You know it's true: The Watchmen 2 Thread

[Themanofbat]

I might get them in trades (once they're discounted)... I have little to no interest as to what came before.

[Tron Bonne]

Originally Posted by TDK Joker

I just read an interview with J. Michael Straczynski and he brings up a very, very good and fair point about writing for characters created by Moore:

"Leaving aside the fact that the Watchmen characters were variations on pre-existing characters created for the Charleton Comics universe, it should be pointed out that Alan has spent most of the last decade writing very good stories about characters created by other writers, including Alice (from Alice in Wonderland), Dorothy (from Wizard of normal">Oz), Wendy (from Peter Pan), as well as Captain Nemo, the Invisible Man, Jekyll and Hyde, and Professor Moriarty (used in the successful League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). I think one loses a little of the moral high ground to say, “I can write characters created by Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, Robert Louis Stevenson, Arthur Conan Doyle and Frank Baum, but it’s wrong for anyone else to write my characters.”

I may be wrong, but I don't think Moore has ever really tried to make the point that it's "wrong" to write those character, per say. I think people have just taken his disapproval and mocking of the idea as saying that. I think his main point against it as being how unneeded it would be, and the tendency of the industry to be heavily trying to recapture certain stories that were big at the time in recent years (Like the way Marvel tried to recapture The Kree War with Secret Invasion, and are bringing back Age of Apocalypse). I could be wrong, though, maybe he has said that in the past, I just haven't seen it.

Anyway, there's some good teams on there, much better than I expected. I'm still not too interested, though, so I'll probably still pass. I'm pretty curious about the Silk Spectre one, though, due to Connor.

[HighFivingMF]

Originally Posted by HighFivingMF

I was hoping for him and Bermejo.

I was right!?!?

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[JTStarkiller]

Damn. Most of the concern I had about this project has washed away after seeing these creative teams. Azz and Bermejo on a Rorschach book? Darwyn Cooke writing and drawing Minutemen? Those two are instant buys. Everything else looks great as well. Label me excited.

[antsman41]

These guys don't need prequels, we know all of their important back stories already. If anything, this will probably retcon Moore facts. Which is dumb...

And if they make these "one-off" stories that fit into the history, than they are just pointless because they therefor didn't mean anything to the characters.

[Motown Marvel]

the talent roster is incredibly inspiring. but im still so turned off by this idea. it's grossly unnecessary and clearly a cash grab.

[Kane52630]

Yeah I don't know what to think of it, Watchmen should stand alone, but I know once they release the trade i'll end up buying it.

[flash13]

I'll check these out, especially the Rorschach and Ozymandias ones.

[Pyro Man]

Originally Posted by JTStarkiller

Damn. Most of the concern I had about this project has washed away after seeing these creative teams. Azz and Bermejo on a Rorschach book? Darwyn Cooke writing and drawing Minutemen? Those two are instant buys. Everything else looks great as well. Label me excited.

At least those two should be worth buying. I also plan to buy Comedian (though J.G. Jones is hit and miss for me) and Silk Spectre due to the involvement of Cooke and Azzarelo. The others I'm not as sure about but will probably try them. I'm wouldn't say I'm quite excited but I'm cautiously (oh so cautiously) optimistic. Will these comics touch the greatness of Watchmen? Probably not but that doesn't mean they can't be good reads and solid companion pieces.

As for Moore's reaction to the news I'm not sure where somebody whose dabbled in playing around with characters from classic literature gets off saying "I don't want money. What I want is for this not to happen. As far as I know, there weren't that many prequels or sequels to Moby Dick." But I can understand why he's upset.

[Symbiotic]

I'm all over these. Every one.

[Pyro Man]

http://shelf-life.ew.com/2012/02/01/...ive-details/2/

Entertainment Weekly article on the whole affair with exclusive tidbits from Darwyn Cooke:

Darwyn Cooke-–whose own highly regarded superhero work includes The New Frontier–explained his vision for Silk Spectre: “One of the first things I did was go back through the original book and look at all the female characters and their position in the story and the arcs they had. What I realized is that as much as I really like Laurie, she’s really only just Dr. Manhattan’s girlfriend and then Nite Owl‘s girlfriend. We never get to see her being self-sufficient and dealing with herself and dealing with her own problems. She’s there for a man. I came up with the idea of looking at the brief period of time when she becomes an adult.” And so the series will take place in the mid-1960s, and track Laurie’s maturation and heroic evolution in the year prior to joining a team of superheroes known as the Crimebusters. Cooke says the book will also focus on how Laurie’s superhero stage mom, the original Silk Spectre, influenced her daughter’s life. “Sally’s very interested in the legacy that can be created from the Silk Spectre brand,” says Cooke. “There’s a little bit of that Toddlers and Tiaras thing going on.” He adds that collaborating with Conner was essential: “The only way I could do this is if Amanda drew it. I desperately wanted this to not feel like a guy who is pushing 50 writing a teenage girl.”

“Every couple months on a slow Saturday I would go down to the store and pick up a few books,” says Cooke. “I could remember picking up the first couple of Watchmen and being fascinated by it. Alan had completely reinvented how comics told stories.” But Cooke does find himself less enamored these days by one of the story’s defining aspects: The “pervasive darkness” of its worldview, which was largely an expression of the British Moore’s perspective on the Cold War, the legacy of ’60s counterculture, and the conservative policies of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. While Cooke believes Watchmen was “note perfect” for its time, “I’d consider it a masterpiece if it had been able to have found what I would refer to as a hopeful note. … Again, it’s not hard to understand [where Alan was coming from], and that sort of storytelling does have an allure for young people. [But] I think the older you get, the more you look for hope or positive things. Maybe I’m just getting old.” With that in mind, Cooke says Silk Spectre “is probably going to be the most hopeful of all the books.”

