A handful of WATCHMEN reviews
3 comments March 5th, 2009
They’re mixed, to say the least.Â
Prepare to be bludgeoned, WATCHMENÂ is sledgehammer entertainment, an action epic with tremendous production values that acknowledges good and evil but is much more interested in things that go boom.
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times…
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. (Four stars)
But the big failure of the film is the failure of the series of comic books that became a graphic novel… it’s a series of comic books…which means that by its very nature, it will be episodic and not flow through the story in a natural, filmic way. The work within any given scene in WATCHMEN is often good… but the scenes seem detached from one another, over and over and over again.
James Berardinelli, Reel Views…
By not being able to study a panel, turn back a page and re-explore something, or pause to consider the moral implications of what’s being stated, too much has been lost. The film feels like a shiny toy not a seminal milestone in graphic literature. (2 1/2 stars)
Christy Lemire, The Associated Press…
Yes, I’ve read WATCHMEN. I understand why it matters culturally, why it’s considered revolutionary in its exploration of flawed superheroes, why it moved you. It moved me, too. And still — or, rather, because of that — I found director Snyder’s adaptation hugely disappointing, faithful as it is to the 1988 graphic novel.
