaper, Spirit’s do-gooder deeds were recounted in a mere handful of pages. Foregoing back stories, monologues, or an assembly of other tools used to deliver sound, compelling drama, each new tale of The Spirit seems to start in what would be the climax of the story if Eisner had more pages to build up to it. The anecdotes range from hot under the collar romances to cat and mouse games with hoboes in Central City’s cavernous sewer system. But, one theme rules every page I’ve read, and that’s irony. Eisner’s short and sweet style and laden irony made for a lethal one-two combo. Frank Miller’s screen adaptation of The Spirit, though, strongly deviates from the original series’ simple essence, its spirit.

Adaptation Lottery

How do you select the “right” stories when creating a screenplay out of a comic? Do you go to the main character’s genesis? Arch-nemesis? Death? Most popular series? Most recent series? It’s like throwing darts at a wall of balloons at the carnival: You try to hit one but soon start wasting darts away at any and every balloon, hoping to pop just one. Miller’s flick resembles this chaotic flail. Granted, Eisner’s The Spirit is a romance in one issue and an international mystery the next (or both at the same time), but the movie never resembled the personality of Spirit’s era or the type of “real” crime he was chasing. For instance, the movie incorporates mythological artifacts such as the Golden Fleece and the Blood of Herecles (Hercules) to the story. The comic is more or less about fighting everyday criminals: bank robbers, swindlers, murderers, etc. Stopping thugs trying to get a free piece of the pie is a far cry from thwarting a villain chasing immortality via the blood of Hercules.

Miller selected antagonist Octopus (Samuel L. Jackson) for the movie. He is a feared villain in both the comic and movie, dubbed the Kind of Crime (read Eisner’s “The Postage Stamp“). His face and figure is never discovered in print, but we see quiet a bit of him in the movie. It’s forgivable, even exciting to see what Octopus may look like-but dressing him as a Wild West ruffian, nazi, and samurai were probably a little outside the realm of Eisner’s vision. The thugs and crime lords of the comic were usually in suits or scraps-which resembles the age the comic was written in. Besides, I believe Eisner was more about the message than the wardrobe.

Through the comic there are many characters that symbolize the attitudes and inner struggles of people, from down-and-outers to the affluent on fifth avenue. Of course there were the bad apples that just led a life without morals, but Eisner seemed to love a character that defies the status quo of his or her respective disposition, and how criminal acts serve as a means to break out of the shackles they were inevitably constrained by. There’s also redemption, which the movie does touch on via femme fatale Sand Serif’s (Eva Mendez) redeeming acts. But, the movie isn’t about the oppressed, repressed, or depressed; it’s about a madman seeking immortality and a hero stepping in between the bad guy and world domination.

The movie also has back story between Sand Serif and Spirit. They were kids that grew up on the same block, and they loved each other, etcetera, etcetera. We never see Spirit as a child in print, which is part of his mystery, and highlights his presence as a heroic symbol, but maybe back story slightly resuscitates a flatlining story.

The comic also celebrates the art of suggestive sexuality, which was as far as published sex went in the 40s. The movie does this, but dips into more contemporary traditions, visa vi Eva Mendez’s hindquarters. The rules on skin and sex were different in Eisner’s day, and my preference would be to see a film reflect a more flirty tone, especially a PG-13 rated film. It would be very interesting to see a modern depiction of what sexuality was like then, rather than thrusting the characters into modern day rules (or lack thereof). But, in the comic Spirit flirts with and kisses the girl—in fact it’s a big part of the series. And since it is such a big part of Spirit’s character, it’s hard to swallow a depiction of him carelessly flirting with every lady that passes him by. It becomes a running joke by the end of the film, and his debased ethics take away from his symbol as a pure good guy.

Miller’s genesis of Spirit was also out-of-the-blue, which in my opinion is a big mistake. In the comic Denny Colt, respected detective and wisenheimer, sought Dr. Cobra in his underground lair. Colt was presumed dead after suffering a chemically induced coma after shooting a vat of toxic liquid in Cobra’s stronghold. Pronounced dead, Colt was buried-but he rose that night and became the Spirit. In the movie Colt was shot to death, but Octopus, who was then a mortician looking for a test subject for his invulnerability serum, injected Colt with a strain of immortal juice and Colt became the un-killable Spirit of justice. Nice symbolism, but why mess with a good genesis? I did notice in my reference that Eisner has a trademark on Denny Colt. Perhaps this is why the movie spins the origins of the character. It is certainly the easiest reason to swallow.

Character Flaw

The characters are hit or miss. Miller got the secondary characters down pretty well. The femme fatales were spot on. Sand Serif was a fiery, ambitious seductress that resembles Eisner’s lusty go-getters very well, while Silken Floss (Scarlett Johansson) was a puzzling oddball and a cool breeze to compliment her boss, Octopus, and his zany outbursts. Ellen Dolan (Sarah Paulson) was Denny Colt’s wife or girlfriend (it was never made clear), and though her character had zero relevance to the comic, she was the only character that had a soft side. It’s nice to have a grounded character bring us back to reality when the rest of the movie resembles 90 minutes of Elmer Fudd (played by the Spirit) chasing Daffy Duck (Octopus).

Spirit (Gabriel Macht) was well casted, but the character was misdirected. Spirit and Octopus were all-but immortal in the flick, and they stood toe-to-toe bashing each other’s brains in (to no effect) on more than one occasion. Spirit was impaled, shot, and smashed throughout the movie, but in the comic he couldn’t take a bullet any better than you or I could. In fact, he is often saved by women or Commissioner Dolan. His allure for women is overdone but entertaining in the flick, and it serves up a few chuckles.

Octopus, I don’t know what to say-probably the most confusing character I’ve ever seen on a screen. He is intended to be a crafty crime boss in the comic, but a scientist and absolute loon in the movie. Commissioner Dolan (Dan Lauria) seems to love tearing Spirit a new one, but in the comic there is much more camaraderie and benevolence. Dolan in the movie seems more like the angry commissioner archetype than a softy.

And last but not least, Lorelei Rox (Jaime King) is an aquatic rhinestone-studded seductress bent on bringing Spirit back to death every time he passes out. What? Unfounded in the comic, they’re relationship is trumped up, as we only see her in flashes swimming and seducing Spirit. Who she is; how she can breathe under water; and why she’s trying to keep Spirit dead, no one will ever know.

Note: I should mention that I did not have access to a complete body of Eisner’s original work. Rather, I based my body of knowledge on a compilation, “The Best Of The Spirit” which I recommend to all comic readers and students of storytelling method. Any insight from The Spirit fans is welcomed and appreciated.