That was a waste of two and a half hours.

[elialshadowpine]

paul_zap and I decided to see Watchmen tonight, since it had just come in with our Netflix shipment, and I'd been hearing good things about it for quite some while. I'm really not sure how this got as much acclaim as it did, because I absolutely loathed it. I have never, ever seen a movie with so much rampant misogyny and accepted violence towards women.

First up. I have not read the books that it is based upon. I actually don't really give a rat's ass if the movie is true to the books or not, because either way, this shit is seriously fucked up. Whether it's the movie makers getting it wrong or the books being that way to begin with, I don't care.

(I am also not paying exact attention to movie timeline here. I'm writing as I remember shit that really bothered me.)


All right. The movie starts out with a lesbian couple being brutally murdered in the first 5 minutes, with a shot of "LESBIAN WHORES" written on the wall above them. This is later addressed by a comment from the primary narrator stating that they were "killed for their own depraved lifestyles" and because they were "indecent".

Brutal is the name of the game for this movie, which I expected given what I heard. It is not the graphic violence that upsets me. It is the focus and direction of the violence that upsets me. The primary narrator is repeatedly derogatory toward women; they are prostitutes and whores, and they deserve to be beaten, raped, or killed because of it. This attitude is repeated throughout the movie in word and action.

Another early scene is where one of the female superheroes, the Silk Spectre, is nearly raped by another member of her team, the Comedian. When he refuses to back off and tries to manhandle her, she punches him hard enough to send him flying. Yet, he then manages to beat her into the ground, and she does not lay another move on him whatsoever, despite being a "superhero" herself. She is barely rescued from being raped by other -- male -- members of the team.

BUT! While it is not onscreen, it's mentioned more than once that she later slept with the Comedian despite that he beat her badly and nearly raped her. And it's all okay! Because she got pregnant! And she loves her daughter! So it's all right and he should be forgiven! What the bloody fuck does this say about women and rape? I could sit here for a fucking hour getting into the implications of this one.

Throughout the movie, flashbacks are shown of the Comedian (who is murdered at the beginning of the movie, which starts the plot rolling... or more like meandering slowly along) assaulting women in addition to the rape scene. He specifically goes after women to attack when breaking up a riot, plus blowing up a school bus. He shoots the woman who is heavily pregnant with his child because she confronted him about walking out and leaving her stuck with the baby. The team's reaction? Is that this is all fucking okay because he did some amount of good. Because of that, it's fucking acceptable and should be forgiven, or at least forgotten.

The primary female heroine in the story does absolutely fucking nothing besides break up with her uber-brain superhero boyfriend. Which results in the almost certain doom of the world because he is the only thing keeping nuclear war from happening, and he is so upset by her leaving him (...plus some other influences) that he checks out. She does not fucking do anything proactive. She follows. She does what she's told. She is treated as the Pure Good Girl of the story that is the romantic interest for two members of the team. The only fucking reason she exists is to be a romantic interest and a Madonna to the "Whores" that are portrayed in the rest of the female cast.

I suppose you could argue that she "convinces" her boyfriend to get his act together and help save the world, but she doesn't even really do anything there. She then gets teleported back to the fight with the antagonist, where she shoots him and then fucking stupidly approaches him to see if he's really fucking dead when it's been stated that his "talent" is for catching bullets. HELLO.

There is a lot of misogyny in the comic book industry, but I have not seen anything like this level. This is misogyny on fucking steroids. This movie has been recommended to me as a great "dark" superhero movie. This is not "dark." This is a fucking study of psychopathy. These are fucking irredeemable characters. This is a fucking movie that says thematically that beating, raping, and murdering women is OK if you are technically a "good guy." But aren't they all the "good guys"?

I can say quite seriously I have never seen a movie that has pissed me off this much. And I cannot for the life of me understand why the hell so many of the self-proclaimed feminist women I know have told me that this is a great movie and a must-see.

It is six in the fucking morning, and I cannot sleep because I'm so fucking pissed over this. Argh.

Comments

[jamileigh17.livejournal.com]

Ack, I see what you mean. *adds that to her never to watch list*

[speaktothevoid.livejournal.com]

I can understand your point, but I must say it is a movie I liked.
As I understood it, the movie isn't about good guys and bad guys -- it's about how the worst people can have some good in them, and those that seem good can be worse than any. The narrator isn't exactly impartial -- Rorschach is about as anti-hero as you can make a character, but that just serves to show the same thing. It does take place in a dystopian, fucked-up world, but I think the point isn't to glorify this, but to repulse the viewer, to set the scene for what is in essence an anti-superhero story.
Like that other comic-made-into-movie, Sin City, it's nasty and violent, but -- at least to me -- also a good story, one that shocks you into thinking about certain things.
And it certainly did NOT make me think violence against women is an okay thing.

[warinbear.livejournal.com]

Good God. They used Rorschach as the narrator?

That explains a lot.

