And because Alex Ross pushed for it and offered to paint the cover

********************

For free?

I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that Gruenwald just wasn't that well-known as a writer. Moore was already making a name for himself by the time he did WATCHMEN. There's only three things I can think of that Gruenwald wrote: the HAWKEYE mini, CAPTAIN AMERICA, and SS. While Hawkeye was fun neither it nor CA has ever been seen as a watermark run* for the character. Sure there were some bright spots, but most fans probably remember the worst parts ( Werewolf Captain America comes to mind) more quickly and more often. I just think he's not known as being a great writer.

And as suggested earlier, not having a set artist for the whole series took some wind out of its sails. At least for me it did. I've never been a fan of having a fill-in artist in the middle of a mini-series. Hated the Layton issues of SECRET WARS. And WATCHMEN had Dave Gibbons. 'Nuff Said.

Finally, I don't think Marvel pushed SS as much as DC did WATCHMEN. I remember a couple of house ads for SS and that's about it. DC had that plus "Who Watches The Watchmen" in their cover corner boxes for months prior to the release. Now, I wasn't privy to any of the fan press back in the day, so I really don't know how much either one of them  was played up in that arena.

Bottom line, I think it comes down to the names involved. Moore/ Gibbons were/ are just seen as superior craftsmen than Gruenwald/ Hall/ Beatty/ De La Rosa/ Ryan/ Buscema ( maybe not this one!)/ Guice.

* I'll readily admit I've not read every issue he wrote in the series.

Also because "Watchmen" comes off as far more "literary" by using such devices as the comic within the comic, symmetrical page layouts, all that prose-style backstory material, etc. "Squandron Supreme" is "just" a superbly told, traditional superhero comic book tale.

*****

Thats the best point in the thread.

I’ve been lurking around here for quite some time, but I finally got the root out and registered this week- so…hi.   Now this is probably not the type of thread that someone should make their first post in, but it’s also the type that’s too hard to resist.

I’ve never read Squadron Supreme, and therefore am not prepared to compare the two, but the things that I admire about Watchmen, like others have mentioned, do not include the plot.  In fact, the first time I read it, when I was a bit younger, I found it almost a chore to read.  It wasn’t until I became concerned with, and interested in the nature of storytelling in the comic book form that I came to appreciate the structural quality of the story.  To me, above all else, I love the trust given between the writer and artist.  It obviously came from a very full script, but the writing and the art don’t compete with one another, allowing a real subtlety to manifest and develop; lesser writers often feel a need to write all over the art in strangely unnecessary ways.

One question I do often find myself asking about Watchmen, however, is who was it written for?  Was it written for readers, or was it written for creators?  Because there’s a real limit to a story if it alienates its audience, but I guess in this case, it seems to have found an audience.  So who knows.