Who’s reading the Watchmen?
Alright, so this article is a bit late. It may have first popped into my head two months ago, if not earlier. It has been circulating ever since. There is no use in pretending that this article is in any way timely — there is, in fact, a strong temptation to drop the subject entirely. But it keeps circling, wanting to be written down. I am hoping that this indicates that the idea has value.
The idea in question is the twist that movies such as Watchmen put to the old “should I read the book before seeing the movie” question. We all have answers to this question for the traditional novel-to-movie adaptation, but what about the graphic novel-to-movie version? How does it change things.
The traditional version has decent arguments on both sides of the equation. The “watch the movie first” traditionalists argue that the book ruins the movie. They claim that movies — even the gross over-long three-and-a-half hour movies that sometimes receive excellent reviews from the critics but make you hate the size of your soda — are always shorter than books. It is impossible to capture a book on film, in its entirety. A good adaptation picks pieces of a book — or sometimes just the concept — and translates that on screen. As a reader, this means that if you enjoyed a book, you will find something missing from the movie. Even if every piece of the story that makes it to the screen somehow meets the expectations set by your imagination (or exceeds them), there will still be things missing. The movie cannot capture it all.
The result, says this argument, is that a book can be enjoyed after watching the movie, but a movie cannot be enjoyed after reading the book.
The other argument — and the side I choose for the traditional novel — is that the movie diminishes the impact of the book, which would otherwise be a richer experience than the movie for the reasons outlined above. This is largely (but not entirely) because the movie takes away from the reader’s ability to imagine the visuals involved. When I read Lord of the Rings, do I really want to imagine Elijah Wood? Is that how Catch-22 is really supposed to end? Movies have the ability to colour the book, and a filmmakers vision might not correspond to what my imagination would conjure when reading the author’s words. The special effects budget might be insufficient, execution might be lacking, they might decide to cast Jim Carey in a movie adaptation of A Prayer for Owen Meany that was so bad that the author requested that they change the name of the movie. Anything is possible.
When it comes to graphic novels, however, the medium of the novel itself is visual. My imagination cannot be turned to the movie version when reading — it is forced to the illustrator’s visual representation on the page.
But what was I basing this on? “Comic book” movies I have watched are a mix of the classics (such as Batman), the unread (such as Hellboy), and the poorly made (such as the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). The Supermans of the world are mythology — there’s little a single movie can really do. The Hellboys are still unread — I know, I’m a bad geek. And The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was so bad I couldn’t watch the whole thing.
Watchmen is different. I had been intending to read it for years, but never got around to picking it up or borrowing it. Everybody I know who has read it loves it. The sticker on the cover proudly proclaims that Time Magazine includes it in their Top 100 Books of All Time. And it’s there, amongst Animal Farm, Catch-22 and To Kill A Mockingbird. The validity of the list can be argued, of course — there are always snubs — but it’s impressive nonetheless.
So I wondered: will reading Watchmen ruin the movie? Will watching the movie ruin the book?
I took a risk. I figured that my concerns regarding watching movies before reading the book should not impact a graphic novel. However, the argument I usually ignore does have some validity — the book really could ruin this movie. So I watched first.
And I’m glad I did.
Reviews I have read indicate that reactions from those who read the book first are decidedly mixed. Some are happy with the adaptation, much like I was with the Lord of the Rings. Others are disappointed — reviews such as the one that Pete wrote for the Big Bad Blog are typical. There is an aspect of the story which Pete enjoyed about the book that was diminished in the movie — which is typical of those who are disappointed by it.
These such reviews pushed me to watch the movie first — and I found the movie wonderful. Reading the book afterwards was a bit short on suspense, but I didn’t find anything lacking — if anything, it was a more in depth look at the same story.
So the Big Bad Blog’s verdict is in: Read Watchmen. But not until you’ve seen the movie.
Related articles: