DC: "Would you like the Watchmen rights back, Alan Moore?" Alan Moore: "**** you, DC"

[8Diagrams(WU)]

His work of course was the first of an era where comic books distanced themselves from the earlier perception and format of comics. However I dont think that comics today would be the same as they were in the decades before if he did not exist.

I mean no disrespect to anyone but I do feel this way so please forgive me, but I think his contributions, while they should be celebrated for being the first mainstreamer to take a comic into a new platform, are overrated for that same reason. I believe that progression would have been made because comics are a reflection of the demands and interests in our culture and society. Alan Moore does not define comics today. Popular culture and our society do and will do so forever. If his talents are those that define genres, then today pornographic comic books would be far more mainstream which is something moore is very fond of.

Please accept my thoughts on the matter with a great deal of respect for everyone here. Maybe I just will never get it but I think his arrogance just ads a bitter taste to how I perceive him as a person as well.

 

[Tron Bonne]

His work of course was the first of an era where comic books distanced themselves from the earlier perception and format of comics. However I dont think that comics today would be the same as they were in the decades before if he did not exist.

I mean no disrespect to anyone but I do feel this way so please forgive me, but I think his contributions, while they should be celebrated for being the first mainstreamer to take a comic into a new platform, are overrated for that same reason. I believe that progression would have been made because comics are a reflection of the demands and interests in our culture and society. Alan Moore does not define comics today. Popular culture and our society do and will do so forever. If his talents are those that define genres, then today pornographic comic books would be far more mainstream which is something moore is very fond of.

Please accept my thoughts on the matter with a great deal of respect for everyone here. Maybe I just will never get it but I think his arrogance just ads a bitter taste to how I perceive him as a person as well.

Well, yes, of course culture and such will always reflect in its entertainment in some way or another, but there's no denying that some people's works have had a influence or definition on the medium they work in. Moore's Watchmen, and his own deconstruction of the superhero in other stories, is still considered more of the biggest influences on superhero comics (whether that's good or bad, of course, is debatable. And even before Watchmen, Moore's Swamp Thing opened all kinds of doors for new ground in that area. Of course, that's not to say everything he's done has been as influential or that only he was influential in his time.

So, yeah, most entertainment/art will be influenced by the culture and society around it, but it's not as if said society and culture just shouted 'COMIC BOOK' and comic books magically appeared to suit the time. You can't ignore the people behind the paper. I mean, books Eisner, Kirby, and Lee wrote absolutely had influence from the culture around them, but you can't totally discount that they created works that had influences in the comic medium

 

[hippie_hunter]

Don Murphy (producer of LXG, From Hell, Transformers) has something to say about this:

Go read that. I'll wait.

Now I am going to tell you why it is shoddy and inept. Alan Moore doesn't OWN Watchmen. Any of it. DC Comics does. It can do sequels now. And prequels.
And any damn thing it wants. So why would DC offer to give Alan back something in exchange for something it already owns????

Now it used to try to respect Alan. But the problem is Alan is so addled, he can't remember his position from week to week. His most recent position seems to be that because DC kept Watchmen and V For Vendetta in print for 25 years, paying him millions in the process, they suck and should give the books back to him. That makes sense to someone who smokes hash and prays to a large snake God, but not to any of the rest of us.

I used to be friends with Alan. Then he changed. He gets petulant a lot lately. He doesn't like anybody doing anything with his books, which is fine, until you realize that he does plenty with the books of Lewis Carroll, Robert Louis Stevenson and many, MANY others. He starts screaming that he doesn't take money from the movies, but he takes money from the comics and that's where he feels wronged. He doesn't make a lick of sense.

But anyway, back to the point. Once, many years ago, DC was going to do Watchmen figures. They asked ALan to support them and he did. They did this as a courtesy , not because he had any rights. ALan THEN went mental over some other perceived slight and withdrew his support. DC respected that and scrapped the toys. But by the time the film came out last year, they were done with his constant whining. They released toys, videogames, making of books, book marks and stickers. They could give a **** about Alan Moore who had become a sad, cantankerous Grandpa raging at the shifting winds.

So why do Scott Thill and Wired run this stupid article? Wired probably doesn't know better, and Thill becomes just the latest journalist who will print anything Grandpa says and treat it as news. He's lazy and arrogant and just plain wrong. In a private email he asked me to "Chill," which is likely the mode in which he did his work.

DC made no such offer, I will swear to it. DC's reply makes no mention of one in the piece. Thill simply took Grandpa's story and made it his own.

This is journalism today.

Meanwhile, while I think sequel and prequels are a dumb idea, expect them to happen whether or not Grandpa wants them.

In fact, maybe next time he appears on the SIMPSONS Alan could be in the Old Age home with Grandpa Simpson- "Back in the 80s I reinvented graphic novels...they were called comic books back then and cost only a dime. I started with a comic called Marvelman. You know it as Miracleman. It was a ripoff of the Original Captain Marvel. When I worked on it we didn't bother to get permission from the copyright owner we just went and did it. Those were the days..."

