Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
TV
Byrne Robotics > TV << Prev Page of 10 Next >>
Topic: Watchmen Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 470
Posted: 22 November 2019 at 1:55am | IP Logged | 1 post reply

...and if it's taken as or meant as a great work of literature then I'm just really baffled.

Well, it seems to be. 

One of the 100 greatest novels of the 20th Century and all that. It could all be a conspiracy just to please the capricious Mr. Moore, but seeing he largely disowns it along with all his material in the hands of corporations it seems unlikely.

Like someone said on the Flat Earthers thread: "Cui bono?" DC/Warner definitely push it as such but if it were up to them to select a masterpiece I'd bet they'd choose one whose author doesn't badmouth them every chance he gets and vowed not to work for them anymore more than 30 years ago.

Maybe if they had read Wonder Warthog (really?) or Squadron Supreme they would put those in Watchmen's place. 

Or, maybe a lot of qualified people and millions of fans that keep it in print think it's excellent. Occam's Razor.

They say Mr. Moore had all this selfless uncorrupt  love, wanted only to elevate and redeem... well those 1963 books could've fooled me! The fun of those came with a grinding of a very sharp axe... 

You know, it is possible to love something (in this case let's say the medium of comics) and also criticize it's darker aspects (in this case, the incredibly lousy treatment this industry dispenses to its creators), and make some sort of valid point. 

I'm repulsed by so-called fans harassing the heirs of Siegel & Shuster, Bill Finger and Jack Kirby among many others while defending the multi-billionaire media conglomerates that own the characters these artists created but at the same time I love me some Batman. What can you do.

There are people with super-powers in costumes... a form developed for the loose change of twelve year olds circa 1938... get over it already!

Who needs to "get over it", exactly? If you're referring to Mr. Moore he has, decades ago. Watchmen fans? Superhero fans in general? Well, we're in a forum mostly dedicated to discussing them, so I guess that's not gonna happen anytime soon.

Dickens and Poe among many others developed their form for the loose change of the common people too. Now their work is considered great literature. Does the prospect of something along those lines happening with the people in costumes with superpowers (in this case via Watchmen) bother you for some reason?

I don't know if Mr. Moore was only moved by his "selfless uncorrupt love" and "wanted to elevate and redeem" but I'm certain you clearly don't.

PS:

The "people in costumes with superpowers" thing you keep doing is the equivalent of "spandex" and "underwear on the outside". It's obviously demeaning to a form of storytelling all of us here appreciate, including yourself I presume. 

Also, it's cheap and easy. I could say "Moby Dick" is about a silly captain obsessed with a big fish and go "Heh, heh, so that's what they call great literature these days?"

It doesn't make you look smart or sophisticated, quite the opposite.








Edited by Rodrigo castellanos on 22 November 2019 at 2:07am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 1640
Posted: 22 November 2019 at 11:47am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

Okay, face front true believer! But are you really enjoying yourself 'darker' themes? Are millions and millions sensitized, loving... actual readers? Or is this just counting the movie Alan Moore himself disowns, maybe even hates?

I see more hate than love, and I'm calling that like I see it, but if you want to turn that upside down and call me the hater well, where is the great industry now that Mr. Moore has supposedly (uncredited by so many) built so selflessly but can no longer participate in because it cannot handle true mature literature?

The followers and lovers kept going 'dark', and purportedly real and adult, meanwhile kids will be stick with that marketing machine of big eyes and spikey hair from japan because it's more fun to them. But a lot of serious and truly true fans turned pro are explicitly embarrassed by those kids, don't want them as their readers. I don't think that is true of Mr. Moore though. I wonder if he saw that in some of his biggest fans? Everything had to be 'important', explicit, nihilistic, extreme. Extreme muscles, extreme violence, extreme sexuality, extreme praise. Well, it's a damned weird fit and that is why the actual readership for super characters (not talking movies and tv, usually based on older runs of the comics) is down to an extreme low point. No kids no future. Watchmen, Dark Knight? Interesting experiments, but wrong path, no future but going further to extremes and fringe interests, also wrong format... by which I don't mean comic story but the costumes, secret identities, sidekicks, magical powers... oh, that is except for Miller or Moore to make fun of puncture and grind into the dirt with a spiked boot and be hailed as hard core and clever for it. Where are we? A cycle of restarts, dead superheroes that come back, a mass medium become a smaller cult collectable with professional condition assessors and fewer places to find them. Thanks so much true artistes?

