National Security Online Resource Center

Watchmen, written by Alan Moore, is considered the premiere work in the graphic novel genre, so its film release has been highly anticipated since production began in 1989. Overall, the film is very entertaining, and worth shelling out a few extra dollars to see it with the full IMAX effects. Like his other noted film, 300, director Zack Snyder displays his skill in depicting violence, sex and superhero tricks in some of the most visually-appealing ways imaginable. The opening credits are particularly spectacular, making comic book panels come alive, something you might find on one of those newspapers from the Harry Potter films.

Despite the entertainment value, do not see Watchmen if you are looking for some escapism and a happy ending. That being said, it is not very clear what the message is, as one is expected in such a dark and dense work.

Moore has said that Watchmen is meant to be a message of “anti-Reaganism” but one is hard press to see it in the film. This alternative reality is a true bizarro world, set (and written) in 1985. Vietnam is the 51^st state after America’s success in Southeast Asia, thanks primarily to Dr. Manhattan, a nuclear physicist-turned-god/Blue Man Group member. With this great victory, President Richard Nixon is still in office after term limits are repealed. Yet at the start of the film, we see a faux McLaughlin Group segment featuring “Pat Buchanan” and “Eleanor Clift” as they debate why Russia is amassing troops in Afghanistan as the Cold War continues.

Dr. Manhattan is the only Watchman who has any actual superpowers, which include the ability to see the present, past and future simultaneously, and–coolest of all to everyone but the Viet Cong—the ability to vaporize people. The other Watchmen are simply costumed vigilantes with various opinions on virtues and justice. Laurie Juspeczyk (Silk Spectre II) and Daniel Dreiberg (Nite Owl II) have given up the crime-fighting trade and returned to secretive, “normal” lives after Nixon banned masks several years earlier. Daniel is pathetic, left only to reminisce about the old days with no desire to fight. Laurie wastes away her days in a government facility with her lover, Dr. Manhattan, who is becoming less human and more godlike and distant every day. Adrien Viedt (Ozymandias) has decided to out himself as a Watchman and has used his incredible intellect in the development of endless energy resources, which he believes will end the fear of lack and will therefore eliminate war.

Rorschach is the most masterful character, and from a conservative perspective, the only hero in the film. Vigilante to the core, Rorschach refuses to unmask and continues to exact vengeance on those who deserve punishment. His morals are black and white, like the shifting ink-blot pattern that covers his face.

SPOILER ALERT! [It is impossible to begin to analyze the film without revealing the ending, so stop reading now if you want to see it.]

For political analysis purposes, the film boils down to a final showdown between the US and the USSR, as Nixon is about to begin a preemptive nuclear strike in a clichéd Dr. Stranglove-esque bunker scene. This attack is averted when Veidt deploys his master plan: he bombs the major cities of the world powers, killing millions. Veidt makes the attacks appear to be the work of Dr. Manhattan, who has become upset after breaking up with Laurie and zaps himself to Mars (still a comic book, remember?). The other heroes are stunned and horrified until Veidt switches on the television, showing a shell-shocked Nixon announcing that the USSR and US plan to work together from here on out. With the exception of Rorschach, the others agree not to tell the tale of what has happened since peace has resulted.

Moore’s goal was to take a shot a Reagan and his politics, but this ending does not accomplish that. Moore believed that many people in the 1980s, thanks to Reagan’s positive spin on America and the globe, were not sufficiently scared of the imminent threat of nuclear annihilation. In his view, this was a message to them that their trust in “heroes” was dangerous and flawed.

Watchmen ultimately does not work as a film in 2009 because history has shown us that this theory and others were simply wrong. The obvious problem with Moore’s main thesis is that Reagan is more clearly represented in Nixon’s character, not in the Watchmen. To somehow claim that Reagan’s vision was anything like Veidt’s socialist utopia is preposterous. Furthermore, Veidt’s solution directly counteracts Nixon/Reagan’s mutually assured destruction strategy, so to draw them together is a reach.

In fact, it is better to juxtapose them and recognize that Moore must sympathize with Veidt. Other reviewers have suggested that the over-the-top criticisms of socialism serve as laugh lines directed at Rush Limbaugh, while others on the far left see the actions of Veidt as heroic and being the main point and message to the viewer. The socialist agenda of Veidt is exposed in that so long as peace is established, the ends justify the means. This has been repeated throughout the last century in the USSR, Cambodia, and the like, and all have failed. Peace is only accomplished my “peace-making”—a good code word for war and death.

Other political realities expose several flaws as well. “Pat Buchanan” points out early in the film that Russia will not dare attack because of the deterrent threat of Dr. Manhattan. As usual, Buchanan is spot on: It is only when Dr. Manhattan leaves for Mars that the Soviets begin to challenge America. This only serves to prove the nuclear deterrence theory of Reagan and others, not discredit it.

Furthermore, the idea that peace would reign and the world would unite because of a horrific attack is something that has failed in recent years. What type of attack would radical Muslims have to pull off for the world to unify forevermore? The attacks of 9/11, Spain, and London were obviously not enough. To look at this same false hope a religious standpoint is also apropos. Daniel believes that if people believe Dr. Manhattan is watching, they will not fight out of fear of him. Evidently, Nite Owl II skipped Sunday school the week they covered the Great Flood and Sodom and Gomorrah. Man has gotten back to this point once again, so what is to stop humankind from doing it yet another time?

The most rewarding part of the film is watching Rorschach work. Rorschach is the only one that boldly declares, “Never compromise, not even in the face of Armageddon,” vowing to expose Veidt’s plot, and he is vaporized for it. Despite his obvious psychological flaws, it is difficult not to see Rorschach as the only true hero of Watchmen. His integrity to the end it the most admirable quality, especially considering that the viewer is led to believe that he does in fact tell the story, through his journal. This also strikes a final blow against the dreams of utopia that seems to be ignored by Moore. There is nothing admirable about Veidt’s solution, or, in the least, nothing that makes it more honorable than Nixon/Reagan’s. Moore tries to discredit Rorschach’s heroism by his penchant for bloody retributions against the unjust. But what right-winger doesn’t sympathize with that? Of all the characters, with all their flaws, I would much rather see myself as the one who fought the good fight to the bitter end. Rorschach recognized that “peace” was a sham, and that evil still exists.

Watchmen ultimately leaves a lot to be desired, because of the ambiguous ending and unclear focus and message. I have no doubt the translation from the novel to the screenplay, along with the editing of the film from 4 hours to 2 hours and 40 minutes, had a lot to do with it. But for the right-leaning viewer, Rorschach provides the role of the hero that is oddly lacking in a movie about superheroes.