Watchmen Review

Like any comic book junkie past or present, I had to see "Watchmen" on opening night. As a bonus, I was able to watch it in IMAX, thanks to my wife's forethought. There has been a lot of hype surrounding the movie, not least because of the huge marketing push, or the "visionary" label bestowed upon the film's director, Zack Snyder.

For this reason, "Watchmen" quickly became a target of many film critics. However, the film was probably a target long before the hype and the marketing campaign due to Snyder's second film,"300," which drew a great deal of controversy. Not only critics, but Iranian politicians halfway across the world condemned the movie on the basis that it negatively represented the Persian hordes as merciless invading monsters. I chronicled some of the controversy here.

As for "Watchmen," I have little doubt many critics were salivating at the prospect of tearing Snyder's third film to shreds. "300" offended their politically correct sensibilities, so "Watchmen" was condemned from the start. Critics have incessantly jabbed the film, arguing the movie was too faithful to the graphic novel.  Never mind the perennial refrain we hear from film aficionados that films are completely unfaithful to the book.

Now the offense is just the opposite.

We hear that there were too many "flashbacks," and there were no allusions to 9/11 and terrorism (?). Malin Akerman was either Jar Jar Binks, or gave a solid performance, depending upon whether you read Newsweek or the New York Times.

Most puzzling of all, NPR's Kenneth Turan boldly declared that "Watchmen" would not make much money at the box office. The film grossed $55 million dollars its opening weekend. Based on this prediction, I question the efficacy of an egregious proclamation in place of sober reflection.

Leaving the critics aside - and their agenda, there are plenty of things to love about "Watchmen," and there are things the film could have done without. Visually, few could argue the cinematic heights achieved by Snyder; the costumes were impeccably crafted, the landscape was grand but beautiful, and there were no awkward, convoluted camera angles. Furthermore, one could argue the film produced some of the finest acting performances of any superhero movie to date. Jackie Earle Haley effortlessly depicted Rorschach's brooding condemnation of humanity's vices, and his own fatalism. Patrick Wilson was utterly believable as the meek Nite Owl II; unsure of himself, but trying to break out of his shell. Billy Crudup's aloof monotone leaves the viewer piteous for Dr. Manhattan's inability to feel, but convinced of his seeming omniscience. Similarly, Matthew Goode's stoic, geeky idealism reflects Ozymandias' ethos - misguided as it may be.

I am no impartial observer, but a long time fan of the graphic novel. Then again, so are most of reviewers, self-proclaimed as they are. There is much more to like about this film than to dislike, but not everything worked. Dr. Manhattan's full-frontal nudity was just unnecessary, and in no way contributed to the plot. Neither did the sex scene between Nite Owl and Silk Spectre. Adding a bit of intimacy and romanticism to a film may add depth and complexity, but the sexual yearning and frustration was present without the gratuitous depiction aboard "Archie," 5,000 feet above the city.

The brutal and choreographed fight scenes were similarly representative of Snyder's excess. Despite the fast-paced brutality, each second of hand to hand combat seemed like an eternity drained from the more important goal of establishing a complicated story line.

Lastly, I cannot comprehend the need to change the denouement. The reason to replace alien corpses with Dr. Manhattan as the cause for the worldwide holocaust escapes me. As a movie goer, I'm un-phased, as a "Watchmen" fan, I'm annoyed. Knowing that the final act is essentially unchanged, what is the point of swearing such fealty for the entire film, only to change its ending? That, perhaps, might be Synder's biggest sin.

So who watches the Watchmen? Apparently, a lot more people than critics would have you believe.

Batman: The Dark Knight

PerezHilton issues a "Spoiler" for Batman: The Dark Knight

Someone big dies in Batman…..but who??

eh.

Cool pic, though.

Alternate Universes: Iraq and Global Warming

Earth One and Earth Two.

Some of the greatest comic book story arcs of all time revolved around the divergence or collision of multiple worlds, during which heroes and villains fought each other and the powers of the cosmos to prevent, or in some cases, hasten, total annihilation.