Jack Kirby created, Alan Moore merely disassembles for the most part... no, I just don't get it. The only thing increased is the level of pretension. If you don't like what a company is for and what it does and what the money involved is there for., don't trust it.. just don't support it, and by the way Alan Moore and all these other people who are a big name with a certain crowd (and yes, of course I know I am nothing), they all supported it to get what they wanted and where they wanted. Boo hoo hoo. Jack Kirby got stepped on indeed, and his wife, I'm not arguing that, certainly not with people who didn't actually know the real people. He is still being used like crazy by all sides and nobody looks good to me. I can't see where it has anything to do with Alan Moore or his grievances which he has a perfect right to and I wouldn't argue about it with him. He can do his own thing without big companies, many are and do, did in the '60s in the undergrounds. And by the way many underground cartoonists I personally met and talked to circa 1986-87 were every single one dismayed at what had become of the mass media superhero comics! The kind of readership it was almost violently against, and the sort of people they were beginning to focus on for the future. I don't see the love in any of that.

Thanks for the really wild Swamp Thing (copyright, tm, registered property of DC comics) comics though. Those I really did enjoy for awhile. Not going to put them next to Steinbeck. I don't remember Steinbeck or Hawthorne or Alice Munro, Malcolm Lowry, even Isaac Asimov, having swamp monster guys in the mix... for the commercial visual gimmjick to hook the stunted adult reader audience.

There, I will just say it as much as I can, the most strident, most serious, adult superhero graphic sequential narrative fans are a word that begins with R and which is very politically incorrect to say and not meant to include actual people who have no control over the state. They aimed for the limited experience and intelligent audience to wow with their comparative sophistication. Now what kind of person takes a man in tights with muscles, created by another artist (and Watchmen, every one was an obvious doppelganger of the Charlton characters whose acquisition sparked this pinnacle of creativity and clever in-jokes) owned by a large company, to create an edifice to their own ego among a small increasingly closed off fanatic cult who they then go on to despise? Love it all you want, I see it as retreating into darkness, Carl Barks and his talking ducks opened up a world of interests outside of ever more super characters to think about, Jack Kirby should lead to the text science-fiction and mythologies he drew from so wonderfully.

Enjoy, more than once if you really must, but enough with the messianic inflation, the ever decreasing circles of homages to this nihilistic ultimatum of puncturing the old super characters. The good vs. evil archetypes are for the twelve year old level superhero comics that use to have multiple millions of readers per issue, they do not work in real life, you'd think Alan Moore readers and Moore himself would've gotten that message from his own works. Another ten or twenty years of I am the pure altruistic giving creator vs. the evil big money world against 'us'? Go do something that can actually grow, somewhere else maybe, and produce positive fruit rather than tearing down with nothing but retread Wonder Warthog without the laughs epics or literary intent I say. It's an airtight garage as Moebius and Jerry Cornelius knew.

There's a big wide world out there, generations of literature minus any genre tropes, and simplistic cardboard cutout props, which according to Philip K. Dick can become all too real and dehumanizing even if you think you are exposing them, pushing them over. You have to look beyonf them, not stay myopically focused on the small paperdoll (or Perky Pat) stages. There's a place for superheroes and their moral struggles to be played out... I think it was and can be good for young readers, and adults can enjoy them just like the talking ducks or Krazy Kat can be read by adults and enjoyed. I think maybe it's only the people who are , well a bit backward, that are actually embarrassed by it and want to destroy it by dragging it into adult realms where it's, well frankly odd looking, and also unsustainable.

More selfless victims motivated by true 'love', oboy. More serious adult superheroes graphic 'novels'? Meh. Slip slide and away. Such focus to almost avoid the real it seems to me, or replace it (Perky Pat). I'd be happy to have the old C.C. Beck Captain Marvel be so lionized and defended... it used to have a place with millions of actual readers each issue. Fan is short for fanatic, don't we have enough fanatics of all kinds yet?


