Pop Culture Watch

| Wed Mar. 4, 2009 3:34 PM PST
I've been meaning to write posts about both 24 and Watchmen for a while, but haven't quite gotten around to it because I don't have anything really meaty to say.  So I'm just going to toss out a couple of offhand observations instead, mostly as an excuse to host an open thread on either or both of these fine Hollywood products.

First, 24.  It's turned into exactly the train wreck that I was afraid of when the season started.  Back when Jack Bauer merely tortured people as part of the script, that was one thing.  Your mileage might vary on whether you felt like watching it, but in the end it was just modern-day Dirty Harryism.  Nothing to get all that worked up about.  But this season Jack isn't just spontaneously beating up on bad guys who know where the ticking time bombs are buried.  No.  This season Jack is beating up on the bad guys as part of a premeditated strategy and then talking about it endlessly.  And so is everyone else.  The writers are no longer content to merely suggest that (in their fictional universe) a bit of extralegal torture might sometimes be justified because it gets results.  They're bound and determined to explicate it on screen every single time it happens and demand that we, the audience, actively approve of it. This is not only depraved, it's lousy storytelling too.  All the usual 24 preposterousness aside, it's made the show cringe-inducing this season.

Next, Watchmen.  Like many fans of the comic, I suppose, I've been waiting for it with a mixture of both anticipation and trepidation.  Anticipation, of course, because it's a seminal comic and I'm eager to see how it gets translated onto the screen.  Trepidation because I don't think it will translate well.  This isn't because I think it's "unfilmable," or because I think Zack Snyder will necessarily ruin it.  (I'm agnostic about that.  I thought 300 was fairly entertaining, so I don't hold that against him.)  No.  Oddly enough, it's because I think the story is simply too absurd to survive the transition to film.  I realize that proposition is a little hard to defend, but there's a sense in which a story that tries to treat costumed superheroes as real people is much harder to accept than one in which the essential burlesque of the superhero genre is simply taken for granted.  Once you start to interrogate the whole concept, it's much harder to successfully suspend disbelief.

Now, obviously that didn't hurt the comic.  (Not much, anyway.)  But I think it's harder to pull this off on the screen, which works by default in a realist mode, than it is in a comic book, which doesn't.  Or so it seems to me, anyway — though I cheerfully admit that the whole argument sounds kind of half-baked.  Feel free to mock me in comments.

This won't stop me from seeing Watchmen, of course.  Maybe I'll even see it on Friday if I can find anyone to go with me.  The question is: how many people who haven't read the comic a dozen times will do the same?

Advertisement

Advertisement

Kevin Drum is a political blogger for Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

Watch-who?

I've never read the Watchmen comics. But, for what its worth, I was really impressed by the trailer. I haven't decided if I'll see it in the theaters or wait until later.

Watchmen

" I realize that proposition is a little hard to defend, but there's a sense in which a story that tries to treat costumed superheroes as real people is much harder to accept than one in which the essential burlesque of the superhero genre is simply taken for granted. Once you start to interrogate the whole concept, it's much harder to successfully suspend disbelief." This is possible, but to me it still seems like a worthy experiment --- in a way one of the questions the book asks is, "What kind of person would want to do this, really?" (And it answers, "A deeply fucked up person, in one of several particular varieties of fucked up.) That was the thing Anthony Lane missed in his review for The New Yorker --- he sees that the world the book portrays is kind of fascist, but he doesn't see that the fact that really, all superheroes are kind of fascists is something the book and hopefully the movie are trying to show you on purpose....the fantasy of ultimate power that the superhero represents can be a cheerful enough thing for kids, but extrapolated to an adult world contains within it the seeds of horror...

"the fantasy of ultimate

"the fantasy of ultimate power that the superhero represents can be a cheerful enough thing for kids, but extrapolated to an adult world contains within it the seeds of horror" That's something the vast majority of comic creators who've been aping what Moore did in WATCHMEN don't understand. Mike

I agree

Worthy Experiment indeed - why not try it? V for Vendetta seemed in the same category, and can you imagine the board execs who said "Too soon after 9/11!!!" But it worked, and didn't just work but worked well!

