First Read: WATCHMEN - Mania.com



Review

3 Comments | Add

 

Rate & Share:

 

Related Links:

 

Info:

First Read: WATCHMEN

A newbie takes a look at the acclaimed graphic novel

By Derrick Teal     March 03, 2009
Source: Mania


WATCHMEN: The First Read (slideshow)
© Mania

Most comic readers agree that the 'Watchmen' graphic novel is deserving of the praise that's been heaped upon it in the past 20 odd years. But how does the book seem for non-fan, whose interest has been piqued by the new movie? We asked author and magazine editor Derrick Teal to set aside everything he's heard, read the book and lend his opinion...

Whether they’re called comics, graphic novels, or whatever, it doesn’t matter to me because I don’t read them. This isn’t to say I have anything against them, per se; it just so happens that the few comics I read growing up didn’t catch my fancy. Instead, I spent my time absorbed in fantasy and sci-fi novels, watching a derivative of manga in the form of anime, and watching other cartoons and films. It’s because of the latter that I’ve been able to follow along with such comic book icons as Batman, Superman, the Hulk, and the X-Men without having picked up a single comic.

You comic book fans are probably saying to yourselves right now, "You can’t watch those movies and cartoons and think you anything about the storylines." And you’d be right. It’s precisely because of this that when I expressed an interest in the upcoming Watchmen film that I was asked to first read the graphic novel and write a review from a “virgin’s” perspective.

With all of that said, it’s safe to say I probably would’ve been reading graphic novels in addition to the fantasy novels I read growing up had this Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons comic been the first that I read.

Watchmen follows the exploits of a number of “retired” superheroes in an alternate 1985 after one of their own is mysteriously killed. “Retired” is a relative term because the Keene Act of 1977 has made wearing a mask and fighting crime illegal, thereby forcing anyone fitting that description to take off the tights and find something else to do with their lives. Eventually their pasts catch up to them when, whether they want to or not, each character is drawn into the action as the body count of former costumed vigilantes and villains continues to grow.

However, “action” is a relative term. Despite the size of this series, there are surprisingly few fisticuffs, explosions and whatever else is sure to be highlighted in the Hollywood incarnation judging from the trailers. Watchmen is instead a surprisingly deep delving into the human psyche. Told mostly through flashbacks, the plot takes a backseat to learning who these characters are.

No, I take that back. The reader is constantly aware of the plot and everything in the story does revolve around unraveling the mystery. But the fact that the story moves forward by taking a look back at the lives of the characters involved isn’t something one might expect from a comic book. Such a literary device is usually only used in classic novels like The Count of Monte Cristo and some Agatha Christie mysteries, or in films like The Usual Suspects.

The reason being is that it’s very difficult to effectively move a story along by rehashing the sordid past of a bunch of characters while keeping the reader from falling asleep. But these characters have such glaring psychological and emotional issues that you can’t help but get engrossed in their flaws and forget that you should be bored.

The promos for the upcoming film state, “You’ve never seen superheroes like this.” It’s very true. And I hope to God we never do see superheroes like this, otherwise we’re all in trouble.

Central to the story is the Comedian, whose death gets the chain of events rolling. His name is completely ironic given his dark and sometimes brutal personality. But as we learn, maybe his personality and name were simply mirroring the society in which he lived — on the surface things seemed pleasant and happy, but were dark and troubled underneath.

Rorschach is a slovenly vigilante feared for his brutality and lack of morals and patience for those whom he believes are hiding the truth. He’s had no problems ignoring the law and continuing his mission of cleaning up the street, which has made him a top target of the police. Since he never took off his mask, he’s the first superhero to take up the task of finding the Comedian’s murderer. His trademark is a constantly shifting inkblot mask. Without it he’s a nobody — both in the eyes of society and in his own mind. While he possesses above average physical skills and an intellectual mind, he, like the Comedian and most other characters in the story, has no powers to speak of. He relies on his instincts and brute force to get the job done.

Nite Owl, Rorschach’s former partner, assumed the mantle from the original Nite Owl when the original (a member of a group of called the Minutemen that got together in the 1930s) decided to retire. His life has been nothing to speak of in the 10 years since the law forbade him and the others from donning their masks. He’s clearly in the throes of a mid-life crisis and is, to a lesser extent than Rorschach, a nobody without his mask.

Silk Spectre has also followed the lead of a former Minuteman; only she inherited the role from her mother. It’s because of this that the Silk Spectre’s life has never been normal. When she wasn’t being dragged around to various functions with aging superheroes, her mother was forcing her to train to be a superhero — up until the day her mother took her to meet the others who would take over (sort of) for the Minutemen. The stresses of growing up in the shadow of her mother and living up to those expectations has left her conflicted: did she get involved with the other heroes because it’s what she wanted or because it was what her mother wanted?

When the story begins, Silk Spectre is living with one of only two Watchmen to actually have super powers, Doctor Manhattan. As super powers go, his are the coolest. An accident with an intrinsic field caused his molecules to scatter, but it didn’t kill him. Once he figured out how to reassemble himself, he discovered he was able to do just about anything. Basically, he has the power of God. This also means he has the biggest flaw. Besides looking like giant Smurf, he’s become completely detached from his emotions and his humanity. One hilarious example of how detached he’s become involves Silk Spectre, him, him and him. And, no, that’s not a typo.

