Alan Moore's Watchmen redefined the superhero genre when it was first published in 1986. Known for its deconstruction of traditional hero narratives, the story explores how absolute power and the pursuit of peace can corrupt even the noblest of intentions. The climactic conflict presents a complex moral dilemma that continues to spark debate, but given what the world has become since it was written, there's clearly only one right answer.

The central theme revolves around the necessity of moral compromise for the greater good. Rorschach, the uncompromising ever-monog vigilante, stands in stark opposition to Adrian Veidt, who orchestrates a catastrophic event to unite the world against an imaginary foe.

The debate between these two characters is about whether peace is worth the cost of truth, and has proven to be a timeless argument. However, when looking back at the comic's ending in hindsight, one thing becomes abundantly clear: Adrian Veidt was right.

Watchmen's Ending Asked Fans To Weight The Moral Cost Of Millions Of Lives Vs. Billions

The Pinnacle Of Alan Moore's Deconstruction Of Heroism

Regardless of how Moore feels about the beloved series today, Watchmen redefined the genre. What starts off as an investigation into the comedian's murder unravels into a master plot to terrorize the world. The vigilante Rorshach unites several of his former allies to investigate, eventually uncovering the horrifying truth. As the conspiracy unravels, they are forced to confront the harsh reality that sometimes, saving humanity means compromising everything they stand for. Adrian Veidt, the most intelligent man alive, known as Ozymandias, orchestrates a global catastrophe in order to prevent an even greater one.

In this chilling vision of heroism, peace is not achieved through diplomacy or goodwill, but through the horrific act of mass murder, leaving the question of whether the ends justify the means hauntingly unresolved.

Ozymandias' plan, while brilliant in its execution, is undeniably horrific. He creates a massive alien creature, a squid-like monster, and teleports it into New York City. The creature detonates, causing a catastrophic explosion that kills millions of innocent people. The mass murder is staged as an alien invasion, designed to make the world's superpowers believe they face a common enemy. The shock of this event is intended to bring about global unity, with the U.S. and the Soviet Union setting aside their nuclear arms race in favor of cooperation.

In the end, Ozymandias’ plan is not simply about saving humanity, but about forcing the world into a new, unified order. He sacrifices countless lives to avert what he perceives as the inevitable destruction of civilization. His actions, though morally indefensible, are executed with cold precision. In this chilling vision of heroism, peace is not achieved through diplomacy or goodwill, but through the horrific act of mass murder, leaving the question of whether the ends justify the means hauntingly unresolved.

Watchmen's Climax Left Readers Questioning The Cost Of Peace

Moore Put His Heroes' Humanity Under The Lens

Ozymandias' plan forces the reader to confront an uncomfortable truth: true peace may only be achievable through force and manipulation. By orchestrating the mass murder of millions, Veidt believes he is doing what’s necessary to prevent global annihilation. His actions expose the inherent flaws in human nature, where power and control often overlook ethical considerations; as much as Rorschach may believe he's fighting for the greater good, the success of Adrian's plan proves he's far from it. This is a cynical, but not unrealistic, reflection of how ruling powers operate and manipulate the masses today, with much less noble intentions than Veidt.

The central argument here is about human nature. Adrian sees his action as a necessary evil, while Rorschach, who values truth above all else, refuses to accept this moral compromise. The implications of Ozymandias’ plan suggest that in times of extreme crisis, survival may demand decisions that fall outside of conventional morality. Moore’s work forces readers to question whether such a choice would be justified and whether, in the end, human peace is worth the sacrifice of individual lives. However, Rorschach never sees it that way.

Rorschach’s Defense Is His Most Heroic Moment, But There's A Reason It Fails

A Defiant Unyielding Morality​​​​​

Originally intended as a critique of Batman, Rorschach’s unwavering commitment to truth is his tragic flaw. In a world where right and wrong are no longer clear, he refuses to compromise his moral stance. To him, the truth must always be revealed, no matter how destructive it is. His belief that humanity must confront its own sins, no matter how painful the truth, reflects a deep sense of personal integrity, echoing Batman's "one rule". Rorschach sees any attempt to obscure the reality as a betrayal, and his unyielding devotion to this belief makes him both a tragic and uncompromising figure.

