Box of Bunnies
Banned
Eh, I think his statement is reasonable. "We're content with what we did but it's flattering that people want to build on our work, best of luck to them" seems fairly mature and even handed.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DC Announces Watchmen Sequel/Prequel Thing: Before Watchmen, Coming This Summer
- Thread starter ElNarez
- Start date
- Status
Eh, I think his statement is reasonable. "We're content with what we did but it's flattering that people want to build on our work, best of luck to them" seems fairly mature and even handed.
krypt0nian
Banned
Fuck that. None of this is sacred.
Responses like yours make me want a Watchmen morning cartoon. :lol
In his defense, he may just be being polite in an interview.
Buddha Beam
Banned
I'll end up buying Minute Men and Silk Spectre just because Darwyn Cooke is awesome and Amanda Conner's art = <3
Lol, I can't agree with you more.
Box of Bunnies
Banned
Oh snap, didn't pay enough attention to the talent in the OP and didn't realise she was drawing some of this. Power Girl's the only monthly I've ever followed, and it was almost entirely on the strength of Conner's art.
Good thing I'm not morally opposed to this or anything. Guess I'll maybe be buying Silk Spectre.
I think he's going to be more disappointed in that they're likely to be just dark and grim with none of the important structural foundations or commentary on the format that he would have rather been the key takeaways from the book.
I don't think I've ever seen a comic book company make such a big deal out of something that no one asked for.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Eh, I'll read them. Loved Watchmen so any extended fiction should be fun.
QUOTED FOR TRUTH. For one, this is a property that has been largely untouched (at least in the comics medium) since 1986. 1986 people. Not counting the movie, I think the only appearance by a "Watchmen" character was an analogue of Doctor Manhattan that was featured in a spin-off of D.C.'s "Final Crisis" epic a couple years ago. Other than that, there was a downloadable video game based on the movie, some movie related toys and stuff, and that's about it. Not really anything based upon the original comic book material.
It's not some "sacred cow" or "holy grail" like you've been led to believe. There's plenty of flaws in the original series. Readers have somehow been blinded by bull**** nostalgia and comic fan-boy nonsense to see through this.
If the new Prequel stuff holds up to the original, then I say bring it on! If it sucks, then we'll have a field day with it and Alan Moore will have been correct all along.
Father_Brain
Banned
He washed his hands of the property years ago. He doesn't give a fuck.
Because it'll make DC much, much, much more money than anything starring new characters could in the current direct market. Ironically, Watchmen would probably never have been greenlit in 1985 were the DC/Marvel audience as insular as it is today.
NeonZ
Member
Huh? It could easily be grimlit, see the Vertigo titles and several miniseries. It just would never have reached a big audience or leave any impact in the industry.
Box of Bunnies
Banned
I always found the idea of Watchmen as a sacred cow that nobody should ever touch amusing purely because the original plan for it was to use Charlton characters. If you plan on playing with other people's characters, you've gotta be willing to let others do the same with yours.
It's not a sacred cow or holy grail, but what it also isn't is a comic book IP to be exploited and rehashed endlessly like all the rest of the garbage that gets published. It's a self-contained story, and a damn good one. The comic industry is desperate and pathetic enough to shit all over one of its finest representatives, it seems, but I'll be sticking with the "fuck you, go bankrupt" position rather than the "I liked this story, so therefore other unrelated people also working on this story forever as long as it makes money is great too" one.
Father_Brain
Banned
Perhaps I exaggerated a bit. But the broader point stands.
And looks like Alan Moore is vocally displeased, though not to the point of attempting to stop the project:
New York Times said:
Box of Bunnies
Banned
I mean, I'm not taking sides either way. I agree that the original story is absolutely complete in its own right and never needed to be touched again. Sometimes enough is enough.
But capitalists gonna capitalise and it was only a matter of time 'til something like this happened, so now the only question is whether the new works live up to the old ones. Sometimes you just need to accept the inevitable, especially in largely pulp mediums like cape comics.
But capitalists gonna capitalise and it was only a matter of time 'til something like this happened, so now the only question is whether the new works live up to the old ones. Sometimes you just need to accept the inevitable, especially in largely pulp mediums like cape comics.
The only thing Alan Moore doesn't give a fuck about is looking like a batshit insane person. I hope he sees one of these books and has a tiny little crazy fit.
That doesn't make any sense.
VGChampion
Member
I like how it looks like it's going to follow the same "mold" as the original. DC should try to innovate with this prequel thing if they want it to even have a chance of this miniseries being remembered in the future. The style the first one was written was Moore's way. These people should have figured out another thing to do. Writing a two page backup story in each issues just isn't original at all.
krypt0nian
Banned
The very word "needed" is a farce in this context. Nothing needs to be fleshed out.
If it sells it was a great idea. If not, then they'll publish something else. They are putting (mostly) top tier talent on it, and for that comic readers should be hyped.
If not, it was never intended for you anyway so no loss either way, huh?
Yup, Alan baby. Just like you were dependent on the work of the Charleton Comics creators that made your main characters.
If it sells it was a great idea. If not, then they'll publish something else. They are putting (mostly) top tier talent on it, and for that comic readers should be hyped.
If not, it was never intended for you anyway so no loss either way, huh?
Yup, Alan baby. Just like you were dependent on the work of the Charleton Comics creators that made your main characters.
