Watchmen 2?

[Admiral_Young]

The Dark Knight Strikes Again was utter shite...mostly I think because of what Miller did with Dick Grayson, among other things but yeah. I doubt this will be that bad...but one never knows until one reads

 

[trekkiebaggio]

Another article bringing up why Before Watchmen might be a mistake...

http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2012/02/01/146218318/before-watchmen-apocalyptic-tales-and-leaving-well-enough-alone

I actually don't mind more Watchmen stories. But if they're not going to be great stories, they shouldn't even bother to publish them.

A quote from that article - "There are no other tales to be told in that world — none."

This just strikes me as having a lack of imagination and ambition.

And as for only publishing them if they're great...surely the only way to tell if they're great is for people to read them?

I wonder if they're going to try and emulate Watchmen completely and have excerpts from interviews and newspaper articles.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Can't help but wonder what JMS would have to say if someone else decided to write new Babylon 5 material, after he had said that he didn't want that universe returned to.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Can't help but wonder what JMS would have to say if someone else decided to write new Babylon 5 material, after he had said that he didn't want that universe returned to.

This was already covered in post 149 of this thread where JMS was quoted as saying (but apparently bears repeating)...

“First, we have to take the word ‘permission’ off the table. Warner Bros. owns Babylon 5 lock, stock and phased-plasma guns, just as DC owns the Watchmen characters. [...] But I get that we’re talking about the emotional aspect of all this, not the legal stuff, which is pretty cut and dry,” he wrote. “So again: apples to apples. How would I feel if Babylon 5 were being made and I were shut out of anything to do with it, despite my desire to be involved? I’d feel pretty crummy about it. But as it happens, that has absolutely nothing to do with this situation in any way, manner, shape or form.”

Referring to repeated unsuccessful attempts by DC to convince Moore to revisit Watchmen — the most recent was in 2010, when the publisher offered to relinquish the rights to the comic if the writer “would agree to some dopey prequels and sequels” — Straczynski said, “He declined at every point. Fair enough. It’s his choice, and it’s his right to make it.”

“So now – apples to apples – let’s make the B5 comparison,” he continued. “Let’s say Warner Bros. came to me and said, ‘we want to do more Babylon 5, and we want you to run the whole thing. We’ll pay you anything you want, give you a proper budget, and you will have complete creative freedom.’ [...] So let’s say that Warners makes that offer, and I said, ‘No, I don’t want it, take your accursed money, your big budget and your complete creative freedom and begone, get thee behind me Satan!’ Let’s say they came back and said ‘Okay, then how about we pay you vast sums of money just to consult? How about that?’ [...] ‘What if we sweeten the deal? What if we offer to give you full ownership of Babylon 5, legally and contractually, so you own it? How about that?’

“If Warners offered me creative freedom, money and a budget to do the show the way I wanted, up to and including my completely owning the show, and I said no to that deal, and if after Warners waited TWENTY FIVE YEARS for me to change my mind they finally decided to go ahead and make B5 without me … then I would have absolutely zero right to complain about it,” Straczynski wrote. “Because it was my choice to remove myself from the process, it wasn’t something foisted upon me by anybody else.”

Source.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Ah, thanks for the link (I was basically too lazy to go back).

But he's ignoring the fact that Moore's 'creative freedom' included the artistic decision NOT to go back and make any more, not to have this - his - universe re-visited and that this itself is a creative choice. But that's been taken away from him.

 

[Nerys Myk]

He addressed that with the last sentence:

Because it was my choice to remove myself from the process, it wasn’t something foisted upon me by anybody else

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Yes but the point is that he's opted to create more stories in a world whose creator felt did not need any to be elaborated on any more. He's removed from Moore the choice of leaving Watchmen as a complete and finite universe.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Actually demotion DC has done that.

 

[Nerys Myk]

^ Yes but the point is that he's opted to create more stories in a world whose creator felt did not need any to be elaborated on any more. He's removed from Moore the choice of leaving Watchmen as a complete and finite universe.