Edited by Rebecca Jansen on 22 November 2019 at 11:55am
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 470
Posted: 22 November 2019 at 2:05pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

Okay, face front true believer! 

"Underwear on the outside" again... who or what are you trying to mock by using that expression ironically? Yes, I am a superhero comics fan. Yes, I also enjoy Alan Moore's and several other artists's interpretations of the genre. It's called having an open mind.

That apparently makes me an idiot that deserves to be mocked by you, and that's all well and good except for the fact that AT THE SAME TIME you claim to defend the "comics industry" (whatever that means these days) and lament its current state. But, of course, let's not forget that in the end these are stupid stories featuring costumed buffoons and anyone over 12 that has an interest in them is a moron.

Excuse me for finding your reasoning very confusing and insulting,

I see more hate than love (...)

Yeah, me too. In your post, mostly hate. Self-hatred I'd say.

I don't remember Steinbeck or Hawthorne or Alice Munro, Malcolm Lowry, even Isaac Asimov, having swamp monster guys in the mix... for the commercial visual gimmjick to hook the stunted adult reader audience.

I do remember HP Lovecraft having all kinds of monsters and Asimov all kinds of robots. Shakespeare had all kinds of ghosts and witches. And the point is...? 

You seem to have an internal conflict of what constitutes "high art" and what doesn't. As I've said with Dickens and Poe, this is an obsolete debate in the post modern world. I recommend you read Umberto Eco's APOCALYPSE POSTPONED ("Apocallitici e Integratti") for a good take on the matter. He even uses Superman comics as an example several times.

There, I will just say it as much as I can, the most strident, most serious, adult superhero graphic sequential narrative fans are a word that begins with R and which is very politically incorrect to say and not meant to include actual people who have no control over the state. 

Just wow.

They aimed for the limited experience and intelligent audience to wow with their comparative sophistication. 

I'm assuming you are including the jurors of the Hugo awards and Time magazine's "100 Best Novels of All Time" amongst these limited experienced and lacking of intelligence and sophistication people. Your standards are higher than mine then, I have to admit.

The good vs. evil archetypes are for the twelve year old level superhero comics that use to have multiple millions of readers per issue, they do not work in real life

Really? If you'd care to join the rest of us here in late 2019 you'd notice that exact same genre being the most popular form of entertainment in the world for more than a decade now. Those exact same simple good vs. evil archetypes for twelve year olds are all over the movies, television, videogames and more alive than ever everywhere you look.

Seems Alan Moore couldn't break them after all.


Back to Top profile | search
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 1640
Posted: 22 November 2019 at 3:59pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

This is going way off topic I'm aware, so you can have a last word after this if you want it... If I'm mocking it's a mocker I mock (to me), if I allude to Stan Lee it's to a Kirby defender who ranks Alan Moore with that gigantic creator and innovator of the comic form.

Seeing an experienced intellect applied to costumed super people was definitely interesting and unique, but it's a sort of inward navel-gazing to approach something from the realm of childhood, which is where the genre was developed and had success after all, an inherently simplified and visuals heavy form. Since this we see every manner of old property exhumed to be undergroundified, but minus the rude humor of the underground cartoonist, it has become commecially packaged and sometimes laugahble earnest or else mocking in a post-ironic look how clever we are (at the expense of the original supposedly 'loved' property or genre). Also, if you have read a fair bit of text science fiction you can come into comics and appear a major creative force simply by mining a few ideas from one author... in the case of watchmen I'd say Phil Dick was most obvious.

I want to write a work of literature for the ages, for fellow adults, I know where to go to do that... it would just not be DC comics and involving trademarked codenames and costumes. It's deconstructive, dismantling, to force into an area something which was not created for that purpose... Mickey and Minnie Mouse engaging in sexual intercourse... now have Disney publish it and not an unofficial underground 'pirate'... where to now fearless front-facer? I like Stan Lee, the character anyway, I liked his hype, it is fun... but somehow his clevering up superhero comics in the '60s led to such over-intellectualization of the format that has been mainly negative. Not studying the craft so much as it's own detritus, the remnants of creativity , the minutia of the dedicated fanatic who tend not to look much outside that smaller world and know where some things have come in from and that maybe they aren't gigantic moments in human innovation or thought.

Some of the hates I see: some comic book fans/fanatics for anything juvenile (including innocent); readership, format, discretion. Killing the thing they probably at least did used to love, be it Stan 'The Man' Lee and his hype talk (now he is evil oppressor, ruthless capitalist exploiter Stan), or the obviously goofy characters that are the strength of comic books (fantasies of running super fast etc. must be made more real involving more suffering and destruction, the morality more confused because patriotism is false and goodness must be hypocracy or at best untested). Hate for actual, possibly boring reality, as in outside breathing air talking to fellow human beings making a living and caring for others (as opposed to news infotainment headlines and 'dealing' with them just to shut oneself off further into a world/universe or importance only to itself). "Get a life". Don't have one, here's a substitue with costumes and powers? You could make 'history' in the form, in the super universe, like your great artiste heroes.

Watchmen, Dark Knight... Wonder Warthog and Spain's Trashman made official and commercial, and very very compromised... leading inward to darkness where the insane await to be 'dealt' with ala Conrad? What do they say about anything other than the superhero concept and strecthing it past a breaking point and then either laughing or crying? Last page, last panel... empty, blank, not to be continued, it was all a bad joke? Like the final scene in The Sopranos? Okay, I'm invited to think about it and have thought and others won't like what I came up with. Excuse me while the next time I want to really think I will pick something with characters that are not fantasy powered, mafiaoso, simplistic insane murdering loons, gaudily costumed, disguised as mice, cats and pigs. Bambi Vs. Godzilla by Marv Newland may've been there first as well. Now that's silly and jevinile, but they aren't going to make it offiical or extend it. It is what it is, I got it, others seem to be stuck back there. The villians get crazier more extreme to allow the others to go more extreme and cosmos chaking and truly mythological and important... bah, give me a fun read, get a life, I don't need it to be a substitue for a life. Such adults and their sometimes absurd pretentions have practically taken the life of the American comic book. Killing what they loved so much more than others, the heroes of their own good vs. evil scenario on the Perky Pat layout. Skim milk masquerading as cream! The very fact that someone would go to and then stay in a juvenile form is pathetic frankly, it is backward, it is dishonest. If you have War & Peace or Crime & Punishment in you, for gosh sakes get in touch with Random House or Penguin, not DC or Marvel comics!!! Don't strangle as the enemy craftspeople who want to produce mere entertainment accessible to the young. Also, let the next generation have their own Flashes and Spider-Mans. Greed to own, and to re-create supposedly better and more seriously, became toxic among too many... certainly no better than the businessmen selling something to make money. Choose your side, love of the pure socialist altruistic creator, and hate for the moneyed elite controlling? I say ridiculousness, juvenile, backwards... and all applied to such a humble form, once approachable now sealed behind mylar and the walls of specilist enclaves like those Christian music and book stores. I'm not interested in a cult, in keeping treasures from others, being better than, oh I don't know Vince Colleta or Roy Thomas, nor in forcing something inherently juvenile (innocent) into being something it's not and can't be.

Comic books winning approval as great works of Art or literature important to you? Fine with me, but hand back those costumes and other genre tropes unsoiled after, especially where funded and managed by a company if you don't want to spend the rest of your life unsoiling yourself through the tilting at abstract windmills (and winding up your fans to do likewise). Nobody has ever been stopping anyone, not conspiring... it seems to me a lot of people of all sorts did do it their way with varying success, but if you do a deal with a company and use it's materials... guess what, it's compromised. Let it be what it is and is best at being... not some pessimistic hybrid of value mainly to fanatics with decades of indoctrination of dubious worth or breadth.

