Watchmen 2?

[Broccoli]

L. Frank Baum and Lewis Carrol are a hell of a lot more imaginative and creative as writers than Moore any day of the week. But that didn't stop Moore from turning those writers' stories into sex fantasies. But what do I know?

 

[Hound of UIster]

It's safe until you begin to devalue your intellectual property. Up until this point, Watchmen has been praised as an "untarnished masterpiece" by the masses. After this? Watchmen becomes not just what Alan Moore wrote, but also what Person A wrote, Person B wrote, Person C wrote, etc. And if what they wrote is not nearly as good as the original, then what happens to the property? All I can say is I hope the extra $$$ is worth it.

That IS a risk, yes. But, small compared to pretty much the guaranteed $$$. So, for DC, it will be a success.

And, there have been good Batman stories, and bad Batman stories. And Batman is still valuable.

Batman is valuable because the character himself has caught on with people. He's popular enough to be passed on between different creators - good and bad - and remain unscathed.

Watchmen is valuable because of its overall reputation as the "Citizen Kane of comic books" (whether one agrees with that or not). What happens when you tarnish that reputation with new material that doesn't have a hope in hell of being as good? I don't think the Dark Knight Strikes Again did the Dark Knight Returns any favors.

By that metric, any sequel or prequel whether authorized or unauthorized that doesn't live up to the standards of the original "tarnishes" it. What about Pride and Prejudice and Zombies? Does that tarnish the original by Jane Austen? What about LXG? Does it somehow detract from the work of Conan Doyle, HG Wells and all the others that Moore took stuff from?

 

[DarthPipes]

JMS raises some good points. Didn't Moore originally want to use those old Charlton Comics characters for Watchmen?

 

[Nerys Myk]

JMS raises some good points. Didn't Moore originally want to use those old Charlton Comics characters for Watchmen?

That was the plan

Blue Beetle= Nite Owl
The Question= Rorschach
Captain Atom= Doctor Manhattan
Nightshade= Silk Spectre
Peacemaker=Comedian
Thunderbolt= Ozymandias

 

[Admiral_Young]

Len Wein is probably apart of this because he was one of the editors on "Watchmen", more so than for his writing. I believe he wrote the script for the "Watchmen" video game that was a tie in to the film.

 

[the G-man]

L. Frank Baum and Lewis Carrol are a hell of a lot more imaginative and creative as writers than Moore any day of the week. But that didn't stop Moore from turning those writers' stories into sex fantasies. But what do I know?

That's why I mentioned Moore "in his prime". Modern Moore isn't that good either.

 

[Myasishchev]

Aaannnd, given how much I enjoyed Rising Stars, Midnight Nation and Supreme Power, I think the JMS ones will be collected also.

I, for one, am definitely looking forward to Dr. Manhattan walking around America.

***

Jae Lee on a superhero book? OK, sold...

Who the hell is Len Wein? Actually, I vaguely recalled something to do with Swamp Thing; but I did have to look it up (edit: I could've read Young's post and saved the trouble, I suppose).*

Anyway, the artists are top notch (although I don't like Kubert at all, evidently people do), but the writers are not who I think of when I think of superhero comics' best (everything I've ever read from Azzarello is really just OK, Wein is old and probably a good editor but I know nothing of his writing, JMS is shockingly unpredictable in output, and furthermore couldn't finish a shit, I mean dude has had at least four projects in the last five years not end but just stop--and then there is Darwyn Cooke, whom I like, whose art is fucking bodacious, but whose writing doesn't hit the same high levels, although I feel he's probably the best of the lot, doing the least essential of the lot).

The upshot is, I can't believe Grant Morrison didn't get in on some of this action. The man has spent twenty years pulling on Alan Moore's beard. What happened?

And like I said before, I still think prequels are the wrong way to move with this, if you've gotta move. It's like DiDio read some abridged version of Watchmen that didn't include the whole third of the book that is devoted to flashbacks.

*Yet Ozymandias should probably be the most entertaining and relevant, and not just for Lee's art although it will no doubt be the best-looking Watchmen 2 book; no, I'm saying it has a place, since Veidt's backstory is delivered in Watchmen in a very hamhanded, condensed, and expository fashion to dead people/the audience, because Veidt's status as the mask killer (huh, I just noticed that, it's rather a flaw in the thriller aspect of the book, isn't it?) precluded the more personal flashbacks, the psychological centers of gravity, provided for the other principals.

P.S.: OK, am I the only one who wanted to see Geoff Johns just fuck this shit right up? Oh, God, that would be the greatest comic book of all time.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't have any interest personally in more Watchmen, but reading David's and JMS's deconstructions of both Moore's complaints and general fannish complaints about the project I can't see any real grounds to object to DC doing this.

 

[Myasishchev]

L. Frank Baum and Lewis Carrol are a hell of a lot more imaginative and creative as writers than Moore any day of the week. But that didn't stop Moore from turning those writers' stories into sex fantasies. But what do I know?

That's why I mentioned Moore "in his prime". Modern Moore isn't that good either.

Hold it, cowboy. Promethea wrapped up in 2005. What do you want from him, a seventh masterpiece and sixth reinvention of the superhero comic already?

 

[Professor Zoom]

L. Frank Baum and Lewis Carrol are a hell of a lot more imaginative and creative as writers than Moore any day of the week. But that didn't stop Moore from turning those writers' stories into sex fantasies. But what do I know?

That's why I mentioned Moore "in his prime". Modern Moore isn't that good either.

Hold it, cowboy. Promethea wrapped up in 2005. What do you want from him, a fifth masterpiece already?

You don't?