Heroes

"That's something the vast majority of comic creators who've been aping what Moore did in WATCHMEN don't understand." The first season of Heroes got this, or at least was headed that way.

Watching Watchmen

I don't know how well the movie version is going to do at translating the book, but I can see one way it could work: keep the focus on the opening scene. The story begins with a murder. Draw the audience into who was murdered, who the suspects are, what their motivations are, and ultimately who did it and why, and I think it will work. That the book is about people who put on masks and have their own set of priorities as 'heros' should be no more off-putting than a story focused around any other profession. Create compelling characters on screen, get the audience involved, wrap it all in a well-told story, and it should work. See, the story is more like a traditional murder mystery than it is a simple super good guys versus super bad guys story. It's not only super heros who wrestle with great moral dilemmas and face tests of character.

I dunno...

I was a big fan of Moore, I love 99% of his work. The only caveat: I was deeply disappointed by the ending of the Watchmen (and the end of his Swamp Thing American Gothic storyline). It will be interesting to see it on the big screen... especially the character of Rorschach. He, along with Batman and Wolverine, are the most responsible for popularizing the Super Anti-Hero. I would argue that if it wasn't for Rorschach, we wouldn't have had three Punisher movies...

Point

So let me first point out that I am married and do not live in my parents basement, however I realize this will not protect me from the somewhat justifiable disdain I should receive for the below comic-geek reply: You do specify Punisher movies, but just had to point out The Punisher was created in '74 in the pages of Spider Man, 10 plus years before Watchmen

I'll see your geekery and

I'll see your geekery and raise you an issue of X-Men #94! The Punisher didn't get his own series until '86, and even then most of his sociopathy was explained away via the revelation that he had been poisoned via long term mind-altering drugs (dontcha love comic books?). Once he got his own full series (initial series was a mini), things went haywire..... and guess when Watchmen was released?

24

This is the first season that I have ever watched a full episode of 24. I love the genre (action adventure spy-stuff), so I decided to give the series a shot. There are brief glimpses of good story telling in what I have seen, but truth be told, if this is the best they can come up with after having nearly a full year off to write this dreck, these folks have little talent. Tired clichés fall like snow in Buffalo, and Kevin you are correct: the arc of every episode so far seem to be built solely to the give Jack a chance to rough someone (or many) up and to so with a self righteous justification. But worse to me is just the lazy writing. I get this is make believe – part of the charm of the genre, but once writers create a world, that world needs to be faithful to the logic of its universe. 24 does not do this. Individual characters and the action itself lurches irrationally to and fro servicing whatever momentary need the director (or whomever) is dealing with. I hate to admit it, but I could care less about torture as a plot element if it was servicing a good story. What I have seen is crap not up to the standards of a high school creative writing class. Two days ago, yelling at the TV, I reached for the remote. Mad at 24 and sorry that this is PBS pledge week.

24 Disaster

I couldn't agree more with your opinion of 24 this season. One thing that's annoying me about this season is the constant references to those who hate Jack because he tortures people for the "greater good." The producers and writers are trying too hard to justify Jack's actions. You constantly have the stereotypical liberal who hates torture and causes Jack to defend his actions, then Jack is proven to be correct and torture is always and forever justified. Enough already. If we want to get into a philosophical discussion about when or if torture is a necessary evil in a free society we're not going get that from watching 24. Personally, I think a country like America engaging in torture is a despicable thing, but I still like watching Jack stick the electrodes to a bad guy. Why? Because it's television, for Pete's sake. I'm able to separate the real from the fantasy -- as are most of the audience, for that matter. The writers need to stop trying to justify Jack's actions. We, the viewer, take for granted Jack feels he must do this, now move on. Of course, on this subject, having read interviews with some of the writers and producers of 24, and knowing many of them vote Democrat and have quite liberal views, I always get annoyed when they create these stereotypical liberals like Senator Mayer. Come on! You can do better than that.

