the watchmen: a review

i saw the watchmen this weekend. i believe i drug two of my closest friends somewhat unwillingly, but willing enough to entertain me, to the movie. i should say upfront that i have not read the graphic novel that it comes from. i can say, however, that it is on my list o' books to read and that i do have a foundational, if only basic, working knowledge of the story. and all of this is to say that it doesn't really matter, because i am not using this space or these words to critique its accuracy to the spirit or plot of the novel or the accuracy of the character development or anything of the sort really in the movie. i want to talk about why i believe everyone should see this movie.

there is depth to the movie. and its depth, for me, lies in the quality of the examination of the human character and the theological and sociological exploration there of. within the watchmen there is an exploration of the way in which the human character is destructive and that without reform, our choices will lead us to a place of ultiamte self-destruction. add to this the enigmatic figure of dr. manhattan who at times engages with the human creation and at times wants nothing more than separation and escape, and you have not only a sincere struggle of the relationship between humans and God, but you also have an authentic and genuine depiction of what it is to desire change of a world, culture, society, and humanity in the face of evil and destructive choices that humans make. there is no simple solution for the watchmen. while there is a commitment to change and reform on the part of the watchmen to what they find to be moral and true, there is also a wavering in that commitment. is it possible that reflection on the mission can result in change in the actions of those trying to accomplish the mission? we see a spectrum within the watchmen themselves of how to effect the greatest change on the greatest number from the absolutism of rorschach to the utilitarianism of ozymandias, albeit stilted at best.

perhaps what i liked most about the movie was that it did not suggest that there was an easy or simple depiction of what is "right" or "true." there was struggle for all who were involved and there was a needed commitment. true there could be doubts, wavering, questioning of the mission and the purpose itself, but there was a deep sense of the need for change and that a better world was possible than the current reality.

the bottom line for me was this: the story is a complex layering of historical fiction with a deep vein of theological and sociological exploration that gives it a depth for reflection that is rare in most movies. there is no sense of direction for a desired outcome of thought, rather a prodding to become uncomfortable with your own positions if only for the sake of re-examination in the face of what is true, real, and authentic. and ultimately, i am left with a sense of hope that a better and different world is possible, if only due to the generation of authentic relationships built on openness, honesty, and vulnerability with one another.