Watchmen

*** out of ****
By: William Moon

The year is 1985, and President Nixon is about to serve his fifth term, in this alternative reality that looks much like the one in which we live in. The opening credits of the film provide a look into what is going on in the world. Lesbian superheroes are slain, war is breaking loose and a band of unarmed peace-loving hippies are gunned down by so-called war heroes, just because they choose to want a better and more loving society. All the while a Bob Dylan song plays over the events.

As the credits roll, one would think that the film would promise a politically charged film, in where the superheroes would be seen as liberals and the villains as conservatives, but the film is a lot more complex than that. On the given surface, the plot, in itself, may only completely make sense to those who have read the graphic novel or seen the film at least a couple of times, and there are many visual distractions that sometimes draw focus away from what plot there would be, and yes, if you've already heard, I am indeed talking about the infamous blue penis of character Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup). That's not to say the aesthetics of the film aren't worth congratulating, because they certainly are. The sequences on Mars are some of the most breathtaking visuals I've seen since Darren Aranofsky's The Fountain, and despite the unnecessary usage of the penis on screen, it still looks visually realistic in all of its digital enhancement. Yes, the pun is intended. But now that I've spent so much time focusing on the cock, on with the plot.

When The Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), a former superhero, is murdered, the masked vigilante Rorshach (Jackie Earl Haley) sets out to investigate the murder. The film ranges over about a thirty-year time period, and rather than hiring different actors to play the young and the old, the same actors play them, with some of the worst makeup I've ever seen on film. One character even looks into the screen at one point to proclaim to the audience "I am 67 years old." It's probably good she told us that, because otherwise we might think she was a 30 year old woman with bad stage-lines plastered across her forehead and cheeks.

The film tries to appeal to a wide-ranged audience, never straying away from explosive adrenaline or a thought-provoking commentary on modern and past times in our world. In many ways it's meant to be seen as a political satire, and although I did not enjoy Zach Snyder's (the director) previous work, this felt like it had more depth than his recent 300 and by far it's well worth the watch for visual effects alone.

I still believe Zach Snyder isn't the best director and here's why: I believe he doesn't fully comprehend the meaning behind his work a lot of the time. As I've said I believe the film is supposed to be a political satire on our times in a political and comical manner. We have a character in the film that is a former superhero, and now a recovering alcoholic, with a bad past with a man who nearly raped and abused her. The woman later gives in and cheats on her husband with this man on her own will. If you wouldn't know any better and I never talked about her being a superhero, you might think this subplot might belong on Days of Our Lives. I think in many ways the film does take itself too seriously, unlike Sweeney Todd, which reveled in all of its maniacally dark humor, but that isn't to say Watchmen is a failure by any means. It's a thoroughly enjoyable and entertaining work of mainstream art that provides a more insight look to what Hollywood could actually be capable of if they set forth in achieving so. The Dark Knight is probably the highest accomplished work in this method. It's a nice effort of a film for hopefully more great superhero movies to come, and although I am still convinced Zach Snyder is a bad director, I believe, as a whole, Watchmen will not disappoint fans of the graphic novel, superhero fans and moviegoers who simply want an entertaining and visually pleasing film.