WATCHMEN (2009) - Zack Snyder

In 1986, writer Alan Moore and illustrator Dave Gibbons unleashed Watchmen upon the world. It would change the face of comic books and become the first comic that was hailed by the literary world. Since that time the idea to adapt the book into a film has been bandied about Hollywood. Directors such as Terry Gilliam, Darren Aaronofsky and Paul Greengrass were all attached to direct at different points. The project was considered unfilmable. But two years ago Zack Snyder, fresh off 300, decided to give it a shot.

Watchmen is a deconstruction of the superhero concept. In an alternate version of US history, superheroes emerge in the 1940’s, fighting crime in the US. The superhero phenomenon continues into the 1970’s when the government, led by Richard Nixon, outlaws masked vigilantes. In 1984, a former superhero, The Comedian, is murdered by an unknown assailant. Rorschach, a former colleague of The Comedian’s, and still operating covertly, takes it upon himself to solve the case. But his investigation reveals a plot to eliminate all former Watchmen. Meanwhile, the US edges closer and closer to a nuclear war with the USSR. And only Dr. Manhattan, the only superhero with superhuman powers can stop nuclear Armageddon.



Watchmen has been the holy grail of adaptations for comic book fans. The community was split as to whether the book could be successfully adapted into a film. It is an incredibly dense work and the thought was that there is no way such a convoluted story could be boiled down into a 2 and a half hour film. And... those who said it couldn’t be filmed... were right. Watchmen is a heroic failure. There are elements of greatness in it. But overall, the flaws are too apparent and take away from what could have been the ultimate comic book movie.



To be fair to those behind the cameras, their job of bringing Watchmen to the big screen was monumental. As I’ve said, the book is incredibly dense. It reads more like a novel than a comic book. And a novel that is thick with plot, exposition and character development. The story unravels at a very measured pace, and this is lost in Zack Snyder’s adaptation. The film seems to strip the story of it’s very essence and delivers version of the story that seems to have missed the point. Snyder does attempt to cover all bases, and I think this is where things become unstuck. He does a good job of delivering the back story to Doctor Manhattan. And his adaptation of the Rorschach is the strongest part of the film. Largely thanks to a brilliant performance from Jackie Earle Haley. But the story isn’t just exposition. There is a plot. And while this plot works in the confines of the book, it is just lost on film.

But the structure and plot development aren’t the only slip-ups in the film. While Jackie Earle Haley really excels as Walter Kovaks/Rorschach, and Billy Crudup is great as Doctor Manhattan (for a guy who’s essentially a CGI creation for the majority of the film), the rest of the cast falls rather flat. There is little chemistry between Patrick Wilson, playing Nite Owl II and Malin Akerman as Silk Spectre. And this is a huge problem, as their story is integral to the dissection of the superhero mythos. And Matthew Goode, who plays Ozymandias, is terrible. He mumbles all his lines and floats about like a prat. Some of the make-up effects also seem pretty poor for such a high-budget film.



One of the surprising things about the film is that it’s gratuitously violent. I understand that this is to jazz proceedings up a little. The source material is very character driven and not thick on the action. But it’s window-dressing and does little but distract from the flaws. It’s a shame really. The story really is brilliant. And, as mentioned by a friend of mine, would have made for a really excellent mini-series. But as it is, two and a half hours just isn’t enough time to fit all the complexities of the story into one film. It’s a fundamental flaw and cannot be overlooked. To leave out elements of the story just makes everything seem rushed and stripped of it’s brilliance. Snyder does his best. And when he gets it right, he really does nail it. But unfortunately, these moments are rare. Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach is definitely the highlight and makes you long for the film to focus on him. But alas, it’s not to be. And with an edit that is 40 minutes longer, you just don’t imagine that the film can get any stronger. A failure. But an admirable attempt.


5/10

THE HEARTBREAK KID (2007) - Bobby Farrelly and Peter Farrelly

Okay, look. I’ve enjoyed some of the Farrelly Brothers films before. Although with this, and Kingpin, you probably wouldn’t think so. I’ve enjoyed a few of Ben Stiller’s films. And when the two (or should that be three) came together in the past, the Farrellys and Stiller made a great film in There’s Something About Mary. So the collaborators must have hoped that lightning would strike twice when they made The Heartbreak Kid.

Stiller again plays the put-upon guy who’s a victim of circumstance and the crazy people who surround him. He’s a little bit crazy, but it takes someone even crazier to bring it out of him. Stiller plays Eddie Cantrow, a terminally single man, with no hopes of getting married. He (inexplicably) goes to his ex girlfriend’s wedding and realises he must do something if he doesn’t want to end up single for the rest of his life. Fate intervenes when Cantrow helps a girl, Lila, who’s just been mugged. Lila seems like the perfect catch. Smart, funny, caring and very attractive. She gets offered a job abroad. To avoid losing this perfect girl, Cantrow proposes. The couple get married and head off on their honeymoon. But Lila’s personality quickly changes and she proves to be a bit of a handful. Cantrow then meets Miranda, and realises SHE is the perfect woman. And so he begins a relationship with her, while trying to avoid his psychotic new wife.



The Farrelly brothers movies have evolved quite a bit since the balls to the wall craziness of Dumb And Dumber. With There’s Something About Mary, they found the perfect balance between the craziness and a certain sweetness to the love stories that are essentially the focus of their movies. But since Me, Myself And Irene (which is my personal favourite of their movies, since I’m a big Jim Carrey fan), the Farrelly brothers haven’t quite gotten it right. The Heartbreak Kid was the best chance they’ve had to regain some of that lost glory, since they’d be on familiar ground with Stiller. But this film just doesn’t cut it.

As I discovered after I’d seen the movie, The Heartbreak Kid is actually a remake of a 1972 film starring Charles Grodin and Cybil Shepherd. I’m quite sure the Farrellys have changed quite a bit of the source material since remaking the movie. They’ve injected their own brand of gross-out humour into the movie, and I must admit, I did laugh during these moments. But I was laughing out of shock more than hilarity. It’s just a shame that these moments are so few in the film. In between, we’re left with a bland, repetitive love story that quickly bores.



I used to like Ben Stiller. His earlier films were great. But somewhere along the way, his schtick just got repetitive and then quickly became annoying. And here, it’s toned down, but there are moments where it creeps back in. And I could have done without that. His performance in There’s Something About Mary was far more interesting, being a normal, dead-pan guy who suffered some horrible circumstances. The now trade-mark Stiller freak out has been done to death. So why do it again? Michelle Monaghan’s character is simply the girl from the average romantic comedy. She suffers little to no mishaps (this is after all, a wacky comedy) and gets off scot-free, which is all too easy. All the comedy is saved for Malin Akerman as Lila. And she gives it socks, fair dues to her. But when she’s not on screen, there are no laughs. And that includes when ‘comedian’ Carlos Mencia is on screen. His character, Uncle Tito seems to have gotten lost on the way to the set of the latest Adam Sandler crapfest and stumbled into this movie. Utterly pointless.

It’s a damn shame that the Farrellys can’t find their form again. They’ve made some very funny movies, and I sincerely hope they’ll pull it off again. But The Heartbreak Kid isn’t that movie. I must admit it’s not quite as bad as I’d dreaded when I went in. But considering it’s not a good movie, that shows just how low my expectations were.


4/10