Unwatchable Watchmen

I made a mistake last night. I was taking a young kid out to the movies and there were no good movies out . . . at least, not that late. So we decided on “Watchmen.” Big mistake.

Simply, there is no redeemable plot. The story line is slow, rambling, and barely organized. There are moral conflicts, but the are address and resolved in totally gray manners.

On top of that, there are good action sequences, but that is all that drives the movie and those have way too much gore (bones visibly breaking and coming out of the skin, a person biting another’s cheek and you can see the patch of skin in the person’s mouth, and the list goes on). Then on top of that, the movie is also unwatchable because it’s “real” rating should be an X. Dr. Manhattan wear nothing through most of the movie . . . so basically his penis is one every scene. And the movie is based in a “slum” town so there are prostitutes in almost every scene. And there are graphic, extended and unneeded sex scenes that don’t hide much.

Though everyone might not agree with me on this, there is also the vilification of Nixon. Although Nixon doesn’t carry a good reputation, he is becoming regarded as one of the best presidents on the last century because he set the footprints that started the economic growth. Not to mention that every President has most likely been involved in covert, questionable actions.

So, basically, don’t waste your money. However, I do want to expound on what really ticks me probably the most. The immoral resolution to a moral conflict.

The climax of Watchmen depends on that man will inherently spiral into fear and rage due to its inherently evil nature. Because of this, man is currently in a state of fear (the cold war), and the world is in a state of decline as people implode on themselves. Because man has put themselves in this situation, there is not significant loss if a single person dies, or even a group of people dies. In fact, through out the film, the slaying of innocents, or demonstrators is glorifies, or at least shown in abundance.

The creates an interesting phenomenon in the audience as they are told to accept this as a reasonable action given the situation, but internally, the audience knows it is wrong.

The supposed answer to the fear perpetrating everyone is the need for a great uniting calamity. The proposed calamity is the loss of a huge amount of human life (so a single life isn’t valuable, but a collective number of lives is? I am sorry, if you assign zero value to a single human life, then no matter how many zeros, or human lives you put together, the value is still only zero). However, the crux of the deli ma comes when it is not the hero’s lives that are to be sacrifices (a concession that the loss of a hero’s life is no more significant than the loss of any other life), instead the hero’s “choose” who will die or the greater good.

So, I am forced to ask the unanswerable question. Is the involuntary, or unnecessary death of one person (or a group of people), worth the preservation of billions of others. If you have no soul, or there is not a God (as the movie supposes), or there is not moral code except what humans have arbitrarily made, sure, why not end life of one more animal?

However, that is not the reality. As everyone knows deep inside, our moral code is not human made and is not arbitrary. Rather it is based on a conscience that is God created and God maintained. In that case, any single human life is worth more than every other human life in every single situation. This premise is what actually drives the pain and emotions behind self sacrifice. Although the sacrificing individual is giving everything for the common good, the individual as a person is still worth more than everyone else, just as a single person the “hero” is saving is worth more than everyone else (including the one sacrificing).

The essence of this value is really best found in that basic question, “Is it ok to kill a large amount of people to save the rest?” This can be debated philosophically all day, so let me make the question more specific and relevant. Let us assume that there is not cure for HIV, is it ok to kill those who have HIV to preserve everyone else and end the HIV? If you did answer yes, let me ask you, do you have HIV? Doesn’t that change the issue.

In here lies the biggest problem with the movie, the hero’s are sacrificing millions or people to save billions. However, the value of the millions is reduced because, what will happen when another catastrophe arises? Kill another couple million? However, while innocents are dying for their neighbors, those who are responsible for the decision remain unaffected and above it all. This is not sacrifice. This is demented reasoning that spits in the face of a creator who didn’t choose other to sacrifice, but sacrificed HIMSELF for us. This mindset spits in the face of a God who is more valuable than everyone but gave up that value for each one of us.

The film reaks of immoral answers to moral questions. The films reaks of disrespect to a God or creater. The films reaks of the disrespect of a single human life, and consequently, many human lives.

This is the problem with the film . . . this is why this film is junk and should not be watched.

One thought on “Unwatchable Watchmen”

  1. a fair assessment. I think your point is also magnified by the close following of Rorschach. While touted in the movie as someone without compromise, in the broader context of the movie where there is alot of anti- objective moral talk Rorschach is portrayed as some sort of hero. The goal by the end of the movie is that you forget all his atrocities in favor of his passion to spread the truth and bring "justice" to evildoers. To the average viewer this may appear noble but I find serious problems with the logic behind glorifying the death of one person by the hands of Rorschach or the death of the thousands perpetuated by the "hero" of the movie. thanks for the thoughts

Leave a Reply