Rorschach represents the ideal of maintaining one’s personal code, no matter the consequences.

At first glance, Rorschach’s refusal to bend for the greater good seems reckless, and it is ultimately a suicidal gesture. His determination to expose the truth, especially in the face of Ozymandias' world-saving lie, makes him seem like a dangerous and delusional figure. Yet, in a world filled with corruption and manipulation, his commitment to truth can be seen as a form of integrity that others lack. His extreme actions force readers to reflect on the value of moral purity in a flawed world. Rorschach represents the ideal of maintaining one’s personal code, no matter the consequences.

Adrian's Argument Continues To Provoke Debate Among "Watchmen" Readers To This Day

Tragedy For The Greater Good

While undeniably extreme, Ozymandias' actions raise the argument about the end justifying the means. His vision of a peaceful world is not achieved by benevolence but by necessity. In his mind, there was no other way to prevent the destruction of civilization unless you controlled the fear that controlled the world. His calculated coldness and belief in peace at any cost resonate more today than they did in the 1980s; humanity has proven time and time again, how quickly it reacts to a common threat, and how easy the masses are to manipulate in advocacy or hostility toward said threat.

Given Moore's history with his sacrifices, Veidt’s vision of peace through sacrifice is less of a vilified choice and more of a pragmatic solution in a fractured world. He proves he is genuinely the smartest man in the world by enacting a plan that harnesses the volatility of public sentiment in times of crisis and how quickly it can reshape the world. As the modern world grows increasingly complex, the debate sparked by Watchmen's ending decades ago will continue to resonate with many people, as it continues to reflect a core philosophical argument about how best to achieve the greater good.

The Legacy Of Watchmen Will Always Be Tied To Its Infamous Ending

"I Did It Thirty-Five Minutes Ago": Why The Watchmen Finale Remains Important

As has been said time and again, Watchmen redefined the superhero genre by elevating it to a new level of narrative complexity, a process in which Alan Moore used his characters and plot to navigate more complicated moral and social questions than arguably had ever been done in comics before, at least not to the sustained degree that the series did. That intellectual depth and moral thorniness is what defines Watchmen's legacy, and the final major moral question the book asks is the culmination of everything Moore did to make the series a singular story in the medium.

Though many fans would like to say they would be Rorschach in such a scenario, it is hard to argue against the decision made by the surviving characters, including Doctor Manhattan.

Adrian Veidt's stunning line, "I did it thirty-five minutes ago," upended the traditional form of the superhero story's climax; not only could the heroes not "save the day" by stopping Vedit's plan, they were instead presented with the choice to be complicit after the fact, or expose him and make the tragedy he wrought be entirely in vain. Though many fans would like to say they would be Rorschach in such a scenario, it is hard to argue against the decision made by the surviving characters, including Doctor Manhattan, leaving Watchmen on a dark, unresolved note that is still impactful.

• 

  Watchmen

  In an alternate history where superheroes are real and significantly impact global events, the franchise delves into the complexities of morality, justice, and power. Starting with a graphic novel, it introduces a world where vigilantes face government crackdowns. Central characters, including Rorschach, Dr. Manhattan, and Ozymandias, navigate a plot involving political conspiracies and personal dilemmas. Subsequent adaptations, including films and a TV series, expand the narrative, exploring the legacy of the original heroes and the societal repercussions of their actions, blending past and present to address contemporary issues.

  Expand Collapse
• 

  Watchmen

  In the mid-eighties, Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons created Watchmen, changing the course of comics' history and essentially remaking how popular culture perceived the genre. Popularly cited as the point where comics came of age, Watchmen's sophisticated take on superheroes has been universally acclaimed for its psychological depth and realism.

  Expand Collapse