Alan Moore = Such a downer

[Equinox]

He got royally screwed by DC on both V and Watchmen, in that the rights were supposed to revert back to Moore and the respective artists after they went out of print.  Of course, they never went out of print, which was virtually unheard of at the time.  In any case, this wasn't a standard work for hire contract, it just turns out to have ended up that way.

IMO, I don't think he was screwed over by DC if they lived up to their end of the deal.  If Moore wishes that the rights reverted back to him, but they haven't due to the popularity of the titles, then that sounds more like a case of sour grapes to me.

I'm sure the Marston estate was saying the same thing during the 60's and 70's during some of the really low print runs of Wonder Woman...

[Equinox]

Yes, it's a wintergreen title, but is that due to sales from the bookstore market, or the direct market? Basically, it'd be interesting to see numbers showing just who is buying the trade. I have the feeling that up till this point, it's mainly been comic readers in the direct market buying new printings of the trade to replace old ones, or to give as gifts.

You have to admit that with Watchmen (and V for that matter), the general public wasn't much aware of it's existence. Hell, when Celina and I saw Dark Knight, a couple behind us actually said "Huh? I've never heard of that"
during the trailer. This kind of exposure leads to a swell in sales, and royalties. While I'm sure it can't compare to the Hollywood cash, it still must be a nice check to cash.

And that's all due to the film.

Oh, and yeah, I have no morals or principals when it comes to this crap. Someone hands me money, I'm taking it.  Beliefs don't pay the bills.

Karma to you!  As long as the company is giving the creators at least their contractual due for work done, then cash those checks upon receipt.

[evaD]

I've never read anything about Alan Moore that made me think the guy was in any way a pleasant individual, he comes across as a fairly toxic personality, but I've never met him, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt if I should ever happen to meet him. None of this diminishes his work in any way for me, except that I wish he would shut up about the movies. If you don't want anything to do with them, then you really shouldn't say anything one way or another. Plenty of comic creators have become involved in the adaptation of their work with mixed results. Some have managed to do wonderful things in the translation from print to film. I'm thinking of Sin City as an example here. If Alan Moore thinks he can do a better job, he should step up and do it. Anything else is just pointless and meaningless. If he just doesn't want his stuff translated to film, I'm not sure there's much he can do about that if he doesn't own the rights. I'm not even sure he can stop them from using his name. I think that, in the case of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and From Hell, he owned the rights so I'm not sure what the complaint is there.
Anyway, he doesn't like the way he's been used by the industry for the entirety of his career? There is a solution to that. Completely divorce yourself from it. Completely. Don't give interviews, don't do any more comics, don't blog about the industry, don't put up a website, don't interact with the community. In fact, go out and do something completely different. Write a complete history of tea biscuits.

Either way, he's been complaining for a long time. Maybe it's time for him and us to get over it and let it go.

[Equinox]

In fact, go out and do something completely different. Write a complete history of tea biscuits.

Are they like these?



I love these; very nomnomnomnom worthy!  I'd buy that book in prestige format, HC edition. 

[Jose Chung]

Yes, it's a wintergreen title, but is that due to sales from the bookstore market, or the direct market? Basically, it'd be interesting to see numbers showing just who is buying the trade. I have the feeling that up till this point, it's mainly been comic readers in the direct market buying new printings of the trade to replace old ones, or to give as gifts.

You have to admit that with Watchmen (and V for that matter), the general public wasn't much aware of it's existence. Hell, when Celina and I saw Dark Knight, a couple behind us actually said "Huh? I've never heard of that"
during the trailer. This kind of exposure leads to a swell in sales, and royalties. While I'm sure it can't compare to the Hollywood cash, it still must be a nice check to cash.

And that's all due to the film.

Oh, and yeah, I have no morals or principals when it comes to this crap. Someone hands me money, I'm taking it.  Beliefs don't pay the bills.

I see what your getting at, and it's a good point.  I simply don't know the breakdown of sales.  Watchmen and DKR sold a boatload of trades in the 80's.  I did see them at bookstores then, and really only those two trades, stocked in the science fiction sections.   Those books grabbed a lot of ink in mainstream periodicals.  But I would only see one or two copies of each.  But that was the late 80's, early 90's.  

