Watchmen Impressions - Gay Content In The Watchmen
Firstly, I'm not going to delude myself into thinking I will change anyone's mind about this movie simply with what I write here. You're going, or you aren't, or you're Alan Moore and would have hated this no matter how good it was. What I can do is talk about how it compares to the comic, and the surprising amount of gay content (and in certain cases, lack thereof) in the film.
So before I go any further, here's the short, spoiler-free version.
It is worthy.
If you want a more in-depth look that includes spoilers, join me after the jump.
Let's start with the beginning, and pleasantly enough, a topic relevant to this blog. The gay content.
The opening credits of Watchmen are a brilliant mish-mash of the backstory of the Minutemen and Crimebusters (although the Crimebusters are just called the Watchmen in the film, for simplicities sake, I suppose) Three moments of interest occur. Silhouette is seen usurping the sailors place in the famous VJ-day kiss in a fabulous shot. We see the eventual sad fate of Silhouette and her lover, which was only mentioned in the supplementary material of the comic and never drawn. Finally, a gathering of the Minutemen is portrayed in slow-motion, with the heroes posed like The Last Supper. Of particular note in this amazing sequence, Captain Metropolis and Hooded Justice at the right side of the table.
All of these together show a remarkable willingness to highlight the fact that these gay characters existed, and a remarkable attention to detail. The fact that the Silhouette scenes were added in particular feels like a nod our way, if that makes sense. Or perhaps they were added in to make up for the removal of Joey the lesbian cabbie's story, which does not make it into the film.
And on that note, lets talk about gay content that was removed.
The world of Watchmen is the world of the early 80's. Things were not good for gays then. AIDS was becoming a serious problem, and the world had grown more conservative after the open sexuality of the 70s. It's no surprise then, that when they wrote it, Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons included this. The word faggot is used multiple times throughout the book, as is queer. At one point Rorschach questions the sexuality of a character. This is an ugly world that is often very brutal to gays.
None of this makes it into the movie.
Aside from the death of Silhouette, none of the anti-gay name calling and insults used in the comics are in the movie at all. They had several opportunities to do so, but they did not. Sex and violence are not shied away from in this movie, but clearly they did not want to include rampant homophobia. To be honest, I'm glad. While I hoped for the movie to be as accurate as possible, a stream of homophobic epithets (no matter how accurate to the comic they are) would have lessened the experience for me. The death scene for Silhouette more than explains this harsh world in a few frames, making the rest unnecessary. I salute Zack Snyder and his team for it.
Without spoiling too much of the movie and the ending, I will just give a few more basic impressions. Sex and nudity are not restrained in any way. If it's in the comic, it's in the movie. You'll see Dr. Manhatten's glowing blue penis more than once. Be prepared to hear some amusing sounds as a lot of the straight guys in your theater squirm. Violence is not held back either. The fight scenes in the movie are brutal. These are heroes who don't take prisoners and are willing to break limbs and smash faces to win a fight.
The acting is good all around, but of particular note are Patrick Wilson (Nite Owl II) and Jackie Earle Haley (Rorschach). Their performances are dead on, and at times are almost eerie in the way the lines are delivered exactly how one would expect the characters to deliver them.
The plot is changed in many places to fit in a decent amount of time and for the most part, it all fits together smoothly. However, this movie is going to make a lot more sense to people who have read the comic. To someone who hasn't, it may seem disjointed at times. Having been a fan for years, however, I was very pleased by the film. It has it's flaws, but shines nonetheless.
Now, if you'll excuse me, it's lat... er... early, and I need to get some sleep. Go enjoy the film!
Sgt. Sausagepants
Posted to Comics on 6 March 2009
· Comments (14)
Other stuff like this: Movie, Watchmen
I too was very interested in the gay content. After the racist, homophobic Nazi-fest that was 300 - and knowing that Alan Moore, in stark contrast, is a staunch critic of homophobia and social injustice generally - I was definitely on edge, and worried that Snyder would insult both Moore and the gay community by including something homophobic and juvenile.
Well he did sort of, if you look closely on Ozy's computer desktop, he has a folder labeled "boys".
Other than that though, everything seemed pretty much appropriate. There was one homophobic slur hurled at Rorschach - a hooker whose advances he denied accused him of being a "homo". And Rorschach himself refers to Sillhouette's lifestyle as being "indecent" - but then again, he would say that, and furthermore she wasn't just a lesbian, she was a freaky dominatrix-type fetish-y lesbian, which just goes back to all the superheroes' identities being tangled up in their bizarre sexual tastes and hangups.
For the most part the movie was very respectful. I actually think the most egregious sin was the gratuitous plug for 300. Moore and Miller are like polar opposites and even if Moore could tolerate a Hollywood movie based on his work, I don't think he would appreciate his work being associated in any way with 300.
Yeah, but Alan Moore is guaranteed to hate this either way, because it's not an exact copy.
And god bless his cranky heart for it.
This is the first, and to my knowledge, only review of the movie that looked at the homosexual components and analyzed them in both the context of the movie and the context of the book.
Thanks Sarge.
I thought that Silhouette told you everything you needed to know about this conservative world, and I don't think it was done in a way to make the conservative viewpoint look appropriate.
