What Went Wrong: Watchmen
By Brian Pew
August 17, 2009
BoxOfficeProphets.com
By the time Comic-Con opened its doors in the summer of 2008, the stained smiley face had become ubiquitous. Watchmen was finally coming to the silver screen. Originally penned by Alan Moore and illustrated by Dave Gibbons, the 1986 comic resuscitated its industry. The legendary story won over legions of fans and took home some serious accolades. It was the only comic to take home the prestigious Hugo Award and was named one of the greatest 20th century novels by Time magazine.
The hype for Watchmen was beyond any potential blockbuster in recent memory. The hardcore fans had been salivating for a proper treatment for 20 plus years. The breathless trailers showcased an onslaught of otherworldly action. The man hired to bring the vision to life was just off the gigantic success of another graphic novel, 300, and seemed to be the perfect director for the job. The stars seemed to align for Watchmen to become the story of 2009.
Watchmen opened the weekend of March 6, 2009 to a ho-hum $55 million dollars. Not a great start, but not one that portended doom. It was the second weekend which confirmed its demise. Watchmen lost its second weekend to the immortal Race to Witch Mountain, dropping a steep 67% to only $17 million. A 61% dip in the third frame put its total into seven digits, and by the last weekend of March it could barely fend off Taken, a Eurothriller which had premiered two months prior. The vaunted Watchmen petered out at $107 million domestic, a far cry from the $130 million published budget and sky high expectations. How did Watchmen, a movie which practically oozed destiny, crash and burn so quickly?
For most underperformers, there are generally a multitude of causes for failure. Direction, screenplays, casting, music, marketing, and acting are just a few usual suspects. Our topic has a host of problems, too, but at the same time Watchmen is not a typical example. It has plenty of small faults, but one overriding negative that eclipses all the rest.
Regarding the small stuff, there are some issues that should be mentioned before moving on. For one, slow motion is played out. It can be very exciting in small, short outbursts, but one of the reasons Watchmen has a long run time is because half of the movie is in slow-mo. Director Zack Snyder used it extensively in 300, but in Watchmen it came off as derivative, even boring. It even was used during the hideous sex scene, which also deserves special attention. It looked like the two principals spent too much time studying Cinemax's late night softcore offerings. The smirks and giggles coming from the peanut gallery summarized the copulation scene nicely. And before the main course, the marketing must be discussed. Keeping a certain level of mystery around the project is a heady idea, but completely skimming over the plot and background of the film was a terrible move. It was already an unknown quantity to many, and not addressing what the movie was about was a wide misfire. When people see a giant naked blue man destroying the Viet Cong, the masses deserve an explanation.
Watchmen held too closely to the book. There, I said it. Normally the exact opposite happens in Hollywood. Case after case has proven that the movie industry either does not understand the source material or care to. Often times there are legitimate reasons for doing so. A Clockwork Orange would be unwatchable if Kubrick set out to mirror the book. The written word sometimes works in ways that moving pictures simply cannot. Therefore, it is up to the filmmakers to change the story while keeping the source's essence. It is a tricky feat to pull off, so most filmmakers do not bother with keeping to the story and change whatever they like on a whim. There is a veritable graveyard of such films, and conventional wisdom was that Hollywood would again botch another classic story.
Zack Snyder admirably set out to honor the Watchmen. Nevermind that the recluse creator, Alan Moore himself, said it could not be done in film. Terry Gilliam famously agreed and proclaimed Watchmen unfilmable after failing to get the production off the ground in the 1990s. But the young gun Snyder brushed off the warnings and dove head first into the project. Time and time again, Snyder assured the rabid fans that he would not let them down. Snyder even said in an interview that no other movie had ever been geared towards the fans like the adaptation of Watchmen. Turns out all of his hard work was counterproductive.
Instead of a gripping tale, the audience was served a story so convoluted that Charlie Kaufman would have been impressed. Moore warned against this problem. He wisely noted that in a comic or book, the reader can turn back a page or two if they were lost. Indeed, the first thought that popped in my head after leaving the theatre was, "If you didn't read the comic, you have no idea what you just saw." As a fan of the material myself, I was even lost! Just as Moore prophesized, and as anyone who took the time to read Watchmen knew, there is a lot of flipping back and forth. Snyder did not seem to grasp this point and kept plugging along for the most part, leaving the audience to ponder the size of Dr. Manhattan's membrane.
Another wicked stepbrother of Snyder's obsession over being true to the story was the film's pacing. At only 12 issues, Watchmen is fairly dense. Every panel seemingly bursts with information, whether pertaining to the main story, a side plot, sociopolitical metaphor, etc. A key tenet to those who believed the story to be unfilmable was that it would take far too long to relay the tale. Did that throw Snyder off? Nope. He went out and filmed virtually all the book. Even after all of the edits it still pushed three hours. While boring may not be the correct word, the story's denseness did carry over to the adaptation, creating far too many yawns among the crowd.
The last side effect of Snyder's comic worship was that the story's "reality" did not translate. Part of the genius of Watchmen was that it was set in our world, but with an alternate history. Aside from Dr. Manhattan, there are no mutants to speak of, no Superman to leap over tall buildings, no hero with a super power to save the day. The world of Watchmen was gritty, troublesome, and truthful. Even though the characters themselves are fairly outlandish, the canvas of comics mutes some of their words, costumes, and actions. Snyder took every picture and word as gospel, recreating it on the silver screen. The giant screen is not as forgiving as the page, and most of the characters came off as far too "cartoonish". Bryan Singer understood this principle, taking Wolverine out of the garish original costume and into a sleek black get-up. Was that a sin against X-Men cannon? No, it was a sign of a smart director who figured out that not everything translates perfectly from the page to the screen.
It took 20 plus years, but Watchmen finally escaped from the list of greatest books never to be made. Although it dazzles in certain moments, Snyder's burden of delivering exactly what every fan wanted can be seen and felt. He was too nervous to take a chance with the story, opting to stay within the lines whenever possible. Tim Burton drew all over the lines. Sam Raimi knew when to alter the story. Singer, too. If only Snyder had taken a cursory look at his peers and why certain adaptations work, we might have a full-fledged classic to enjoy instead of a shell.