Hasn't Moore removed himself from the process?

 

[Admiral_Young]

^ Yep after several overtones from DC to work on something.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Again, the point I'm trying to make is that Moore clearly felt that nothing needed to be added to the Watchmen universe and that it did not need to be revisited. I think that this was a right of his as its creator. DC and the various writers they've hired to do this have deprived him of that right. It's not a question of him being involved in the process. It's of there being a process at all.

 

[Myasishchev]

^ Yes but the point is that he's opted to create more stories in a world whose creator felt did not need any to be elaborated on any more. He's removed from Moore the choice of leaving Watchmen as a complete and finite universe.

Did Alan Moore come with hat in hand to Steve Ditko?

 

[Nerys Myk]

^ Yes but the point is that he's opted to create more stories in a world whose creator felt did not need any to be elaborated on any more. He's removed from Moore the choice of leaving Watchmen as a complete and finite universe.

Did Alan Moore come with hat in hand to Steve Ditko?

Exactly. The bulk of Moore's career is made up of him telling stories with other people characters. Sometimes with the serial numbers filed off.

 

[EnsignRicky]

After reading JMS's Well reasoned and flawlessly timed response, I'm starting to feel a little more receptive to the idea.
That being said, I still can't help feeling that a whole lot of issues would have been avoided if they had just followed protocol and waited until Moore was dead.

 

[Nerys Myk]

After reading JMS's Well reasoned and flawlessly timed response, I'm starting to feel a little more receptive to the idea.
That being said, I still can't help feeling that a whole lot of issues would have been avoided if they had just followed protocol and waited until Moore was dead.

Since when is that protocol?

 

[Myasishchev]

^ Yes but the point is that he's opted to create more stories in a world whose creator felt did not need any to be elaborated on any more. He's removed from Moore the choice of leaving Watchmen as a complete and finite universe.

Did Alan Moore come with hat in hand to Steve Ditko?

Exactly. The bulk of Moore's career is made up of him telling stories with other people characters. Sometimes with the serial numbers filed off.

Indeed. I mean, I'm sympathetic to the "Alan Moore is special" argument, because he is, but at what point can we just say that his substantial material and intangible rewards have compensated him for his snowflakery, and that he has no extra-legal, vague moral rights to work on characters he doesn't legally or morally own?

 

[milo bloom]

Another article bringing up why Before Watchmen might be a mistake...

http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2012/02/01/146218318/before-watchmen-apocalyptic-tales-and-leaving-well-enough-alone

I actually don't mind more Watchmen stories. But if they're not going to be great stories, they shouldn't even bother to publish them.

A quote from that article - "There are no other tales to be told in that world — none."

This just strikes me as having a lack of imagination and ambition.

I was already on board, but that just cemented my feelings.

I know a lot of folks are on the side of "use the money to make new properties", which has its merits; but we've seen over the years how people can go back to Batman and Superman and still turn out new and imaginative ideas.


I will be waiting for the collected trades, I don't do single issue comics anymore.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

I disagree with those that say that any sequels or prequels will diminish the reputation of the original. The reputations of Casablanca & Gone with the Wind haven't been harmed any by the less-than-stellar follow-ups.

 

[Admiral_Young]

CaptainDemotion you haven't said anything that hasn't already been said in the thread already or by others. Your point is well taken. DC hasn't deprived him of anything. Moore has chosen not to work on anything else concerning Watchmen. He feels it is complete and that's great. I do respect that. DC though also has the right to make money since it owes the rights and has decided to enact it. They've brought in top talent on these books as well. Again, it isn't like the original is being altered or anything like that. Should DC have respected his wishes? Sure. They're a corporation though and in the business of making money.

 

[suarezguy]

I feel there's a difference between reusing characters from a work over 70 rather than just 25 years old. In any case, only the Rorschach and maybe Dr. Manhattan art looks good, with Nite Owl too Batmanesque.