You kind of skipped the part where Comedian is getting punched by Hooded Justice and jokes "is this what gets you off." It's just like the novel, but because the movie-only people don't know the rest of the story about Hooded Justice or Captain Metropolis, it lacks some of the --err-- "punch" of the novel. The movie would have been pretty awkward and imbalanced if they added the whole Justice/Metropolis, and Joie thing in there, so I don't miss it. The reference to it though, was a great touch for those in the know.
I saw a screening Wednesday night, and then I went to a midnight show last night. I think I enjoyed it better the second time. There's a lot of information that is being thrown at you, and even though I know everything from the novel, my mind was still trying to assemble it in the way this particular version of the narrative unfolds. the second time felt more relaxed.
I loved Doc, his TV interview and his Mars montage are both great and felt very tight and focused. Patrick Wilson was the perfect Dan. Jeffrey Dean Morgan played the Comedian so well I think I would be a little scared of him in real life. Malin was alright, people keep saying she's stiff, but really Silk Spectre II had a bug up her butt through the whole book so it seemed right to me. I don't know why some people thought she'd be warm and cheerful. Matthew Goode was disappointing, mostly because of his lisp. Carla Gugino's makeup was a little odd. She was great in scenes of her past, but present day was kind of a hammy mess.
Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach was so good, I was stunned. He doesn't get a lot of face time, due to the nature of the character, but his voice, his movements, everything was intense.
After seeing it, I wasn't really sure how I felt. I didn't hate it, but I wasn't sure I really liked it either. However, I've decided that it was a just adaptation of the GN. Like you, I liked the nods to the Silhouette (Who I actually loved the look of and now wished SIlhouette had been a bigger part of the movie). And, my thing was that the director and Warners didn't skip over the fact that Dr. Manhattan was naked through most of the film. I was happy that we got penis and not a barbie doll interpretation. That was the thing that would have bothered me to no end if they had gone that route. As for the violence, yeah wasn't expecting it to be so graphic. All my friends flinched at the violent parts.
I have to agree with you RogueFan, in that I wasn't really sure if I liked it or not. I was kind of surprised that the good Doctor's floppy blue manhood was hanging out for all the world to see...I was really expecting it to get the "Censor Steam" treatment ala an Austin Powers movie. And I was glad that Silhouette's sexuality wasn't shied away from (and that actress looked damn good in that tight, kinky getup.) But yeah, I too noticed the file on Adrien's computer labeled "Boys." I wasn't sure if that was supposed to be some kind of homophobic jab or some kind of in-joke or something.
On a separate note, I felt that if I hadn't already read the comic, I would have had no idea what was going on. I thought the storyline would have been very convoluted to newcomers, and I was extremely disappointed that the "Black Freighter" side story was not included. I understand it is getting it's own animated straight-to-dvd adaption, but honestly...why couldn't it have been in the film? I felt the foreshadowing in the comic-within-the-comic really added a whole new dimension to the Watchmen, and the interactions between the two Bernards was truly heartwarming. The scene in which they embrace as the cataclysm approaches right after they each start really getting to know one another brought tears to my eyes. Not so in the film, as the audience really didn't even get to know them at all. A friend suggested that the Black Freighter was left out because it would have made the movie way too long, but I think if they really wanted to, the filmmakers could've shorted a few of the fight scenes and made room for it. But I'm guessing they are just trying to milk this film for all it's worth...and it's working, as I will definitely be buying that dvd when it comes out. *sigh* I am such a corporate shill.
Lauren I have to disagree about being able to add the Black Freighter. You can't add the Black Freighter without adding everyone at the newsstand. Shaving off a few minutes of slow-mo wouldn't have enabled them to put the BF story in. Bubastis was enough of a "wtf?" for newcomers.
As for needing to read Watchmen first... I don't think that would have helped in all cases. Some people liked it without having read the book. Others dislike it and have read the book. There doesn't seem to be a common thread I can find between people who will like it and people who won't.
I should point out, word has it they shot all the necessary transitions at the newstand so that when the movie comes out on disc they will be able have a special viewing mode that adds the black freighter story in.
Because I didn't read the novel,and saw the film with a New Jersey straight-laced audience...I got a different take. The movie seemed homophobic to me on a couple of levels. (On the other hand, I really think it is one of the best superhero movies I've seen--just wish it wasn't tainted with Synder's issues).
Here is how I saw it, remember I never read the graphic novel, "lesbian whores" written with the lesbians' blood on the wall...and Rorschach saying they deserved it was the tip of the ice-berg. I didn't know Hooded Justice was gay-- this may have made up for that moment in fact or balanced it out the lesbians' death. This movie when all is said and down makes gay people out to be deserving of death and sinister--look at the way Adrian was portrayed in the film.
Did you notice how before or after Adrian--the sinisterly gay problematic bad guy--had a scene--just about every time--Dr. Manhattan's blue penis was shown......which let me tell you made the oh so straight New Jersey males in my audience vocally and physically wince. Very smart...very subliminal for those not in the know. Adrian, I pegged as gay from the beginning and one of the bad "kinds" at that--he was sinister and sinisterly utilized by
Snyder. The upside down triangles and his only connection to humanity--Alexander the Great. What sealed the deal was the "boys" folder on his desktop--I think we can all guess what digital images are in that computer folder. I laugh at this a little--part joke on my part: who didn't think the white tiger signaled back to Seigrfred and Roy?
I would say the reason the movie came across as homophobic to me is because the balance is off and tipped in the favor of Snyder's believes. Really think about this for a moment.
If the graphic novel commented on hate, what was the movie doing: if it was a comment on hatred, why wasn't the director/film clearer in its comment. Thinking about the issue again, I see the film as almost sitting on the fence making subtle choices. The questions it raises--on the gay side of things only being: are gays perverse or not perverse; do they deserve to be killed for how they live their sexual lives or not? These are the questions that are raised. And I would say the film leans a little more to the side where its okay to kill a gay for who they are from my first watching. I'd like to watch it again; so I can ground my critique further. But in the end, is it possible that the director and screenwriter may not have handled these characters clearly? I understand that Moore is compassionate and hates equality...isn't it possible that Synder ignored this quality in the graphic novel. BTW, I brought my copy of the novel today.
The short version - we hadn't read the novels, we hadn't even read reviews, walked in cold. Didn't get a whiff of homophobia, quite the opposite. The inclusion of the lesbian "V-J day" kiss was delightful, the death scene was ugly,as it should have been. Again, in the 80s, gay men and women WERE senselessly dying, and some in the straight world DID think it was retribution. Didn't feel singled out, since ALL of the Minutemen were being eliminated in montage. Rorschach's feelings were within character, being unforgiving (remember, he IS insane). Adrian was simply perceived by us as one in a long line of effete movie bad guys, even with the reference to Alexander - the file on his computer was simply part of character (once we got THAT), although the moviemakers might have called it 'men' instead of 'boys'...(is THAT in the novel at all? But why would someone who's the smartest man on the planet have his eye-candy file on his take-over-the-world hard disc ?) But the important thing for us - now that we know - is the missing Hooded Justice reference. Would it have changed how we viewed or enjoyed the movie ? No. Would we have liked just a passing scene or reference ? Yes. Certainly would have been balanced by the straight sex included. But very perceptive of all the correspondents here !
To chime in on the "Boys" folder, I thought it was just a subtle nod to the book, where Adrian's sexuality was called into question by Rorschach, IIRC (Its been ages since I've read the GN, if it wasn't obvious). My boyfriend, who was a total Watchmen virgin didn't even notice it.
I enjoyed the GN, but I'm not a big fan, and my boyfriend has never read it, but we both loved the movie. I thought the changes made to the GN made sense, and that they were smart about cutting out excess while keeping the heart of the story intact.
Finally, since when was Zack Snyder considered a raging homophobe? 300 wasn't the most sensitive movie, but I never expected it to be, and I don't think that came from Synder himself, but rather the source material. Synder seems like a nice enough guy in everything I've heard from him.
After just having read the first chapter of the graphic novel, yes, Rorschach does question Ozzy's sexuality.
Also, why is everybody being so judgemental of the word boys? That doesn't always refer to under-age boys if that's what people are getting all huffy about.
I cal guys between 16-25 boys. And while that might be fairly young for a middle aged guy, it's hardly that reprehensible.
Or is it just the fact that the 'bad' guy is being depicted as being gay? Not every gay person is a saint you know.
Really, I don't know what people are getting their panties in a bunch for this time, but it's always something I suppose.
Adrian was gay in the book, there's nothing 'homophobic' about having a folder marked 'BOYS' on his desktop. There's nothing homophobic about a gay villain -- grow up, losers. What, you think just because I'm gay that I'm somehow not smart enough to come up with a well-intentioned but evil plot to save the world? Fuck you, YOU'RE the homophobe if you have an issue with Ozymandius, plain and simple.
I thought the movie was brilliant. I was expecting a certain amount of on-screen homophobia to highlight the unique flavor of the 1980s attitude but the bits that they left out we not at all missed.
I would also like to point out that my girlfriend, who has never read the GN, was *more* enthusiastic by the end of the movie than I was.... this might have been because I had a fever of 99.8 at the time and I thought I was going to fall over but I like to think it was because she was able to fully appreciate the film before reading the novel in it's entirety.
I'm sorry, but while I NEVER read the book, nor was familiar with the concept BEFORE I SAW the film Watchmen, I must say that as a 'NON-STRAIGHT' male, I felt there was a lot of homophobic and anti-gay images and themes.
PLOT SPOILER:
The MOST glaring was the VERY gay and fey Watchmen (villian--we find out at the end) who idolizes Alexander the Great and has a file on his computer titled, "BOYS". One scene in particular seen complete with purple satin jacket adorned with a broach.
The lesbian couple being brutally murdered --IN BED no less-- was 'just deserts' for their "crime" of sexuality.
I also should say, the film was brilliantly shot and effects were outstanding.
However there was also a NWO theme throughout. (A faked terror attack actually BENIFITS for world peace).
This was slick, hot, hip childminded-propoganda.
But it was beautiful to look at.