In DC Comics' now classic Crisis on Infinite Earths series from the 1980's, hordes of superheroes from parallel earths came together in a final battle to save the space/time continuum. Ultimately, the many versions of earth collapsed into one another, allowing DC comics to in effect re-invent its superhero universe, and start from scratch. Tabula Raza, if you will.

This plot has been re-hashed many times over the years in the comic book world. Alternate realities, parallel earths, dopplegangers, the end of time, etc.

However, with every re-telling, the tale only gets more stale.

Which, in turn, brings me to the real world, a world in which we are living, (or so it would appear) among two divergent realities.

We have one reality (Let's call it Earth One): an overzealous President, who is perceived to have abused his office and used the pulpit to create an artificial climate of fear. Those who have assailed the President's rhetoric about the war on terror, such as Daily Kos, have described it in terms like Domestic terror 'plots' as disinformation:

On this story, and every other, that's really all a vast majority of Americans want from the media -- "a healthy dose of skepticism -- given this administration's track record with truth."

and others have written pejoratively On "terror":

The war on terror has created a culture of fear in America, he noted, adding that the Bush Administration's elevation of these three words into a national mantra since the horrific events of 9/11 has had a pernicious impact in American democracy, on America's psyche and on US standing in the world.

Another poster on Daily Kos similarly sought to downplay terror fears: The German Terror Plot Media Scare [Translation of German Article Inside]

And now for the alternate reality, or as I'll call it: Earth Two.

The alleged Terror "fear-mongering" of Earth One seems to parallel another highly politicized issue that has also gotten a great deal of media attention of late. Its most outspoken proponent, Al Gore, has not been shy about the dire straits humanity has found itself in:

Former US vice president Al Gore on Friday warned that global warming presented the most severe crisis ever faced by humans but said the planet could be saved if the right steps are taken.

And the response from Daily Kos? Let's not jump to conclusions. Oops, no, my mistake, that was in response to the [fortunately] timely arrest of the 'Fort Dix Six' before they could act out their homicidal terrorist plans. In any case, the writer went on:

The government tells us there's a war on terror, but most of the claims seem to be exaggerated. I don't know what is real news and what is Fox propaganda drivel. So I'm a skeptic, for now, until I hear and read all of the facts. I expect Keith Olbermann to give this story the scrutiny it deserves.

Excellent point, should we apply this logic to Global Warming, Kos?

Global Warming Week: Antarctica's Melting! Mountains of Madness [UPDATED]

Perhaps not. Apparently, the characteristics of 'hyperbole' in Earth One doubles for selfless alarm-bell ringing in Earth Two.

Instead, in Earth Two, celebrities such as Leonardo DiCaprio are promoting a new film about global warming, which "uses a barrage of images and reams of interviews with the world's top environmental scientists to paint a bleak but still optimistic picture of the fate of our planet."

Hype? Hysteria? Of course not! More akin to Merry swearing loyalty to Théoden at Edoras after the lighting of the beacons!

In Earth Two, glamorous self-promotion has become reality. We have students forced to watch An Inconvenient Truth four times a year in public school.

In Earth Two, yet more celebrities, like Rosie O'Donnell, are promoting 9/11 conspiracy theories on national television, and equating American troops with terrorists:

"I'm talking about a word: terrorism, that the administration has used to terrify this country. They're terrorizing Americans by using the word terror and taking away our civil liberties!"

Although in Earth One, the "German government warns Australians to stay away. New “Al Qaeda In The Lands Of The Villains” cell expected to strike soon."

And although in Earth One, experts such as Victor Davis Hanson have said that "stateless terrorists can be more dangerous than past conventional threats."

And although in Earth One, Christian civilians in [democratic?] Turkey, (for example), have been tortured to death for not being Muslim...

...Earth Two persists in believing that this threat is overblown, overhyped, and politicized. Terrorists are a minor nuisance at best, they argue.

...