I just read Watchmen for the

tagged as: 
I just read Watchmen for the first time yesterday, in advance of seeing the movie. I'm not a comic book reader in general, so maybe I'm a decent test case for the non-genre-fan perspective. My quick take is that the story might be better as a movie than a comic book, but the ending is a big problem. I think the screen version will emphasize the story and visuals, which are the book's strong points, and, for me, movies just have a much more visceral impact. The characters in the book are fairly flat, and I doubt they'll suffer in the translation to the screen. (In fact, some competent actors could surely improve them, and Watchmen looks like it has a decent cast.) But that ending. It was pretty bad in the book, and it seems even worse for the screen. I suspect they won't tamper with it much for fear of offending fans, which is a shame. The ending was just terrible.

Kevin, I tend to agree with

Kevin, I tend to agree with this guy that the film is probably unfilmable and won't be much good. I suspect a lot of people who've read the novel seven or eight times won't be seeing it for precisely that reason.

Got to disagree there, mary.

Got to disagree there, mary. It's Batman, Wolverine and the Punisher who popularized the superhero antihero. The Punisher first appeared 12 years before Watchmen and had his first miniseries a few months before Watchmen was published. Rorschach is a much better treatment of the same theme, but he's not the reason Punisher was popular.

"The ending was just

"The ending was just terrible." Pal, you're dead wrong. And I don't like your hat.

anti-heroes

The superhero genre has always had a large share of anti-heroes. Consider Submariner just before WWII when his primary interest was destroying humanity or provoking a world war. Or The Spectre --is that legal?

the fact that Lane uses part

the fact that Lane uses part of Rorschach's (purposefully paranoid, overblown, ridiculous, exaggerated --unreliable in lit. terms--) internal monologue as an example of Moore's authorial voice pretty much renders the review completely ridiculous. R. R. Rosenbaum's link to the Edge of the American West above (a blog you all should read) is helpful here: Lane is busy dismissing any comic book/graphic novel that A) isn't Maus and B) has superheroes and really doesn't get that Watchmen is about comics, and about reading comics specifically, and that it has a deeply ambiguous take on those things and on the whole idea of self-narrativized heroism. Unfortunately, Snyder doesn't seem to show too much evidence of getting that either. Another signal that Lane doesn't get it: he thinks he's making a point by saying that Nite Owl is a rip off of Batman. Dude: Nite Owl is Moore's re-wright of Blue Beetle, an old Charlton character that was a rip-off of Batman that DC acquired, and then made Moore turn into a new character when they balked at having their fresh new intellectual property written as impotent and chubby. Actually, Nite Owl is the Adam West version of Batman, while Rorschach is the darker version, maybe the Neal Adams/Denny O'neil take but also foreshadowing the Miller re-vamp in the Dark Knight. Rorschach is also, of course The Question, a right-wing crank vigilante created and written by notable right wing crank (and certified comics genius) Steve Ditko. The Question used to spout Ayn Rand-isms, literally, while beating up crooks. but the comc book Watchmen is more than just the geeker's paradise that these details might suggest. Moore is smart enough to wonder how and why a popular medium came to contain these kinds of intellectual impulses, and what that medium's place in our culture meant for writers and readers. Lane thinks that he's too smart to bother knowing this, and Snyder, by most early accounts, didn't think that it was important enough to the meaning of the story to attempt to address it.

Genius

That's the genius of the Watchmen. It works as a straight up super hero drama, and at the same time, as a send up of the super hero genre. Not many writers could do that. And even fewer directors. Which is why I fear for the movie. But we'll see. Kyle, it may be too much blame Moore and Rorschach for inflicting the Punisher on us... but somebody's got to take the blame.

Anthony Lane

[vaguely spoilery comment:] I agree that Lane's review was pretty sub-literate, and proudly so (and I say this as a fan of many of his reviews). He seems to think it is a criticism of Moore that "in the end...most of the surviving Watchmen agree that [spoiler stuff] was a small price to pay for global peace." What an amazingly clumsy reading, to take that agreement as something the writers expect the audience to join in.