Alan Moore and comic books, an interesting experiment. And then you move on, or do you get stuck there unable to go anywhere else? Unable to go back to the thing you loved without screwing it up and closing and walling it off the same 'dark' adult way? A graphic rape scene in comic books; done in the undergrounds, now done in a mainstream comic from a corporate publisher, now what? Bat tank rolling over and crushing masses of humanity with trademarked logo placement all around... check, now where to? Yeah, real sophisticated, real mature... but you just broke the toys big name. Excuse me while I put those away and simply enjoy an Avengers comic, because I need something fun like that where everything isn't over-intellectualized in a show-offy fashion but blank and over at the end as a result. Sure, the good guys will win something, and there's a next issue blurb. Is that not loved?

I don't feel dumb buying and enjoying a Godzilla comic, or a Captain America, never have, never will, at least not the ones that are in the style they started in, but I would feel kind of dopey to be seen putting hardcover gilt-edged super people 'graphic novels' next to the Mary Shelley and Henry James.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 470
Posted: 22 November 2019 at 6:22pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

Fair enough, Rebecca. 

There's some stuff we won't agree on and that's ok, I respect your opinion and appreciate the length and thought in your posts. Gonna try to keep the snark to a minimum ;)

The thing is, it's just a book. A well-read British bearded weirdo had some thoughts about the super characters that populated his juvenile power fantasies and laid them down, and the end result was very good and interesting (by most accounts).

The sky is not falling. The book didn't "ruin" anything. Superheroes are doing fine. Better than ever, in fact. (The comic book publishing industry maybe not that much, but it'd be a huge stretch to blame it on the bearded weirdo's oeuvre).

You clearly have some underground sensibilities (just like the bearded one) but your reasoning is so contrived you end up defending the "comics as product" (that can never change or evolve) over the "comics as an art form" angle I prefer, if I may be that pretentious.

But the cat is out of the bag now. Comics are a valid art form, even American superhero comics too. We'll just have to deal with it.

I understand there's a certain stigma associated with comic books in America (basically, if you read them you're brain dead). That doesn't happen in my neck of the woods, and most definitely doesn't happen in places like Europe or Japan. 

So I get where your "silly stories for 12 year olds" thing comes from but we have to accept that, for some reason, that's not longer true and it probably never was. Superhero stories are massive, the biggest crowd-pleasing blockbusters all over the world and their target audience is mostly adult.

We won. We were right. There was something interesting and cool about these stories and characters and when the world finally agrees with us we bitch about it. It's kinda funny.

And there's room for everybody. If you want classic adventure fare in a cosmic Kirby-esque scale you got it: AVENGERS ENDGAME is the biggest film of the year. If you like the deconstructionist thing there's JOKER, that has just reached 1 billion in the box office and is the first R-Rated film to do so. These things can coexist perfectly.

This is the zeitgeist of superhero culture. Not the sixties, not the eighties. Right now. It's undeniable. I, for one, choose to celebrate it (which doesn't mean not being critical, I proved that enough with my opinions regarding the Watchmen TV show this thread is about).

And it wouldn't have happened if the form had not evolved in some way over the years. Superhero stories can be more than what people imagined in 1938, in 1963 or in 1985. Some other weirdo may be doing his revolutionary take right now, at least I hope so.

Does that mean we need to see Mickey and Minnie having sex? Probably not, and anyways it's already been done. While the AIR PIRATES thing was mostly juvenile I think on an intellectual level it had some legs at the time. Later, Art Spiegelman used the same Disney codex of talking mice to tell a very personal and deep story about the Holocaust no less and the result was, I'm sure we all agree, a masterpiece.

Is it high art? I think so, but it's not relevant anyway. You seem to struggle putting your graphic novels next to your Mary Shelley yet the Frankenstein monster was already chasing Abbott and Costello seventy years ago. Nothing we can do about it except discern what we like and what we don't, high or low (if there is such a thing).



















Edited by Rodrigo castellanos on 22 November 2019 at 6:30pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5198
Posted: 23 November 2019 at 5:12pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

Rodrigo, if you really think ‘British Ozymandias used a catapult to land on one of Jupiter’s moons’ I think therein lies a clue to your issue with the series.