At least if this was the case it would end up as a stupidly entertaining disaster.
D
Deleted member 20415
Unconfirmed Member
34 issues over 6 mini-series with an epilogue issue and a spin off pirate story... that screams of cheap grab. If they wanted to do a prequel, make a complete story prequel that doesn't sprawl like modern mega events.
The modern mega event wore me the hell out a few years ago (Civil War and Darkest Night being the last I could handle) and this just continues the tradition.
The modern mega event wore me the hell out a few years ago (Civil War and Darkest Night being the last I could handle) and this just continues the tradition.
There hasn't been a single sequel, prequel, or spin-off of the Watchmen since 1986.
1986
Don't play the "exploited/rehashed" card for something that has been largely untouched for twenty-five years.
I'm talking about the comics industry, where that "card" definitely applies.
Box of Bunnies
Banned
This is going to sell on the name alone. So in that sense it's already a great idea, for the publisher. What matters for readers, as far as it being a good idea or not, is the quality of the stories being told. Of course, we won't be able to tell that until we actually see what they put out.
So I'm being cautiously indifferent. If they're great stories? Well hey, awesome, that's some more cool stuff for me to read. If they're not? Well, that's a lesson learned for all involved.
Watchmen never "needed" a DD episodic brawler either, but I bought and got mild enjoyment from the first part of the game that came out after the movie.
krypt0nian
Banned
Eh it's work for hire and they own it just like any other of their properties. Not utilizing it when they feel it could make them money is irresponsible, especially when the alternative is considering it some sort of property above reproach.
Comics is a business, man. Let's not pretend otherwise. Those that are taken aback by this weren't going to buy it anyway and aren't DC's concern.
Because it's a business we should pander to them?
krypt0nian
Banned
I'm excited to read this based on the creators. I feel zero about properties that are above continuation. But to ignore that there's money to be had and call it a shameless cash grab is a bit silly from DC's perspective.
You personally don't want it? Cool. But DC is doing the right thing for its shareholders, and by getting the level of talent it has, for it's interested readers too.
krypt0nian
Banned
And then somehow loses them before the Watchmen series!
I don't think anyone would dispute that this move isn't motivated by money, as I'm sure it's the only reason it exists. The issue comes in with the actual necessity of telling these stories outside of making money, and I think you'll be hard-pressed to come up with one beyond the given reason.
When you get down to it, a series designed to be a big prequel to Watchmen is a really silly concept since what happens before the events of Watchmen is a big part of the original story.
Father_Brain
Banned
I'm finding it hard to disagree with this quote from JMS here:
I find it unlikely that most of those authors would approve of how Moore used their characters in LoEG and Lost Girls, after all. One could credibly argue that it's fundamentally different when the creator is still alive (and feels gypped by the original contract he signed), but I don't think that the original creator not approving inherently makes Before Watchmen some kind of atrocity; that'll depend on the quality of the books themselves.
I find it unlikely that most of those authors would approve of how Moore used their characters in LoEG and Lost Girls, after all. One could credibly argue that it's fundamentally different when the creator is still alive (and feels gypped by the original contract he signed), but I don't think that the original creator not approving inherently makes Before Watchmen some kind of atrocity; that'll depend on the quality of the books themselves.
krypt0nian
Banned
If it sells that's the only reason they need. I don't believe any comic needs to be made so that's moot IMO.
And there are large gaps in time not covered in the original series and plenty of room for additional storylines.
EDIT: And JMS' quote further backs up what I was saying. Moore appropriated the work of the Charleton Comics creators just to be able to write Watchmen. I think he's so full of himself that he forgets this.
I think the diffference is that for Moore, I'm sure that the idea of the story came first. After all, it's not like a company was asking him to exploit those characters.
With this, it's clear that they decided that they needed to make new stuff with these characters and only came up with the story afterwards.
krypt0nian
Banned
No different than how they plot out their schedule most times. "Hmm we haven't seen Animal Man in a while. Get me some pitches and let's make this happen."
EDIT: I'm done here. I see zero issue with DC comics putting out books with characters that DC comics owns. Anything else is just sacred cow stuff.
Which is relevant to the shareholders and the shareholders alone, not to consumers.
As a consumer it's a little ridiculous to praise something just because it's going to show benefit to a corporation's bottom line. "Oh hey, gas prices just raised by a dollar! But the market can bear it, which means the oil corporations will make more money! YAYYYY!!!"
Fair point, but the characters he uses in LoEG and Lost Girls long ago entered into the mass cultural consciousness and have been parodied and reinterpreted and re-appropriated time and time again. Here we have DC/Warner Bros commissioning a prequel to their 'property' to cash in on high interest in the wake of the movie.
It feels wrong.
krypt0nian
Banned
I'm not praising it for that. I love this list of creators. I was talking about all the cash grab claims by saying "of course, just like every other comic that's not a PSA"
But I've said both things multiple times already.
Box of Bunnies
Banned
You mean the movie that released nearly three years ago and barely broke even? Yeah, real big wave they're riding there.
Oh that I agree with, from a creative standpoint I have zero interest in actually reading the books. There can't be anything too interesting to tell about the characters at this point and were I tasked with actually writing any of these books I'd be sweating bullets.
But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done, could end up being pretty awesome.
- Status