With a glance around my flank, they fall upon a George Perez drawing of Superman, a heavily inked battle epic landscape of super heroes littered across a double splash page, oozing color and kinetic energy.

It's a great picture. But I live in the real world. Given that immutable fact, I can only take stock of the rampant hypocrisy among limousine liberals and opportunist politicians to elevate and promote a questionable cause, of which the effects are ethereal and arguable at best, at the expense of an actual threat which has already killed thousands of Americans.

If we lose the war on terror to raving bands of Islamists bent on turning our world upside-down and installing a Caliphate, who will mourn global warming?

Alas this is an opportune time to quote the prescient Al Gore, taken out of context, of course:

"Are we going to say to our children that we were too busy to pay attention?"

Are we?

Does every movie have to be about race?

If you ask Manohla Dargis from the New York Times, then yes.

The big selling point in “Spider-Man 3” is that Spider-Man or Peter or some combination of the two discovers his so-called dark side when an inky extraterrestrial glob (a symbiote in Marvel-speak) spreads its gooey tentacles over his body, turning his suit and soul black. Though there’s something dubious about the idea that black still conveys evil in our culture, pop or otherwise (tell it to Batman and Barack Obama, for starters), the idea of messing with Spider-Man’s squeaky-clean profile, smearing it with dirt, a touch of naughtiness, seems too good to resist.

Dargis unsurprisingly echoes her colleague A.O. Scott, in his review of 300. Maybe it's simply a form of comic book bias. However it is not even an American phenomenon. British critics of Spiderman 3 have cited the flashy patriotism (because Spidey is shown swinging past the American flag), and decried the 'Sunday School Morality' of the film. Perhaps the film should have been darker and more sadistically violent, such as Lock, Stock & 2 Smoking barrels, or Snatch, or Layer Cake. Those are some quality films which needn't trifle with such mundane issues as right and wrong, or good and evil. Why bother, when you can choreograph myriad gun-wielding action sequences over and over ad nauseum?

It's a comic book movie! What do you expect but hokey Sunday School Morality? And is that not ironic, that one critic decries the racial aspect, while the other emphasizes the good-natured morality?

On a side (but geekier) note... If I had to critique the film (based on the trailers I've seen), it would not relate to the perceived racial overtones (or undertones).

Rather, I would question the casting of Topher Grace, who stands in flaccid, pale comparison the the Eddie Brock of Spiderman Comic Book fame. Undoubtedly, Grace was selected for his youthful appeal, but the older, muscular, darkly brooding Eddie Brock in the Comic Book series suited the sinister idea and appearance of Venom much more appropriately.

Speaking of Venom - all the shots I've seen have been short, but one thing seems certain: Venom is a skinnier, slimier, more alien looking version of the Comic Book villain. That is unfortunate. It's bad enough they discarded Spiderman's black costume, opting for his red & white to be bathed in the black symbiote. Would it have killed them to let the black costume be shown as it appeared in the Comic Book? Doesn't it look way cooler than the traditional costume, which they simply painted over with a metallic black paint brush?

That's it, I've said my piece... until tomorrow afternoon, when I'll have seen the afternoon matinee.

Mark Steyn on Spiderman 1 & 2

Mark Steyn talks Spiderman:

From 2002:

Adapting Spider-Man isn't like adapting Jane Austen, where you can chop characters and stick in lesbian scenes to your heart's content. Mess with a comic-book superhero and the purists will leave you for roadkill.

Steyn on Spiderman 2:

...sketching the tensions in Peter Parker’s double-life, are Raimi’s triple valentine to comics, youth and New York. The director has an instinctive grasp of the material – notice, for example, how Marvelised a version of the city it is, the streets and stores brought to life with a heightened quality that evokes Steve Ditko and John Romita’s comic-book backgrounds.

No word yet on Spiderman 3...

British Movie Critic Slams Comic Book Patriotism

Newsbusters reported on a Times Online review of the upcoming Spiderman movie. The British film critic found issue with Sam Raimi's inclusion gratuitous juxtaposition of Spiderman and the American flag in the upcoming 'Spiderman 3.'