 

[IBRAH08]

I used to be friends with Alan. Then he changed. He gets petulant a lot lately. He doesn't like anybody doing anything with his books, which is fine, until you realize that he does plenty with the books of Lewis Carroll, Robert Louis Stevenson and many, MANY others. He starts screaming that he doesn't take money from the movies, but he takes money from the comics and that's where he feels wronged. He doesn't make a lick of sense.

Wait, like, actually?

 

[Kurosawa]

His work of course was the first of an era where comic books distanced themselves from the earlier perception and format of comics. However I dont think that comics today would be the same as they were in the decades before if he did not exist.

I mean no disrespect to anyone but I do feel this way so please forgive me, but I think his contributions, while they should be celebrated for being the first mainstreamer to take a comic into a new platform, are overrated for that same reason. I believe that progression would have been made because comics are a reflection of the demands and interests in our culture and society. Alan Moore does not define comics today. Popular culture and our society do and will do so forever. If his talents are those that define genres, then today pornographic comic books would be far more mainstream which is something moore is very fond of.

Please accept my thoughts on the matter with a great deal of respect for everyone here. Maybe I just will never get it but I think his arrogance just ads a bitter taste to how I perceive him as a person as well.

I was there, I was reading comics then and I can say with total confidence that him and Frank Miller changed mainstream superhero comics more than anyone ever. Not for the better in my opinion, but superhero comics before them and after them are completely different animals.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Wait, like, actually?

Pretty sure that's part of Don Murphy's quote.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Lol, that whole Don Murphy thing was ******ed, why did you even bother posting that? Murphy doesn't know anything about this situation (or most of the other things he commented on), and he's obviously fairly bitter himself, considering the things that happened between him and Moore during the LXG lawsuit fiasco.

I doubt Moore is going to outright lie about this, and if he had, I'm sure DC or someone within DC would have denied it by now.

 

[IBRAH08]

Pretty sure that's part of Don Murphy's quote.

Hahahaha oh yeah. THanks Corp. I didn't see that colon. A little punctuation makes a big difference. I was about to be like, "WHo are you, Hippie?" though.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I guess that would have made hippie Don Murphy

 

[Karelia]

I'm probably one of the very few people who wouldn't mind seeing a Watchmen prequel/sequel. Maybe it's just out of curiosity, but I still think it would be cool to see a new Watchmen graphic novel. If they get a good creative team to work on it, then why wouldn't you guys want to see it happen? Comic Books get different writers all the time... But I guess this is a little bit different situation with Watchmen.

I guess I try to be optimistic about anything, though. If they could at least get Dave Gibbons involved with this, if they actually make a prequel, would be awesome. Since he doesn't seem to hate Watchmen.

Not really surprised DC would try and do this. I mean Watchmen is successful, if something is successful and praised it's not a surprise they'd do this. At least they asked Alan Moore first...? xD But I think Moore is a little too harsh. DC is probably a little different of a company now than they were in the past... Maybe not, but who knows....

 

[hippie_hunter]

I guess that would have made hippie Don Murphy

Yes, I am Don Murphy

 

[hippie_hunter]

Lol, that whole Don Murphy thing was ******ed, why did you even bother posting that? Murphy doesn't know anything about this situation (or most of the other things he commented on), and he's obviously fairly bitter himself, considering the things that happened between him and Moore during the LXG lawsuit fiasco.

I doubt Moore is going to outright lie about this, and if he had, I'm sure DC or someone within DC would have denied it by now.

I thought that it would be an interesting read. Though I do agree that Murphy comes off very bitter, and an ass, in his comments.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I thought that it would be an interesting read. Though I do agree that Murphy comes off very bitter, and an ass, in his comments.

I kind of like how he keeps referring to Moore as Grandpa Moore, and they're only like ten years apart in age

I'm probably one of the very few people who wouldn't mind seeing a Watchmen prequel/sequel. Maybe it's just out of curiosity, but I still think it would be cool to see a new Watchmen graphic novel. If they get a good creative team to work on it, then why wouldn't you guys want to see it happen? Comic Books get different writers all the time... But I guess this is a little bit different situation with Watchmen.

I guess I try to be optimistic about anything, though. If they could at least get Dave Gibbons involved with this, if they actually make a prequel, would be awesome. Since he doesn't seem to hate Watchmen.

Not really surprised DC would try and do this. I mean Watchmen is successful, if something is successful and praised it's not a surprise they'd do this. At least they asked Alan Moore first...? xD But I think Moore is a little too harsh. DC is probably a little different of a company now than they were in the past... Maybe not, but who knows....

Well, I don't know if I would go as far as to say Moore outright hates Watchmen, but I think the hate is more directed at what it spawned, and the unintentional role it had in this whole 'Dark Age' of comics.

