Going Clear, a documentary by Alex Gibney about the Church of Scientology, aired on Sunday and has already made waves throughout Hollywood. Many celebrities, who know people involved in the church, have been tweeting openly about the effect the film had on them. Meanwhile, the Church has been trying to dissuade anybody from believing the “lies” that had been exposed. It is obvious that Going Clear has struck a chord with viewers, but far less obvious is how much of an effect it will ultimately have.

In terms of the information presented in the documentary, Going Clear is not “news.” Everything exposed here has been reported on heavily by various newspapers and online media, and the documentary was based on the previously published book Going Clear by Lawrence Wright (which I’m currently in the middle of, and finding fascinating). Especially well-publicized has been the “Anonymous” attacks against Scientology, originally spurred by 4chan board members and now consisting of, well, anybody who wants to refer to themselves as “Anonymous.”

However, until now, none of these attacks or exposes (with the possible exception of a hilarious South Park episode) have garnered mainstream attention. To really learn about the atrocities committed by the church, you have to go out of your way to find it, to purchase a book on the topic, or read several-page-long articles and testimonies. While these are ultimately small commitments, they are a lot for the standard online attention span. By simply being an HBO documentary about a large, infamously litigious entity, Going Clear is more accessible and high-profile than any previous attempt to expose the Church of Scientology’s secrets.

So, subject matter and significance aside, how does Going Clear actually fair? Incredibly well. The documentary is remarkably organized and, well, watchable, despite serving as a history of Scientology, an L Ron Hubbard biopic, an expose on Sea Org, an account of former executives and their actions, a damning indictment of the IRS’s caving on Scientology as a “religion,” a testimonial by former members personally damaged by the Church, and an insight into the Church’s dealings with its biggest celebrity endorsers. Given all of these subjects, Going Clear could have easily been a mess of facts thrown at the viewer. Instead, through a miracle of editing, it’s difficult to even notice the seams while watching. Subjects bleed in and out of each other with ease.

It helps that every facet of this story is fascinating. Despite a two-hour runtime, Going Clear never feels like it is wasting your time. Gibney classifies his interviewees as intelligent and largely “normal” early on, insinuating that even the viewer is capable of this type of devotion, or “Prison of Belief,” as the book and film’s subtitle calls it. It is easy to sympathize with the people telling their story: they clearly regret their time with the church, and their actions, but felt 100% at the moment that they were working for the greater good.

One can hope that the response around Going Clear will have an effect on the Church of Scientology’s power, but precedent has shown that it is unlikely. However, even if this all comes to nothing, Going Clear will remain one of this decade’s most powerful documentaries for the way it exposes the dangers of belief and devotion. It is an absolute must-watch.