Despite the popularity of superhero films lately, Watchmen is, arguably, the most important superhero movie to come out in years.  While Iron Man was a huge box office success, Hellboy II was a solid film in its own right, and The Dark Knight earned Heath Ledger an Oscar, none had the pedigree that Watchmen possesses.  Alan Moore’s graphic novel is widely regarded as the greatest work that any combination of comic artists and writers have ever produced.

What’s more, the Watchmen movie is directed by none other than Zack Snyder, the man behind the instant classic 300.  300 was not only an extremely faithful adaptation of another famous graphic novel, it was among the best films of 2007.  Further, the buzz it generated among comic, gaming, film, and sci-fi/fantasy geeks is still, well, buzzing.  Quite frankly, your grandkids will probably be awestruck by that film like you’re awestruck by Forbidden Planet.

This combination of iconic graphic novel and supremely skilled director should result in an outstanding film, loved and revered by geeks (and even some non-geeks) everywhere.  How does it stack up with the critics?

Roger Ebert:  4 Stars.  “The film is rich enough to be seen more than once. I plan to see it again, this time on IMAX, and will have more to say about it. I’m not sure I understood all the nuances and implications, but I am sure I had a powerful experience.”

Mr. Beaks:   “This is a stunning achievement. I didn’t know if Snyder had an artistic identity of his own after 300, but there is a voice ringing out in his WATCHMEN that doesn’t belong to Moore or Gibbons.”

More reviews, after the jump…

Time:  “Snyder spends much of the movie’s 2 hours and 40 minutes on the splatter of crushed limbs, the chatter of Strangelovean science fiction and the nattering of the obligatory romance. He also encourages a little festival of tone-deaf acting. Yet Watchmen has moments of greatness.”

LA Times:  “There isn’t a movie in his landmark graphic novel “Watchmen” — at least not a really good one. What we get instead is something acceptable but pedestrian, an adaptation that is more a prisoner of its story than the master of it.”

IGN:  “The story lurches from one obvious, jarring pop music cue to another, so much so that Watchmen feels like Forrest Gump with superheroes.”

Cinematics:  “On its own, the movie is an efficient adrenaline delivery machine, occasionally taking flight and occasionally sputtering, but most often just motoring down a long road with colorful scenery to pass the time.”

I could go on and on….Watchmen is, thus far, the most anticipated film of the year, and the reviews are everywhere.  But, for the most part, they reflect the ones we selected, above.  Is the movie a good one?  Virtually everyone agrees that it is.  Does it rise to the uber-epic level of the graphic novel?  Most think not.

One insight:  you’ve probably seen some trailers and clips from the film.  Oddly, most of the clips that can be found on the net are dialogue scenes.  While these may give a feeling for the plot itself, this is, at it’s heart, a superhero film.  If the action is solid, stiff acting and an occasionally slow plot will be overlooked, at least by the geeks that will fill the theaters.  What do most of the Watchmen critics – those who didn’t particularly care for the film – complain about?  Stiff acting and an occasionally slow plot.  The critics who are most enthusiastic about the film focused on something else entirely: the visuals and the action.  As this is a comic book film, that may be most appropriate.

I managed to find a few action scenes while researching this piece (they’ve been out, but somehow I missed them in the sea of dialogue-heavy bits out there) and they give a somewhat different feel for the film, one that’s both exciting and captures the spirit of the original graphic novel.  Judge for yourselves whether this one is worth eleven bucks and three hours of your time:

~~~

If you enjoyed this post, visit our illustrious Wandering Goblin main page. There’s lots more tomfoolery just like this.