Anthony Lane

[vaguely spoilery comment:] I agree that Lane's review was pretty sub-literate, and proudly so (and I say this as a fan of many of his reviews). He seems to think it is a criticism of Moore that "in the end...most of the surviving Watchmen agree that [spoiler stuff] was a small price to pay for global peace." What an amazingly clumsy reading, to take that agreement as something the writers expect the audience to join in.

24 = Interro-porn

I've watched each series of 24 with increasing disquiet. Over the same period, admittedly, I became much better informed about the real world practices, ubiquity and (in)effectiveness of torture. This time around, I just can't stomach it anymore. Contrary to the experiences of actual interrogators, in Jack Bauer's magically redemptive world, torture is ALWAYS necessary (tick, tick, tick), torture is ALWAYS justified (tortured suspects are either obviously complicit or monstrously guilty), and torture ALWAYS works - suspects always know and always blurt out, at the most extreme moment of their abuse, the crucial piece of information that justifies everything. To have this patently dishonest portrayal of coercive interrogation accompanied by pontificating tough-guy lectures about "the real world", renders the merely mendacious into the monstrous. This is sadistic, adolescently eschatological, Manichean interro-porn that has the temerity to be pompously self-righteous. Enough.

24

I watched 24 for the first time this season after giving up on totally last season when it had jumped the shark. My sister told me that it was better this time so I tried. It was totally beyond any kind of pale. 8 men swim under the White House and tunnel their way in in less than an hour. These same 8 men totally overpower/out fox The Secret Service, and ultimately take the White Female President hostage. Right These 8 men are Black Africans. Who took over the White House The last scene is the very dark leader of the terrorists/commando/tinpot African Dictator holding the alabaster face of the Presidents daughter and running a gleaming knive down her cheeks threatening to remove eyes,nose, lips, tongue and anything one can flail from a human face. I happen to like me a good splatter film, I'm crazy about the Transporter series. I don't know where the impression that the writing staff of this crap are liberals. jeremy sorkin is to the right of dik cheney. The under currant is jeeze we know you tortured for the 'greater good' . Aside from the TOTAL IMPOSSIBILITY of a minute of this story being possible, it is every dittohead's button presser. An inyourface racism. People who don't approve of torture are pussies... Reading on the message boards for the show it went from 'this episode jumped every shark that ever lived' to 'if jack could have torured the treasonous little weasel who helped the terrorists with all of the White House Codes a little longer.....' This script was another sulphurous spew of right wing storyboarding from gitmo. These guys are like the jerks who formulate the talking points for republican bloviators on Fox. This episode was utterly contemptable

Watchmen

http://www.latimes.com/video/?slug=la-et-turan-watchmen05-vid Kenneth Turan speaks to many of the expressed anxieties.

Pretty accurate Kevin

I saw Watchmen last night (as a card carrying member of the liberal media elite) and your assessment of the nature of "reality" is exactly right. I never read the comic / graphic novel, and I found myself baffled by what level of disbelief I was supposed to suspend. For whatever reason, I don't have this problem when I watch Batman or The Pink Panther. Neither of these is any more real than Watchmen, but at no point in either did I ever question what was happening.

the end

i've found that most of the "serious" major media orgs have written unfavorable reviews of watchmen. but who cares? for instance, newsweek hates it. and whenever i look for analysis of seminal pop culture phenom like genre-changing graphic novels, i always turn to newsweek. meanwhile the smaller venues (online zines, blogs, alt papers) love it. it may wind up being the most expensive cult film ever made, but that's ok for me. i've got my ticket for the first showing @ imax on friday. however, the specifics of the ending of the graphic novel have been changed for the film, but not the intent. most who have seen the film and understand moore's premises are fine w/the changes. however, the news of the new ending has really upset hitler.

Ebert loved it!

Roger Ebert loved Watchmen. Gave it four stars. But then Dark City was his top movie in 1998.