Ozymandias, the last of the main players, doesn’t have superpowers like Doctor Manhattan, but his superior intellect and renowned physical abilities would qualify as “super.” He has enjoyed enormous financial success in the days following his retirement from crime fighting…mostly through marketing. He’s kind of like a combination of Donald Trump and Billy Mays. His vanity and arrogance are his truest flaws.

And it’s all of their flaws that drive the story. Without them, you don’t even have a typical murder mystery because the flaws provide the motive for the murder. Aside from the obvious, it’s the psychological issues of these characters that make you want to keep reading. As John Milton proved in his classic Paradise Lost, characters without flaws are boring. The only reason people even talk about God’s character in Paradise Lost is to discuss how incredibly dull he is in comparison to the character of Satan and all of his issues.

What’s surprising about Watchmen is how the few lines of text and panels are capable of portraying these complex emotions and issues of these people. Each word is as expertly chosen as each line in a character’s face. Coming from a literary background, it’s flat-out amazing that such subtleties can shine through without sentence after sentence offering detailed windows into a character’s head or offering a play-by-play of the action.

This isn’t to say that Watchmen is perfect. It’s incredible, that’s for sure, but it’s not perfect. Written in 1985, it’s definitely starting to show some of its age. Which is something that all period pieces have to deal with at some point. Despite the story taking place in an alternate reality, a 15 year old who lacks the experience of having lived with the U.S./U.S.S.R. tension might not fully understand the implications. Someone that age also might not even blink that Nixon is the current U.S. president in 1985 and would likely ignore a line mentioning the president changing the law so he could get a third term, which is very Nixon-like.

On that same note, section (albeit a very brief section) involving the president and his actions seems thrown in. A few tidbits can be gleaned from this passage, but it otherwise really doesn’t fit. It might have been included as an allegory or a parallel to other events in the storyline (and there are plenty of allegories and parallels throughout Watchmen), but as to what it relates to was lost on me.

Another problem that I had was the character of Nite Owl. I couldn’t help but see the similarities between this character and Batman: No superpowers, wealthy, and he has all kinds of gadgets. Hell, his name is Nite Owl, for Christ’s sake.

But these few flaws don’t diminish the overall quality of Watchmen. Readers get so wrapped up in the depth of the characters and unfolding events that you’re immediately drawn right back into the story. In fact, the masterful storytelling almost compels you to keep reading. Experiencing such a compulsion was, for me, totally unexpected. I’ve only had that happen a few times, and those times involved great novels. But if Watchmen can draw such a reaction from me, it can from others, too. It’s definitely worth “watching.”

COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

Showing items 1 - 3 of 3
1 
jmg134 3/3/2009 11:37:16 AM

Ok, so I finally read the Watchman tpb.  I don't know...maybe because I've read too many "grim and gritty" comics since the mid to late 80s to the present I didn't feel overwhelmed by the story I guess?  Maybe if I read the comic when it first came out it would be different.  Now I remember reading The Dark Knight Returns when it came out and was blown away by how different the storytelling was told. 

Plus with all the stuff I've heard about Watchmen, such as the story and characters already and the movie...it kind of ruined everything for me.  Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed each character's problems and drama but I felt I have read all that stuff before.  I know Watchmen precedes all the anti-heroes and heroes with personal problems so that's why I am disappointed with myself that I didn't read it when it first came out.  So in a way i felt cheated.

I guess a good example to how and why Watchmen didn't "blow me away" was when I first saw Psycho.  All I kept hearing was how a great horror movie this was.  it didn't really do anything for me either after you see all the Halloween, Friday the 13th , and Elm Street movies.  I guess I was expecting more ya know?

Also, true with the review that there wasn't much action since I felt the story seemed more about character study than a big action type comic.  I will still see the movie and do some comparisons with the comic about how Snyder added or omitted some stuff.  It does look like from the trailers he has amped up the action, but good character development is just as important too.

I think the Squid part could have worked.  It made sense to me what Ozy's plan was for using the "alien" Squid.  But I see Snyder's point on changing it to keep the regular movie audience invested in the film.  If he didn't a lot of them would probably groan in disbelief of an alien squid showing up in New York and killing half the city. 

So there is my two cents on the graphic novel.  I wanted to read it first before the movie came out, just to make some comparisons and how true Snyder made it to the book.

Late.

 

VillageIdiotPrime 3/3/2009 12:23:18 PM

134, you made a couple of good comments above.

The one that I want to comment on tho, is the one about Psycho.  I really understand that.  People that I talk to cant understand why I wasnt impressed with The Shining when I finally saw it a few years ago.  They know that Ive seen legions of horror movies and that Im a fan of the genre.  By default, I should get how awesome that film was.  The thing is, I dont get it...but thats just me.

 

darkheart00 3/3/2009 12:55:15 PM

"The Shining":

King's novel >>>> Kubrick's film (Jack was on his "A" game though)

1 

ADD A COMMENT

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.

MORE CONTENT BY DERRICK TEAL

POPULAR TOPICS