Not sure I'd agree that Watchmen should have been more hopeful but I'm a pretty bleak guy.

Also, some art courtesy of IGN:


















I like all of these, the covers for Minutemen and Silk Spectre are the best looking ones though. I'm not sure how I feel about the Crimison Corsair business. I'd rather have a Black Freighter back up or even a separate Black Freighter mini but in either case this will probably be the weakest part of the whole event in all likelihood.

[Kane52630]

You know, ever since they released the DC logos I wondered why they showed one for Watchmen.

[Pyro Man]

Interesting piece from Newsarama with opinions from several creators including Peter David and Kurt Busiek.

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/the-...en-120201.html

Peter David's feelings on the subject probably come closest to mirroring my own, albeit I'm not as optimistic about it:

When you’re talking about “creators,” I suspect you’re mostly talking about Alan Moore. David Gibbons’ judicious phrasing about the endeavor, I think, expresses a positive mindset in seeing the work as a tribute, an homage, especially when one considers that Watchmen began its creative life as an updating of the Charlton characters; if it had remained that, then Moore would have had nothing to say about ownership to begin with, “draconian” contracts or no.

I think Moore is on more slippery grounds, asserting that these prequels are DC's simply depending upon 25 year old ideas of his, implying that it’s a sign of some sort of creative bankruptcy. Yes, Moore — whom I’ve never had the honor of meeting — is correct that there is no sequel to “Moby Dick.” But Moore’s position is odd considering he took characters created by Jules Verne and Bram Stoker and turned them into superheroes, and transformed beloved literary heroines into subjects of erotica. Does public domain automatically make one morally superior in recycling the iconic characters created by authors who are no longer around to voice their protests? Considering his Moby Dick comparison, apparently he doesn’t think so. Does the fact that it's a corporation taking the initiative rather than a single individual automatically make the endeavor inferior? That’s a hard argument to make considering that a corporate entity desiring to utilize its properties led to “Watchmen” in the first place. The fact that Moore is so vehemently opposed to the other authors working upon his characters — characters that are pastiches of Charlton Comics creators — might tell you something about how L. Frank Baum would likely have reacted to Moore's handling of Dorothy. And if that's the case, people who stridently protest Watchmen prequels might want to reconsider the moral validity of their ire.

To me, DC's announcement simply means that Alan Moore's work has reached the iconic status of such characters as Superman and Swamp Thing, about both of whom Moore has graced us with some of the most compelling and memorable stories ever told. Let us hope that the storytelling bar that Moore has set in his own work on other people's creations will be met — and perhaps even exceeded — by those who are now following his lead.

[Watchman]

People who say that there isn't a difference between LOEG and Watchmen prequels are wrong.

And damn you DC! Cooke writing and drawing Golden Age superheroes is something I can't pass up. Probably check out Rorschach and the Comedian.

[Sgt.Pepper]

The creative talent line up is very promising, so the potential is there, but I'm still on my guard about this. However, I'll probably buy and read these when they're gathered together in one volume.

[The Morningstar]

I don't like the idea of this at all. But they've got some great talent working on the books, so...

[Motown Marvel]

yeah, when moore "recycles" characters from classic literature, he's redefining them in a completely different context than from their original source material. that is not happening here with these characters. they are the same characters being used and continued in the same context. And with certain characters and stories that is expected and necessary and it works (i.e. superman, batman, etc). but the watchmen characters were devised for a specific reason and that purpose was fulfilled completely with the original graphic novel. to try to go back and expand on it does come across as nostalgic recycling of decades old ideas in an attempt to make a cheap cash grab.

[WompuM]

Originally Posted by Watchman

People who say that there isn't a difference between LOEG and Watchmen prequels are wrong.

And damn you DC! Cooke writing and drawing Golden Age superheroes is something I can't pass up. Probably check out Rorschach and the Comedian.

You read the newest issue of Shade? Cooke dominated that ****.

[Raiden]

As a fan of the original graphic novel, I'm not very excited about DC's plan to make prequel miniseries for the major characters from the GN. I understand that they want to make alot of money, and maybe even use them as springboard for a new Watchmen movie, but I thought that the original story should've been a standalone and Alan Moore imo clearly wrote it as such. However, even though I don't think it's a good idea, this project does have some talents that I'm interested in, such as JMS and Adam Hughes, so I might be curious enough to check it out in the future. I think DC knows that too, that's why they're forging ahead without Alan Moore's blessing or his participation.

[Kane52630]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/bo...ries.html?_r=1

Alan Moore told The New York Times: "I tend to take this latest development as a kind of eager confirmation that they are still apparently dependent on ideas that I had 25 years ago."

[Sawyer]

I swore to myself that if this ever happened, I'd be firmly against it...... but........ That ****ing Minutemen cover. ****ing Cooke!!! And Azzarello and Bermejo on Rorschach?! Good God....

[Kane52630]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

I swore to myself that if this ever happened, I'd be firmly against it...... but........ That ****ing Minutemen cover. ****ing Cooke!!! And Azzarello and Bermejo on Rorschach?! Good God....

I know lol they got the right people to do it.


here's the high res covers:

[craigdbfan]

Not really happy with this because Watchmen pretty much covered all its bases with past, present and future.

But I have to admit this cover art is incredibly sexy.

[taskmaster]

Originally Posted by Kane52630

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/bo...ries.html?_r=1

Alan Moore being a delusional, egotistical ass? Surprising.

[Wesley Dodds]

No.