I read with some interest an article from Nikki Finke on the Watchmen movie – in it she kind of mirrors my opinion of the movie, in that it was TOO literal a translation of the book, and that it may have succeeded as an adaptation but failed in many ways as a movie. Spot on, I think. I also am reading Syd Field’s Screenwriting Workbook, and almost all the things he recommend to write a successful screenplay was not followed here (some example: use flashbacks sparingly, they stop the momentum of the movie cold) and (What is the point of your script and story If you don’t know, who does? Make that point your skeleton and hand all the action on that point.)
I have also had the chance to talk to some people whose opinions I respect who had never read the original comic, an the general response to the film was… meh. One friend said that the first hour was gripping but as soon as the plot centered on Laurie and Dan she lost interest.
(I mean, they are just not interesting characters. The Comedian and Rorschach? Great characters. Dr. Manhattan? Fascinating. But those two? I just didn’t care – and the actress was also pretty bad, too.)
All expressed some level of frustration at the movie, sounding a lot like Syd Field questioning a novice screenwriter – what was the point of the movie? What was the story it was trying to tell? When several intelligent moviegoers walk away from a movie and doesn’t see why the story should have been made or what the point was, you have a problem.
Finally, I read some backstory on the creation of the original miniseries last week. Originally Alan Moore only wanted to do six issues – he did not think he had enough plot for 12 – but he was committed to do 12, and so he made every other issue an (origin) issue, which completely worked and added great depth and context to the work. But that was fine… for a comic book. For a movie, you get those incredible tonal shifts and flashbacks that slows things down.
Movies have to always go forward, and everything must drive towards that ending – that point. Watchmen failed to build momentum in the second half, and lost the audience. I have never seen such an apathetic response to the ending of a movie, ever, especially surprising when you see what happens at the end.
The author of the movie’s screenplay has written an open letter to fans, asking them to go see it again the second weekend, to help the movie’s box office receipts. It smacks of desperation, but it also has a slight tone of (we did an incredibly bold visionary film that deserves to be supported.) Umm, no. You adapted a seminal work, and captured much of the original’s tone and feel – that is to be applauded. But it was not bold… not at all. It was paint-by-the-numbers. Bold would have been to actually make an honest-to-god MOVIE out of the story, and use Rorschach’s meat cleaver and cut the hell out of all the scenes and plot points that did not progress the story to it’s climax – and it’s point.
I know what the point of the original graphic novel was. I’m still trying to figure out what the point of the movie is. And that is an artistic failure. Alan Moore requested his name be taken off this movie, even before it started production. I kinda understand why, now.