 

[Myasishchev]

I don't have any interest personally in more Watchmen, but reading David's and JMS's deconstructions of both Moore's complaints and general fannish complaints about the project I can't see any real grounds to object to DC doing this.

Well you've never been much of a fan of fans bitching about their fandoms.

I still think "retreading well-covered ground" is a pretty good objection. I'll withhold final judgment, of course, I'm just saying a true sequel would be so much more useful (and ironically, it'd probably make people bitch louder).

That's why I mentioned Moore "in his prime". Modern Moore isn't that good either.

Hold it, cowboy. Promethea wrapped up in 2005. What do you want from him, a fifth masterpiece already?

You don't?

Well, yeah. The point is, Promethea was only seven years ago; unless he's physically unwell, I don't think he's quite lost his game yet. Neonomicon notwithstanding (though in disclosure, I didn't read it, it sounded pointless and gross and it was drawn by Jacen Burrows, yuck).

Edit: and yeah, I miscounted masterpieces. -_-

 

[Broccoli]

L. Frank Baum and Lewis Carrol are a hell of a lot more imaginative and creative as writers than Moore any day of the week. But that didn't stop Moore from turning those writers' stories into sex fantasies. But what do I know?

That's why I mentioned Moore "in his prime". Modern Moore isn't that good either.

My first sentence was a response to Moore "in his prime". My second sentence was in reference to Moore taking other's work and doing...something with it.

I suppose my comments were arguing two different points. My bad.

That's why I mentioned Moore "in his prime". Modern Moore isn't that good either.

Hold it, cowboy. Promethea wrapped up in 2005. What do you want from him, a fifth masterpiece already?

You don't?

For reals. It can't be that hard.

 

[Admiral_Young]

At least this is ignoring the Last Stand...or is it?

 

[Broccoli]

I can't see why it would.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Well, yeah. The point is, Promethea was only seven years ago; unless he's physically unwell, I don't think he's quite lost his game yet. Neonomicon notwithstanding (though in disclosure, I didn't read it, it sounded pointless and gross and it was drawn by Jacen Burrows, yuck).

Edit: and yeah, I miscounted masterpieces. -_-

I feel like I read in an interview (yeah, I know, no link...) that he was growing less interested in writing comics and turning more of his attention to prose and stage performance...

 

[Myasishchev]

He has time to revolutionize another medium!

 

[trekkiebaggio]

Besides, it's not as if it's an either/or situation. It's not like these guys have one story left in them. I'm sure they'll create other stuff at some point.

The point is, it's not about the creators. Creators create, that's what they do. However, they are also going to create what those who pay the bills ask them to create.

All of these are talented people--DC chose well--but they could've also been asked to create NEW ideas. But they weren't. They were asked to take a comic book that's 25 years old and make some new stuff from it. And I believe they will do the best job they can.

However, what if they turned to Brian Azzarello and said, "Hey man, skies the limit, what do you want to do?" (Which, I'm assuming happened with Spaceman.) What if DC gave as much push and PR to something new?

Obviously, that would be a huge business risk, something a corporation wouldn't do. But that's the sentiment behind the "why don't they do something new?"

And the concepts weren't the problem with ENT & VOY, it was the execution that made them same old same old.

Execution is true of ANYTHING new OR old. But, what if Paramount had spent the money on some NEW sci-fi franchise, without the creative shackles of 700 hours of canon (which fanboys won't let you violate) and expectation (which you can't let ANYONE done.). What about NEW creative ideas?

That's the sentiment being expressed. It's a very safe thing to go back to an established intellectual property. (Which, again, is why a corporation is going to do it.)

Fair enough, I just think a good story is a good story whether it uses new characters or old. And I don't believe that having characters with history means you're shackled, I think it's something which can work to your advantage.

I suppose the expectation is the biggest thing these guys will have to deal with, because it's so controversial there will be many people ready to rip the project apart if they see anything wrong with it.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

If they sell as well as DC would hope, I wouldn't be surprised to see DiDio and company find a way to start doing DCU/Watchmen universe crossover stories...most likely as a companywide crossover event (Infinite Watchmen, anyone?)

Supposedly, the Watchmen Earth was going to be one of the 52 Earths post-Infinite Crisis and the Challengers of the Multiverse were going to visit there in a Countdown: Search for Ray Palmer special.

As it is, there was a Watchmenesque world in the 52 Earths; we saw that world's Dr. Manhattan-like Captain Atom in Final Crisis.

For myself, if I had been in the meetings where the New 52 was planned, I would have argued for integrating the Minutemen into the Golden Age, as contemporaries of the Justice Society and the Freedom Fighters. If you're building a universe from the ground up, with all these pieces to play with, you can do things like that. But as we know now, there doesn't seem to have been a Golden Age in the DCnU.

 

[Disruptor]

Like others I have to laugh at Moore and his fans getting all up in arms about DC using the Watchmen characters. Afer all his four most famous "creations" are

1. A revamp of Marvel Man, which in it's self was a revamp of Captain Marvel
2. Watchmen, a revamp of the Charlton characters
3. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which mined the classics for its character.
4. A total revamp of Swamp Thing that told us everything you know is wrong.

I'd say V for Vendetta is more famous now than...most of those. Thanks to the movie and protestors wearing those stupid masks.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't have any interest personally in more Watchmen, but reading David's and JMS's deconstructions of both Moore's complaints and general fannish complaints about the project I can't see any real grounds to object to DC doing this.

Well you've never been much of a fan of fans bitching about their fandoms.

This is true. I've been a big enough fan of Watchmen and of some of Moore's other comics writing (Supreme is one of my favorite superhero things, ever), though, that I think my (perhaps unaccustomed) reflex in this case has always been to support his authorial possessiveness.