Of course, this is simply anecdotal.  To your point, however, I got the story as it came out in issues and my trade, which is a first printing, is actually a hand-me-down from my brother who upgraded, so good call, lol.  

I think that Watchmen was one of those books that people knew about.  But I agree with you: at this point it is apparant that the bulk of the sales are due to the film, sales that may already be approaching the pre-trailer numbers.  I wonder if Moore is asking his accountant those questions, lol.  Hell, maybe his is.  

[thefreakytiki]

Not to be a douche...

But the term is evergreen book.  Ever green means that it is continually blossoming and giving life.  Wintergreen is a flavor of mouthwash. 


I agree with all points though.


the Tiki

[Jose Chung]

Oof.  I blame beer.

 

[Hassan T]

Alan Moore is like the weird uncle at the family gatherings that is always complaining about something

What gets me is that he didn't create the Watchmen by himself. There is Dave Gibbons, who has been pretty happy that there is a Watchmen movie being made. You would think that Moore will be a bit more "pleasant" about it because of that.

[JimN]

Alan Moore: I'm with Wood.

Whenever this point comes up, I always think of Peter David's infamous words on Moore.

David said something to the effect of yes, he may shit all over the films, and reject the cash offered from the studios, but he aint saying a damn word when it comes to all that extra cash generated by book sales.

These films are drumming up interest in works that have been gathering dust on store shelves for years, and it's asshole-ish behavior of the highest order for Moore to be shitting all over them.

If you're so above it all, turn ALL the cash away, and shut your mouth about the whole thing.

That makes no sense. He wrote the books. He worked on them and takes pride in them. There's no reason he should object to the money he earns from them. It's not money he objects to, it's the adpatation of his work into a medium he doesn't believe it is suited for and, if I understand correctly, he doesn't want to accept money for such adaptations because he doesn't approve of them and has no interest in particpating in them. I think that's a perfectly acceptable, understandable position to take and it doesn't make him an asshole.

Heck, if you look at a lot of the garbage Hollywood turns out, it's not difficult to understand why he doesn't want his work turned into more of it. That's exactly what happened with The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Is he supposed to be happy about that?

Jim

[aSh]

Moore can think and say whatever he wants. After seeing From Hell, I can see why he thinks movie adaptations are worthless. Watchmen was selling in respectable numbers before a film was even announced.  Moore saying negative things isn't really much different from Stan talking to all the kids out in Marvel Land, or Joe Q going on to the Colbert Report to talk about Civil War and Secret Invasion. He just wants a reaction. Also, I think Moore is afraid of his work only being remembered as a series of poor movies.

Oh, and work for hire doesn't mean that the person who performs that work should have shut up, bend over, and grab their ankles everytime a benifactor takes that work and bastardizes it.

I have heard a story that Jack Kirby couldn't go into a toy store because when he saw all the Marvel toys that he didn't get credit for that were based on his designs, he would get extremely worked up and he couldn't work for days. I know that Moore gets all of the royalties and credits for his work, but I will always give the creators the benefit of saying whatever they want about their creations and their adaptions. I am glad the public is enjoying comic book movies, but I think most of them suck. I feel that most of the time comic book movies aren't as complex and orginal as the works they are adapting (like any other work of literature). I don't go to them anymore. I know people enjoy them and that there are good comic book movies. I just feel that most fall flat for me when compared to their orginal work. V for Vendeta is a good movie, but the movie is not nearly as good or moving as Moore's orginal work.

Moore just doesn't want to be seen as some comic book company's and media conglamorate's gold mine for creating what he believes is corprate consumer exploitation. He wants be known for what he is, A Damn Good Author. Kirby wanted credit and compensation for his work. Moore wants recognition for the great works he has created, not the shabby movies based on his work.

[thefreakytiki]

Moore could have very easily accepted the cash and donated the entire lot to a group like HERO Initiative or CBDLF... but it's his choice to do what he does.  Oh well.   



the Tiki

[aSh]

Moore could have very easily accepted the cash and donated the entire lot to a group like HERO Initiative or CBDLF... but it's his choice to do what he does.  Oh well.  



the Tiki

Time/Warner could do that themselves if Moore doesn't want the money.