Also disappointing is the inability of the director, Sam Raimi, to end the romp without a fleeting shot of the American flag. The Stars and Stripes just happens to be fluttering behind Spidey as he makes his triumphal return to honour, probity and good honest fist-fighting.

This reminds me of all the critics that whined and complained about the unapologetic high powered testosterone in 300. As if it is somehow rude, or immoral for a film to display a flag in a patriotic manner. Just like it was racist for the creators of 300 to show the Persians as dark-skinned.

_

What about the comic book character Captain American? Captain America! I wonder what his thoughts are on a character whose whole costume is a flag! The heights of political correctness know no bounds.

The Virginia Tech/Punisher Link...

These pictures further heighten the coincidence. Thanks to Hot Air for linking my first post. It does seem that Cho Seung-Hui definitely had some inspiration before donning his clothing and choosing his weapons. Dr. Phil has suggested that video games are the source that provided the template for Cho's methods. Or, as I've noted, the visual parallels between The Punisher comic books and Cho's attire and weaponry are definitely worthy of further consideration. These points are not highlighted to point any fingers at the entertainment industry. Violent, hard-core action films, movies and comic books are here to stay. 99% of the public can be exposed to blistering violence and gore without descending into mass-killing murder sprees.

However, there are those who cannot help themselves. For certain individuals, there is no level of censorship or medication that will turn their twisted personalities around. Cho Seung-Hui appeared to be one of these individuals.

The majority of these Punisher drawings/pictures are by Timothy Bradstreet, an artist famous for his dark realism. Bradstreet has been creating cover art for The Punisher series for quite some time now. More pictures can be found here.

The way the Virginia Tech killer's pictures of himself mimic those of The Punisher is eerie. But in all likelihood, this is simply what it appears to be - a coincidence. Cho Seung-Hui was impressionable enough to play "Shine" by Collective soul obsessively. Perhaps he was also an obsessive comic book fan.

Interestingly enough, as a commenter pointed out in a previous post, Cho's attire and choice of weaponry also resembles many films of Chow Yun Fat, the protagonist in John Woo's Hard Boiled and The Killer. Both movies are classic Hong Kong film noir crime dramas. It is more than reasonable to think that Cho would have seen these films and become a fan of the stylized action sequences, in which hundreds of bullets are spent in wave after wave of bloody fighting. Ultimately, there may be no reconciliation between Cho's influences and his motives.

Was the V. Tech Gunman a Punisher Comic Book Fan?

Much has been reported about the Virgina Tech Gunman's motives, and many news outlets have even begun to explore the movies and books that the Cho Seung-Hui (aka Ismail Ax) may have used as a template for his grisly attack. I read a number of comic books growing up and throughout college. And seeing images of the killer on television and all over the web, something gnawed in the back of my head. I felt like I had seen strikingly similar images before. The gunman's posing before a camera, his attire, and his choice of weaponry seemed eerily familiar... like something out of a Punisher Comic Book.

After some research online, I found the images that the killer's posing had reminded me of. However, just a short disclaimer: I am not purporting that the killer was a Punisher Comic Book fan, only that these images are shockingly similar. I am also not suggesting that if we do indeed discover that he read 'Punisher' comics, the creators, artists, writers, publisher are liable or at fault. My goal is to simply try and help to make sense of this senseless tragedy.

The Punisher is a Marvel Comics character at least three decades old. The character is transformed overnight from a Marine veteran into bloodthirsty vigilante when his family is killed by mobsters. The similarities I would draw in temperament and actions - The Punisher seeks to kill those he deems to be criminals. He executes them on the spot with impunity. The Punisher acts as judge, jury and executioner, and he is remorseless. Sound familiar?

Note the gloves and dual hand guns in this picture:

This final image seems telling in that the Punisher is wearing a tan-colored vest with ammunition strapped to it, and stands with his back facing the wall, much as the killer appears in the pictures he took of himself: