CHUD have interviewed The Watchmen Director Paul Greengrass (thanks to JoBlo for the pointer) and part two appears today.
There are some interesting insights and it really does put Greengrass in a good place (as our HR department would say) with the fans of Watchmen. From the initial sounds of it there is some hope that this won’t be steamrolled into a Hollywood package.
Let me paraphrase from the interview and let you see some of the hope filled statements he makes.
On Dr Manhattan:
What is absolutely imperative is that we have Dr. Manhattan and that we dramatize his powers and that we have a character who people that are familiar with the comic book will recognize straightaway as Dr. Manhattan. We have to be authentic to that vision. And we will be. Now if you’re asking me is he going to be stark buck naked from top to bottom from the first frame to the last, actually in the graphic novel he’s not either – he has a rather natty suit on some of the time.
On the relevance of the novel today:
In many ways it’s one of the things that makes me feel that Watchmen speaks to us today in a way because the character of Dr Manhattan – that strange mixture of detachment and engagement, that loneliness if you like, that inability to make the right move is very interesting when you think about the world today. Ultimately Adrien’s plan, vis a vis Manhattan, is an interesting thing in the world today. Manhattan is a very key character.
On the multiple characters:
…they√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢re all magnificent characters. And they all must have their moment in this film.
On the casting ages:
…it does seem to me that there is the group of characters in the Minutemen, who rose and fell. Within that group you have Sally and the Comedian. Then you have really three characters who emerge at a later stage: Rorschach, Manhattan and Adrian. And then you have Dan and Laurie who are a bit younger, almost children of the Minutemen. They are a little younger again than Rorschach, Manhattan and Adrian. That√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s the thing we need to preserve in our casting…
On the Watchmen world as a whole:
I absolutely do want, intend and believe that we will bring to screen a Watchmen world that has depth and allusiveness. That it has that kind of richness and texture of the graphic novel.
What I think is very, very important is that the world be real. That it be the world that we understand is the world we’re living in, rather than it being a kind of romanticized Gotham City. I think a second thing that’s important is that the world unfolds in a manner consistent with our world outside.
I think the second thing that√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s really important is that when you sit inside that world our ensemble of caped crusaders, that you understand that these are human characters, flawed characters. That they√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢re not superheroes…It√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s that concept that you have a human drama that involves this cast of characters and that you understand where they√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ve come from. That this is not just some casual thing that they do, they do it because they√¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢re compelled.
CHUD: But the third element is that the novel serves as a deconstruction and critique of superheroes and comic books. Will you be delving into that?
Greengrass: Yes, we absolutely will do, and you are absolutely right, that’s the third element.
On Alan Moore:
Q: Alan Moore has been very vocal about not being happy with the movie adaptations of his work. Have you spoken to him about this, or tried to speak to him, or even just hope to speak to him?
Greengrass: I hope to, I would love to. I intend to try. In many ways he’s made his position plain about the films. They’re not my films. I wasn’t there. I wasn’t at the scene of those accidents. All I can speak to is where I come from, where I come to Watchmen from and what I would like to do.
In summary:
A lot of people out there will be skeptical about us, will doubt that it can be done, will worry about how we will do it. All I can say in all honesty and humility is, I understand that. I believe with a passion that we can do it, I believe with a passion that I was making a contribution in my country as Alan Moore was in his way at that time, but I was dealing with a lot of the same material and ideas at that time. I beg only that you judge me when I’m done, as I’m sure I will be.
I know I’ve reproduced a lot here, but I feel it is important – and please do go and read the full interview, it’s really good – Greengrass is really bringing through the understanding of the novel and of the vision of Moore. It does sound like he’s hit it dead on. My only surprise is that he hasn’t talked to Moore yet.
What does everyone else think?
