– Warning: this article contains spoilers –

The alternate 1985 sees President Nixon elected for a third term, and vigilante heroes, once the toast of New York City, exiled into retirement. Watchmen delves into the lives of these heroes and how their pasts affect the present and the future. Fighting crime is never as simple as justice against crooks, in any superhero film really, but rather a test of humanity as the hero tries to refrain from sinking into unrecoverable depths.

It’s here in Watchmen that the humanitarian morals stand out. As Ozymandias/Adrian Veidt justifies that killing millions in his pre-empted attack has saved billions, Nite Owl/Dan Dreiberg states that he hasn’t reshaped the world, but rather deformed it. In a world today where war is increasingly technological, we still have the ultimate fear of a nuclear attack, no different to that of NYC in Watchmen (this 1985 centred after Vietnam but still in the midst of the Cold War). But what this story does is play out to us through its final stages is that even the idea of the ‘greater good’ can never benefit everyone.

Why would I save a world I no longer have any stake in?

As the credits so masterfully depict with the help of Bob Dylan, the times are a’changin’. With harsher times comes greed; both in the form of corporate power, as exemplified by Veidt, and comfort, shown by the complex relationships between Comedian/Edward Blake and Silk Spectre/Sally Jupiter and Rorschach’s satisfaction in killing people. The women don’t try to be but are ultimately femme fatales – Silk Spectre’s desire for love led her back to the man who tried to rape her, but she never had closure because of Laurie and finds herself forgiving him. Rorschach: what does he see? A childhood filled with ridicule from having a prostitute mother which shaped the maniacal justification for his killings. It’s stories like this that are sadly present in today’s world, and Watchmen’s public find themselves helpless against those in a seemingly ‘higher’ position to call the shots that benefit themselves. What’s interesting here though is at the same time we are shown a group of very fragile individuals who are just as helpless – even they can’t grasp what is happening to them. Dr. Manhattan’s influence as a God-like creature suggests that there is always a higher order – but when he doesn’t know how it’ll end then what hope have we got?

Our world can appear like that a lot of the time, where the direction we are headed seems doomed; and Watchmen’s complex themes show the audience that while there is unsettlement and discontent, life is a miracle. This film is relevant because it shows that sometimes we have to question why things are as they are. Why we choose them to be. Watchmen stands to reflect a society not so different to our own through the flawed psyches of these people, who have turned to fighting the world under different personas – different identities. We see that it’s not just about defeating the villains. It’s also about finding ourselves underneath the masks.

I heard a joke once: Man goes to doctor. Says he’s depressed. Says Life is harsh and cruel. Says he feels all alone in a threatening world. Doctor says “Treatment is simple. The Great Clown Pagliacci is in town tonight. Go see him. That should pick you up.” Man bursts into tears. Says, “But doctor… I am Pagliaci.” Good joke. Everybody laugh. Roll on snare drum. Curtains.

Watchmen (Review)

‘Watchmen’ studio war settled

Not so unlucky now Mr. Cavill…

All eyes on Watchmen as Fox fight to push back release

Cinema Releases – March 5, 2009

“It leads everywhere. Get out your notebook. There’s more.”

Seven burglars broke into the Watergate building intending to bug the Democratic National Party headquarters but were caught and put to trial. Bob Woodward from the Washington Post, who was assigned to report the case, found that digging deeper led into hidden conversations, witness cover-ups and unexplained fund transfers that rose from the Republicans’ Committee to Re-elect (for President Nixon to extend his stay in office) to the top of the Administration. Together with colleague Carl Bernstein, they ran a series of stories following the trial of how secret funds were being used – not for humanitarian aid as Nixon suggested but for gathering intelligence on their opponents.

The scandal led to President Nixon’s resignation, still the only Commander-in-Chief in history to do so mid-term. Americans were shocked by what their leader had done and demanded answers. But months later they still had none, after new President Gerald Ford gave Nixon a full pardon from any wrong-doing. Bernstein and Woodward released their discovery as a book, which soon had a film of the same name, All the President’s Men. With Alan J. Pakula at the helm and Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman as the leads, it was still cautious ground and had to be treated with importance but these names brought credibility and interest to a very intriguing story. For those who hadn’t read the book, the film showed audiences how Woodward and Bernstein unravelled the mystery and the pressure they were under. For the film isn’t just about Watergate, but also how journalists uncover and handle such huge information. Many films have been made about reporters, but none with such importance. This really happened, and was still fresh in America’s mind.

“Woodward. Bernstein. You’re both on the story. Now don’t fuck it up.”