His prison appears to actually be ON the moon & he is trying to find a way to breach its walls - hence the catapult.

I’m not sure you are following the actual plot of the series vs watching it to just make disdainful comments about it.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 470
Posted: 23 November 2019 at 6:19pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

(Sigh)

Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5198
Posted: 24 November 2019 at 12:51am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

Well that just confirms he’s ON Europa, which is what I said. I still don’t understand your issue with him using a catapult to escape the barrier around his prison & the phrasing that for me, inferred that the catapult led to him landing on the moon & thus did not start on the moon.

It’s like saying ‘I used a catapult to land on earth’. Well of course you did, you started on Earth.

What was your issue?
That he used a catapult? That the catapult is located on Europa? Something else?
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 470
Posted: 24 November 2019 at 2:50am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

We as viewers learned he was in Europa when he landed. Don't know what was incorrect about the phrasing, but English is not my first language so apologies if there was any confusion.

I don't have an "issue" other than thinking the show is ridiculous and pointless. I do find a suddenly British (without explanation) Ozymandias propelling himself from a medieval catapult and landing on a moon on Jupiter (him being there already not being hugely influential) to be a ridiculous scene.

Dr. Manhattan building his fortress on Mars while reflecting on the nature of time I can take. This, on the other hand, seems like a "jump the shark" moment for me, among many others. Of course it's all very subjective.

For decades, we WATCHMEN fans had to hear from people that don't like it that the plot was weak and the giant squid ridiculous. But apparently what's going on in this incredibly over the top show is a-ok.

What can you do. If you like it, good for you. Keep enjoying the show.


 


Edited by Rodrigo castellanos on 24 November 2019 at 2:53am
Back to Top profile | search
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5198
Posted: 24 November 2019 at 9:06am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

I love Watchmen the comic. Have done from the moment I first read it (as it was being published). I think it was above a lot of other comics that had been published @ the time, I also liked other Moore stories such as Marvelman, Captain Britain, V for Vendetta, D. R. & Quincy, Skizz, Swamp Thing & many others. 

But, while I think Moore has an almost poetic use of language that exceeds many other writers, I also acknowledge that he begs, borrows & literally steals concepts, characters & story points from other people (ask Alan Davis to sign an issue of Eclipse’s Miracleman   One day. Just be prepared to run really, really fast. & then talk to me about how DC ripped Moore off)

So why shouldn’t he be subject to the same? & that’s the issue I have when people knee jerk reaction to Watchmen must not be touched. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Greg McPhee
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 August 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4169
Posted: 27 November 2019 at 6:15am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

I like Watchmen as a comic book. I rank it up there with Camelot 3000 for doing something different with the genre.

Should it never be touched or expanded upon? I'm going to say no. If there is a good story to be told with these characters, I'm all for it.

Len Wein gave an interview to a Green Lantern podcast where he discussed Alan Moore briefly in regards to Watchmen and Swamp Thing. Might not be the exact quote, but Len said:

"I endorsed what Alan did with Swamp Thing, as both the creator and editor as it gave more story possibilities."

"Alan may go on about how DC treated him over Watchmen, but he was very well rewarded financially by DC for his efforts at the time."
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8440
Posted: 27 November 2019 at 4:16pm | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Having read Alan Davis's open letter on CBR, he may have a case that Eclipse and presumably now Marvel have reprinted specific pages belonging to him without permission or compensation, but the notion that the characters he designed on those pages from Moore's description also belong to him is irrational.

And if you'd like me to talk to you about how DC ripped Moore off, I will be happy to do so. They promised him the return of his copyright on Watchmen and included provisions whereby he would once again own his work in a given amount of time. Moore had fought for that and only signed the contracts with the understanding that his work would be returned to him once DC was effectively done with it. 

Watchmen's success, however, meant that DC kept the book in print indefinitely, something never before done, and in so doing reneged on their promise to return the property to him at some point. Moore may have been paid well at the time, but he has been denied profits he would have if he had ownership of Watchmen, something he was teased with and denied. 


Edited by Brian Hague on 27 November 2019 at 4:17pm
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 

<< Prev Page of 10 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login