Though, I guess most people are probably against it because it is kind of seen as sacred to a lot of fans and readers. They don't see it necessary because, even if Moore and Gibbons did have initial plans for continuation of the story, it's really not something that needs any of that. If those continuations would have seen light originally, odds are it wouldn't have been nearly as well loved and received (Like Justice to Kingdom Come, for example).

I mean, personally speaking, I'm impartial to it. I was never the biggest fan of the book, and I know even if they do these sequels/prequels, they'll probably just kind of fizz away with time. But I do kind of understand why people are defensive of it; like or hate it, Watchmen is a very, very important book in comic history for a lot of reasons.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I just keep going back to Kingdom Come. Great story, but I look at The Kingdom and Johns' JSA arc and Magog and I can't help thinking how it's a little bit tainted now by all the crap it spawned. When you've got a really amazing story with a clear beginning, middle, and end, going back to franchise it and milk it for more doesn't seem to work out too well, and it comes off as crass besides.

 

[Evil Twin]

Late to the party, but I fail to see how this was really a story.

It seems that the following situation is true:

DC would like more work from Alan Moore.

Alan Moore once wanted the rights to Watchmen back.

The higher ups at DC proposed a compromise, you do something Watchmen related, we'll give you the rights to Watchmen.

Alan Moore said no.

Nothing seems terribly unreasonable to me. Heck, Alan Moore once openly talked about spin offs from Watchmen. Would anyone be worked up about a Minuteman special by Moore and Gibbons? A Tales of the Black Freighter anthology? The Life and Death of Dollar Bill? The Life and Death of the Silhouette?

Also, the idea that DC has somehow "vandalized" Alan Moore's work with the company seems to be completely without merit. Reprinting his work, periodically updating the colors, and sending him a regular royalty check seems a far cry from "vandalizing" his work. Yeah, DC is terrible for reprinting Watchmen to meet demand and sending millions in the direction of Moore and Gibbons in the form of royalties. Heck, DC was pretty generous in the first place in allowing obvious knockoffs of their Charlton characters to have a "creator owned" reversion clause.

Alan is a very demanding creator. DC is a big time publisher that has their own agenda. It's no wonder there was conflict. There's really no moral superiority here. Especially since other creators, and friends of Moore, like Neil Gaiman and Dave Gibbons can find common ground with DC.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Where are you getting this thing about vandalizing his work or whatever.

And I'm not sure what you're first question is? DC seemingly offered Moore the rights to Watchmen back in exchange for doing some kind of prequel/sequel material. How is it not a story...?

And if Moore had the taken Watchmen to a creator-owned company at the time, DC couldn't have done anything. The Watchmen characters were originally the Charlton characters, and DC had him change them. Outside a couple of a visual similarities, the differences are pretty big between the two. If DC had tried to sue Moore and Gibbons if they were publishing through either an indie company or shelf publishing, it's doubtful DC would have won. So, yeah, not sure how 'generous' that was on DC's part

 

[Evil Twin]

Where are you getting this thing about vandalizing his work or whatever.

From this quote from Fifthfiend

"Comic creators aren't obliged to be polite to companies that **** them over and vandalize their works."

While we can argue about the first part of that equation, I hardly see how DC has vandalized Moore's works. Heck, they've gone well out of their way not to tread over them.

And I'm not sure what you're first question is? DC seemingly offered Moore the rights to Watchmen back in exchange for doing some kind of prequel/sequel material. How is it not a story...?

Maybe because I don't see much new here. Anyone think that this is the first and only time that DC has reached out to Moore to see if some compromise could be reached? I don't.

Especially without any idea of what kind of prequel/sequel was discussed. I ask again, would anybody object to a Tales of the Black Freighter book?

And if Moore had the taken Watchmen to a creator-owned company at the time, DC couldn't have done anything. The Watchmen characters were originally the Charlton characters, and DC had him change them. Outside a couple of a visual similarities, the differences are pretty big between the two. If DC had tried to sue Moore and Gibbons if they were publishing through either an indie company or shelf publishing, it's doubtful DC would have won. So, yeah, not sure how 'generous' that was on DC's part

Perhaps not, but apparently the genesis to the story was Dick Giordano asking around to see if anybody had some ideas for the Charlton characters. Moore pitched something and Dick Giordano decided to go ahead with it with the exception that the characters would be changed to non-Charlton. Giordano could have very easily decided to go ahead with the Charlton characters in which case the subsequent complaining would be moot. And then Levitz/Giordano made the generous offer of adding a reversion clause to the "not quite Charlton" characters with a really generous royalties package and bonus compensation if someone wanted to make a movie out of it. Considering that Moore had done nothing but work-for-hire for DC prior, it was well above industry standards for the time. It was apparently a better deal than what Miller got for Ronin, Byrne got for any of his new Superman creations, etc. It perhaps wasn't the best contract in the industry, especially in hindsight, but it did make Moore and Gibbons wealthy men.

If it was a few years later, anyone doubt that it would have been an Elseworld's work-for-hire project?