What Woodward and Bernstein did for investigative journalism is something that arguably no-one has bettered. Their tenacity in getting witnesses to talk; or rather to agree with their theories is superb to watch in the cinematic adaptation. Redford and Hoffman give us a picture of men desperate to keep their jobs but to reveal something that was in the greater interest of the public is exactly what journalism students are taught as a main priority in their work. It provided journalists and those studying the craft among others inspiration to continue with it and strive to be like Woodward and Bernstein. A major source of theirs came through the infamous ‘Deep Throat’; a friend of Woodward’s who led them in the right direction without handing over straight information. This led to another ethical issue for Woodward and Bernstein – the lack of named sources brought criticism even from the Post itself, with editors unsure about running a series of stories without any names. Their trust paid off in one of the biggest scoops in newspaper history, and we must remember, in a time before the Internet.

Conclusion:

All the President’s Men remains just as relevant now in an age where news is instant and constantly evolving. What followed it were the famous Frost interviews, where English talk-show host David Frost won the rights to Nixon’s only post-Watergate TV interview. He would have borrowed from Bernstein and Woodward along with his own research to get out of Nixon what no-one else did. The release of Frost/Nixon has brought it all back to the surface in a time where there is political turmoil and change. Journalists continue to question motives of leaders, as do Hollywood directors and everyday citizens. The theme of the film is to trust your gut instinct, and to know who you support and why.

Corruption must be stamped out on all levels, and All the President’s Men is a cinematic example of an account that proves it can be done.

Frost/Nixon (Review)

W. (Review)

Doubt (Review)

The Special Relationship (Review)

Golden Globe Nominations and Academy Awards Announcements

This segment, entitled It’s Relevant, will focus on the film most similar to the shape of the world’s state as a whole, or something that has happened to me personally (should it be overwhelmingly important!). At the moment, as it has been for the past few weeks, it is seemingly so that the first film featured here should be none other than Oliver Stone’s Wall Street.

With the world (particularly the US and UK/Europe) affected by the global financial crisis, Wall Street has as much worth now as it did when it was released in late 1987/early 1988. At the time, the last recession had hit the US hard just months before and there was suggestion director Stone knew of the impending crisis. Of course that was impossible, but the public always like a conspiracy, don’t they?

Set in 1985 (and boy can you tell – from the music to the interior decoration, it’s blatantly obvious), Wall Street follows stockbroker Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen) and his ambitious rise to the top with financier Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas in his Oscar-winning role). Within the Hollywood necessity of sub-plots (the budding romance with Daryl Hannah’s Darien and father-son dramas with real-life father Martin Sheen), we see a central character fight out the demons that surface when the going gets really good. Stone shows us the hustle and bustle of Wall Street as a stressful and at times rewarding place, and when Fox has it all, he has it all.

But how much is it gonna cost you? That’s the theme of the film and really, a resounding question for consumers today. The credit crisis has been caused by lenders giving money to those who can’t pay it back, and Fox is in a similar situation before his ambition to get in Gekko’s good books gives him a lifeline. What Wall Street strongly formed in my head was a vision of a drug addict and his dealer. Fox is so consumed by making it big that he would even offer up the company his father’s loyalty resides with – and for what? Happiness? Money can’t buy you that no matter how hard you try! With Gekko as his ‘dealer’, Fox finds his relationships with family and friends ruined, and ultimately his being found out is the final nail in the coffin.

“The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you very much.”

While Gekko was the villain, he did raise an important point within the now infamous ‘Greed Is Good’ speech. Stone’s insistence on Douglas’ performance in this scene to be word perfect pays off as we are delivered a speech that because of the current situation can still give chills. What he says is still applicable today, as now we are being given money by PM Kevin Rudd to spend – be greedy and save the economy! It also lays blame on the US, who at the centre of the crisis should’ve monitored more over dealings. Gekko’s opposite is Lou Mannheim (Hal Holbrook), a workmate who gives balance to Fox’s conscience through moralistic views. In what appear as removed scenes from the rest of the film, we ultimately get the moral of the story through lines such as: “The main thing about money, Bud, is that it makes you do things you don’t want to do.”

Oliver Stone knows how to make an audience think. Wall Street had prominence at the time and it most certainly does now. You can’t help but feel sorry for those in Bud Fox’s position – even Sheen’s choice to cry in the final scene reflects the emotions seen on Wall Street in the past few weeks. It seems that in this scenario, money really does make the world go round.

Wall Street (DVD Review)

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (Review)

Australian Box Office Wrap: 25-26 Sep 10

Australian Box Office Report: 14-17 Oct 2010

Australian Box Office Report: 7-10 Oct 2010