Alan Moore’s Watchmen is the story of costumed crime-fighters with no super powers and the insanity such a life would lead to. Into this mix of misfits and damaged goods, insert one additional hero, only this one with such super power that he is basically a god. The mix is a mess of real-life personal issues (will there be a war? who’s sleeping with who? how did our parents make us the disturbed human beings we are today? How can people act like that?) and the presence of a true super-being, who increasingly loses interest in the human baggage and emotion.
No comic had ever been like that before. Moore broke new ground. The elements of a horror comic met the conventional narrative of the superhero story, and then it all got turned on its head and came out as a murder mystery. Is it nuts? Yes. Does it make a lot of sense? Sort of… These characters are violent and flawed and yet they are still comic book heroes. That tension is what the Watchmen is all about.
The Watchmen comic book, that is. Now there’s this whole thing about a movie, and it’s a big friggin’ deal. I don’t really know what the New Yorker’s Anthony Lane is all about that, but he attacked this movie with such savage hatred, decrying the fetishistic violence and perversity that were certainly part of the book (don’t know about the film yet). All I could think when I read his review is that, this guy is warning the readers of the New Yorker, to not believe the hype with this movie – it is low art. Thank goodness we have Anthony Lane to see these dreadful train wrecks and then to help protect us from ourselves.
Yet, in general, people do not describe the Watchmen comic book as low art. It has rightfully been given a place of honor among all written fiction. Also, this was not a flash in the pan for Moore. He created much greatness both before and after Watchmen. And Anthony Lane doesn’t really tell you about the comic because this is a movie review.
But here is a film that tries to do so much. This is blasphemy and it lacks the blessing or even acknowledgement of the comic book’s author. Should the review address the hype? Does the review owe the filmmaker anything for the effort? Does the review even need to acknowledge the task, thus making reference to the comic book and its successes?
No, the review only needs to say “this is not human suffering” and “this is not what real violence means,” “that’s not pity,” and “it’s not funny.” It’s so annoying to have to review movies that don’t feature Kate Winslet.