Dark City

That was a brilliant movie. It was so good that Keifer Sutherland didn't suck.

Kevin Since (to my happy

Kevin Since (to my happy surprise) you're such a Watchmen fan, maybe you could post a thoughtful response to the New Yorker's Lane and his willfully wrong-headed view of the comic book. As others here have pointed out, it seems he just doesn't get it and he delights in that fact; what kind of critic does that? It shouldn't bother me what a middle-aged review for a stuffy magazine thinks, but as a long-standing New Yorker subscriber (and admirer) it really does. If they can have Sasha Frere-Jones writing seriously about pop music, why can't they find a film critic who's not a pompous ass?

based on Jack Bauer's rationalizations

The best way to counter arguments in favor of torture is to justify its use against its proponents. Afghan or Pakistani insurgents could justifiably torture Americans to find out which wedding or family celebration will be bombed next by the US Air Force, based on Jack Bauer's rationalizations. If we can do torture to prevent the pending loss of innocent life, our torture victims can, too.

I read the first issue of

I read the first issue of Watchmen when it originally came out. I thought that it took itself too seriously. Everything that I've read about it recently reinforces that opinion.

I have long been a fan of

tagged as: 
I have long been a fan of the watchmen books and have waited uneasily for its inevitable cinematification. While I won't be able to see it for a few weeks I have watched several clips on line and the acting looks wooden and forced. The same criteria that the Art Director loves - the literal translation of a frame drawing to the screen - looks like it will be the downfall of the film qua film - it will need to expand and deepen the story, not just replicate it. That said, the ending has always been a weird blend of procrustean and utopian, that we can be scared into universal brotherhood. It's not a position I buy but it makes for good visuals. Luckily, I think that Moore isn't talking about our world - just what it might have become had we truly lost our way. Call me benighted but I don't think we've fallen quite that far. As for 24, I've enjoyed it for several seasons but this time it's just beating a dead terrorist (horses being too beloved for such purposes). The constant reliance on terror and torture rather than negotiation and persuasion has drained any redeeming qualities from the plot; the acting is unusually wooden and the story arc is, at least so far, a very neat M, with story A ending so that story B can start - a dereliction of the writers' responsibility to fill a season with one story. What I once liked about it was the spycraft and the explication of the full spectrum of manipulative strategies. Now I get that from Burn Notice, and I'm riding the TiVo FF button on a lot of 24's tiresome self-justifications. It is worth noting that "24" with the shift button down is "@$"; this seems to reflect neatly the vapidity to which the series seems to have sunk.

"...that we can be scared

"...that we can be scared into universal brotherhood..." Well, there's your nickel definition of fascism.... Lane is bad on comic book movies. He just doesn't like the genre much. Which wasn't so much of a problem when he was teeing off on the Phantom Menace, but is for anything a little more complex...

An ideal mash-up

tagged as: 
In its next season, 24 needs to combine with the recently-cancelled My Own Worst Enemy, and toss in a dash of Fight Club. In this mash-up, Jack Bauer chases, eventually catches, and then mercilessly tortures an arch-rival (played by Christian Slater). But something isn't right. As Bauer interrogates his prisoner, and especially as the other skillfully manipulates Bauer's head in self defense, the audience slowly realizes that Bauer is torturing ... HIMSELF ... whom he perceives as a separate person. Then the questions become. who is the "Company Construct," who is the original personality, and who will survive the battle of wills? What's not to love about that? A little something for everyone! 24 producers, call me! :-)

Mick Lasalle the San

Mick Lasalle the San Francisco Movie Critic loved it: "Director Zack Snyder is beginning to look like the best thing to happen to the action movie in this decade. His previous film, "300," took the battle of Thermopylae and re-created it, combining stylized visuals with a feeling for history, culture and character. His new picture, "Watchmen," follows in the same vein, but goes deeper, achieving a psychological sophistication that "The Dark Knight" aimed for but didn't quite reach." read the entire review here http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/06/MV5M16993S.DTL

Heroes "doing what is needed"?