I haven't seen the movie, and probably wouldn't have sought it out even before reading this, but I have read the graphic novel. I don't think the story in either format is intended to promote acceptance of violence against women, any more than . . . <can't think of a good example> . . . some stories that use the word 'nigger' are intended to promote acceptance of bigotry.

Violence against women -- violence used as a tool against any group in order to gain power -- is evil. That doesn't mean that it does not exist, or that ignoring it will make it go away.

I agree, it's a good story, though a very uncomfortable one. I really don't see how using Rorschach as a narrative voice would make for a good movie based on that story, though.

[fordarkness.livejournal.com]

rorschach is the narrator in the comic too.

[warinbear.livejournal.com]

Only parts of the book are narrated by Rorschach. There is a lot of the written story that has nothing to do with him. Frankly, I thought he was a worse 'hero' than the Comedian ever was.

[autobottrixter.livejournal.com]

I suppose I should start by saying I have not only read the original book, but I am in fact a huge comic books geek up to the point of making pretentious Lit-Crit statements about things like this. So forgive me that trespass. :)

I thought the movie was pretty good, but I think one thing that was hurt a lot in the adaptation was that for some reason they made Laurie/Silk Spectre a much less compelling character. That aside, the point of Watchmen when it was originally published was essentially an anti-fascist story. One thing you might note is that rarely are these "super-heroes" actually saving anyone. The only one who ever seems to be doing anything approaching crime-fighting is Rorschach, and even then it's the post-crime vengeance sort. Watchmen intentionally presents super-heroes as normal people with very, very serious issues. They aren't conventional heroes and you aren't even necessarily supposed to be rooting for them. You aren't supposed to cheer because the Comedian tried to rape a teammate, or because he killed a Vietnamese woman who was pregnant thanks to him. It's supposed to show you that he was a terrible, terrible person, that despite being a "hero" he was actually an evil bastard. And that teammate later cheating on her husband with him? Again, the older Silk Spectre isn't exactly Mother Teresa. She has her own issues. The only really sympathetic characters are Dan/Nite Owl and Laurie/Silk Spectre, and even they're a little socially maladjusted. It's a story about screwed-up people with too much power and what they do to the world because of it.

Just as the original book was intended to be viewed in the context of the super-hero genre as a whole, the movie only really works as a juxtaposition to all the other super-hero movies that have been coming out lately. And even then it's much better as an adaptation of the book then it is as a movie itself. The characters are meant to be, to varying degrees, psychopaths, because that's a likely if rather pessimistic outcome if we really did allow vigilantes to be our heroes like they are in fiction.

[kaelstra.livejournal.com]

The whole point of the movie is sometimes something amazing can come from horrible, terrible things, and because of that, humanity is worth saving.

Also, it is worth noting that technically none of the "superheroes" in the movie actually have superpowers, except Dr. Manhattan. The rest are just people who play vigilante, but there is nothing powerful or special about them beyond that. They're all sort of like a B-movie star version of Batman.

I also don't recall Silk Spectre nearly being raped by anyone else other than the Comedian.

Don't get me wrong, some of your points are spot on, but I personally disagree with some of the things you are seeing, or reading into.

Autobottrixter really sums the rest of it up. I wouldn't say it's a "girl power" movie or anything like that, but it certainly does spin some interesting things to think about.

[terrycat.livejournal.com]

This is a fucking study of psychopathy. These are fucking irredeemable characters. This is a fucking movie that says thematically that beating, raping, and murdering women is OK if you are technically a "good guy." But aren't they all the "good guys"?
That's sort of the point. they're the good guys... only they're just as much scum as the rest of us. More so, because they're anonymous and powerful.

And the primary female character.... is completely useless. Worse than. she's an accessory. Nuff said.

As for the rest of it.... yeah. it is really misogynistic. It's also rampantly anti-[non-standard lifestyle]. Any hint of homosexual or even non-american attitude is highlighted and spat at. I can see the logic. The narrative(?) character is such a narrow-minded arsehole, everything must fit into his attitude of right and wrong. It's a snapshot of the time period, I guess. He's such a bigot that you feel you have to oppose his views just to be less scum than he is. But it's still like wading through sewerage to deal with it.

[terra-firma.livejournal.com]

The movie was fairly true to the story, but couldn't get into the details like the novel did. I'd recommend reading the graphic novel; it seems like a different type of literature than what you're used to. There are fucked up things going on in the world, and people will write about them. Keep in mind that Alan Moore covers all sorts of subjects, and ALL his books cover something that's Wrong With The World. Literature should not have to shy away from triggering subjects...sure it's uncomfortable, but it's gritty and real. Them being "superheroes" was wrongly portrayed as the point of the movie...it's really not. The point is that a lot of them are straight up bad or just okay people trying to get by.

I understand your reaction, but is everything everyone writes supposed to glorify women and show equality and fairness and that rape never happens? In an idealised world, sure, but in the dark endtimes that Moore conceived of, that would have been ridiculous.