[Filthy McMonkey]

Time/Warner could do that themselves if Moore doesn't want the money.

Yeah, why doesn't the big faceless corporation out to make a profit give Moore's share to Hero?

Oh, yeah.  Big faceless corporation out to make a profit, right...

[aSh]

Yeah, why doesn't the big faceless corporation out to make a profit give Moore's share to Hero?

Oh, yeah.  Big faceless corporation out to make a profit, right...

I am just saying that you can't expect one thing of Moore and not of corporation who made that money in the first place.

[Filthy McMonkey]

As far as Alan Moore and his alleged assholiness, I distinctly remember him saying that, 'hey, just because they make a movie of my work, doesn't change the work itself'.  That was pretty much his final opinion on the subject until the second or third lackluster translation and the absolutely idiotic Joel Silver incident.  Then he went off, and people keep pokin' the bear.

It's like, before, they were screwin' him, but gently, with lube.  Then he didn't object too much, so they figured, 'Fuck it!  Go hog wild!  Torture porn and sand in the KY!'

So I kinda see his point.  Sand is hurtful.

[Filthy McMonkey]

I am just saying that you can't expect one thing of Moore and not of corporation who made that money in the first place.

Actually, you can, because one is a human being with values and principles (however skewed they might be), and the other is A FACELESS CORPORATION CONCERNED ONLY WITH MAXIMIZING THEIR OWN PROFIT.

It's a small difference, but, I think, a significant one.

[Wood]

If his deal was that simple I'd say you have a point. So, to stretch the analogy, what if you were told that they just wanted it for one show, and then after that, it was all yours to do with as you please.  What a great deal!  Nobody else will give you such a great deal to pay you for the work, and once they're done with it, let you have it.

Oh, except that one show?  It's never going to end.  Did we forget to mention that?  Sorry.

Yeah, that "It's work for hire so I deserve to get screwed" mentality is exactly why the Hero Initiative is needed so badly.

Wood, I'm not trying to be contrary to you here, it's just that you're pressing all the right art vs commerce buttons for me with this.  So karma to you to counteract that wicked witchcraft coming from Northampton

Paul, I'm not going to say your perspective isn't valid, far be it for me to proclaim anyone's opinion right or wrong (except Vince, who gets shit wrong ALL THE TIME). What I'm saying is that Alan Moore isn't a nice person. Period. I'm not making a judgment over whether he's a real "artist" [whatever the hell that means in the context of producing mass produced products intended to sell to consumers], I'm suggesting that he's a dildo. A guy who IS a fantastic writer and may or may not be a hypocrite [I can see valid arguments on both sides of that one], but just comes across as an asshole of the first degree every chance he gets.

[aSh]

Actually, you can, because one is a human being with values and principles (however skewed they might be), and the other is A FACELESS CORPORATION CONCERNED ONLY WITH MAXIMIZING THEIR OWN PROFIT.

It's a small difference, but, I think, a significant one.

Faceless corporations have faces, morals, and values. They are run and owned be actual human people. They can do the right thing just as easily as anyone, and it is sad to think that we expect so little of them. If you expect them to shit on your shoes, they will shit on your shoes and then they will shit on your face.

[Filthy McMonkey]

Faceless corporations have faces, morals, and values. They are run and owned be actual human people. They can do the right thing just as easily as anyone, and it is sad to think that we expect so little of them. If you expect them to shit on your shoes, they will shit on your shoes and then they will shit on your face.

As much as they would like you to think otherwise, corporations are not warm and cuddly.  They do good works in order to have a good face to put forward, thereby maximizing their profits by not being shunned by the consumer.  I just go by what history has shown me, more often than not, to be true.  It's simply their primary function, to make profit for their shareholders.

If corporations could be counted on to do the right thing all the time, there would be no need for the Hero Initiative.

[Alec Burkhardt]

Yeah, why doesn't the big faceless corporation out to make a profit give Moore's share to Hero?

Oh, yeah.  Big faceless corporation out to make a profit, right...

As I understand it, Time Warner doesn't get to keep the money Moore is refusing to accept - it all ends up going to the respective artist of the original work.  Because that is where Moore has said the money is to go.  So no extra profit is being made because of Moore's refusal to accept payment when his work is translated into a movie.