On the big screen the audience gets to see the "dirty deed" done by the person tortured or casually having his rights as a criminal suspect torn to shreds. We just assume that those doing the torture to criminal suspects also know for certain what heinous deeds these guys have done and that they "deserve what's coming to them". Transfer to real life where those in charge casually presume guilt and just as casually deny suspects the ability to defend themselves against accusations. To the credit of cinema, very often we get to see innocent people being coerced with threats of detention without hearings by authority figures. So in the back of our minds we know how easily that power wielded by those in authority can be abused. There is the old adage "fight fire with fire". This is where the anti hero like Dirty Harry and Jack Bauer come in. Most prissy liberals are too squishy soft to combat real villains and the anti hero is called in to battle this evil. Of course on the screen we know the identity of the villain whereas in real life those who detain and torture absolutely have no clue in most instances. However, that does not deter our political leaders and their apologists in the media from invoking the "dark hero" analogy. Why do we need to "coddle" those [guilty - by false association] people? The reality of visual images of the twin towers going up in flame and jihadist beheadings are totally unrelated to the abuse of those detained without just cause - yet apologists will deride any critic as "naive and foolish" for persisting in their criticism of harsh means to those "who get what's coming to them". It's obvious to those who watch Jack Bauer on screen that his victims do "deserve what's coming to them". We see the villains in action. Those in Bagra, Guantanamo and Abu Graib are mostly clueless as to the guilt or innocence of nearly all people detained. Acting like Jack Bauer is pure sadistic criminal behavior. And those who are colleagues are far more sure of their guilt than they are of the detainees. Those who witness and don't prosecute are accomplices to this criminal behavior. Seriously guys - is Alberto Gonzalez pro crime or what?

The ending

Is it this part of the ending that people are hating?

watchmen

saw it at midnight last night/this morning... never saw the comic, didnt know the characters or premise. this was easily the best comic book based movie ive seen in my 47 years on the planet. the script, the acting, the style, the editing, the cinematography, the soundtracking choices, the one liners, the attention to detail and countless references to be caught were just ALL ON FIRE. anyone who poo poos this film is, for me, is to be held in low esteem for their lack of judgement in understanding what it is they just saw:) w00t w00t!!!

Thanks Kevin!

I always love your column, but finding out you're a Geek makes me very happy! Just watched last week's 24 the other night and it has definitely jumped that ol' shark. The takeover of the White House kicked me right out of my suspension of disbelief. And the writing this season has, overall, been lazy and inconsistent. I originally got into it because of the plotting but that seems toast as well. So it goes. As to Watchmen... yes, I bought it back in the day, issue by issue, going insane waiting a month between each one. I re-read it now and then and see entirely new layers. I never liked the damn giant squid, so I'm okay with Snyder getting rid of it. When I see it tomorrow, if I'm rooting for Dan & Laurie at the end, I'll be happy. I love Alan and respect him deeply, but he will never like any movie version of his books - this is just a fact, and given how badly some were done (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen anyone?) I can't really blame him. Plus, he hasn't been deconstructing superheroes for 20+ years - he's moved on & this theme no longer interests him. At least he's been gracious enough to have the money go to the artists. I'm terrified about the movie but Wil Wheaton said it rocks, so I'm going to trust him. And maybe pray a little. ;-) Keep up the good work!

Watchmen

tagged as: 
Not bad at all (have not read the grapjhic novel). Very entertaining.

Watchmen?

Am I the only person here who has no idea who the Watchmen are? I've never heard of the comic, much less been told this is some cultural ocon I should be drooling over. What is this all about? Where can I know more?

Processor

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often. Betty http://laptopprocessor.info

I think this season of 24 is

I think this season of 24 is not as original as it was in the past. I love the show but I think the networks might be wining it down. I have reason to believe that this is the last season of 24. Southerland has other projects on his plate for 2010.

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback

We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.

Photo Essays

Meet the guys who risk life and limb to dismantle weapons in Afghanistan.
Post-genocide, Rwandan women raise the children of their attackers.
Behind a generation's iconic images.