Watchmen Prequels - It's Official

[RickV]

Well that tend to be the norm with eccentrics who are really good at what they do. Not the most photogenic people.

[Julian Lytle]

I understand what you're saying. My point was just that these days, people will take sides over almost any topic online and please note that I qualified my comment with "if the circumstances were similar enough". That's not always the case. 

You're right, the dynamic we're discussing is less prevalent in some fields than it is in comics but I certainly don't think comics are unique in this sense. For example, this dynamic is common in sports, where fans are often split when it comes to disputes between players and teams. In that situation, team loyalty becomes the equivalent of company loyalty in comics and it makes sense because they're basically two sides of the same coin. Many comics fans pick DC or Marvel as their favorite "team".

As for how all this relates to Moore: most of the reactions to the interview in question (on this board anyway) haven't involved people siding with DC in the old dispute over Watchmen. I think almost all of us agree that Moore and Gibbons got a raw deal and that was wrong. However, people aren't just reacting to Moore speaking out against the politics of the American comics business. It's his arrogance, petulance, bitterness and ignorant disdain for many of his fellow comics creators and their work that really grinds at some of us. I also have a hard time seeing him as the victim he makes himself out to be. That doesn't mean I side with DC screwing over creators with a bad contract but anyone signing a contract has a personal responsibility to get at least a decent grasp of what they're signing and Moore clearly didn't meet that responsibility. He signed what he claims is one of the most anti-creator contracts imaginable and he was so happy with it that he encouraged another collaborator to sign the same deal! He can rail against DC all he wants but it was his responsibility to understand what he was giving away, and if he signed a contract that bad, he set himself up for everything that followed. I could sympathize with him more if he had been a naive 19 year old just breaking into the profession but he wasn't. He had to be close to 30 years old at that point and he'd already been working in comics for a while. He was aware of the long history of publishers taking advantage of comics creators.  It sucks that DC took advantage of him but all the bitterness and broken friendships that followed were his choices.

I don't know Jim I see Sports as very different. There are things that sports teams represent that is more personal and communal than mainstream cape comics like Marvel and DC. I can see liking a type of sport as the same liking DC over Marvel etc. Like people who don't like basketball but love baseball.  But other than that I don't see as the same really, even what I just said I can kinda stretch to see that.

Now on to how Moore I guess carries himself in interviews. In the end it's all his opinion but he doesn't have to like these people. He doesn't have to think they are talented. He doesn't have to be nice about it. Especially in world where people love to shit on Rob Liefeld online and in shops like its a comics national past time. Just because a person is 30 doesn't mean they can't make a bad decision and not like that they were played. especially if you're the first one to do it. That's like hating on the Superman creators cause they first ones to get got and be salty about it. Again there are plenty of artists who got screwed by signing some deal even after being in the business and have been public with their dislike of it.

On the friendship stuff, Gibbons was wrong. He knew he was wrong. That was supposed to be his mans. And he asked him not to talk about that shit and he did anyway. He chose the dough and company over his homie. I've seen people cut for less. He line stepped. Also I don't think it's too much to ask for a thank you after you basically give a person probably 6 figures at minimum. 

[Lawrence]

League_burningitch_pace1 by lawrenceofdallas, on Flickr

[JimN]

I don't know Jim I see Sports as very different. There are things that sports teams represent that is more personal and communal than mainstream cape comics like Marvel and DC. I can see liking a type of sport as the same liking DC over Marvel etc. Like people who don't like basketball but love baseball.  But other than that I don't see as the same really, even what I just said I can kinda stretch to see that.

I think it depends on the person, Julian. I'm betting you've seen both sports and comics fans get very attached to a particular team, character or company and for some comics fans, the hobby is as much a part of their personal life and community of friends as sports is to a community on a larger scale. There are obviously differences between sports fandom and comics fandom but sports fans have definitely been known to back a team over a player in a dispute, just like die-hard comics fans sometimes back the company that makes the comics they love over a creator in a dispute.

Now on to how Moore I guess carries himself in interviews. In the end it's all his opinion but he doesn't have to like these people. He doesn't have to think they are talented. He doesn't have to be nice about it.

I agree and I'm not saying he has to do anything. I'm just reacting to his comments.

Especially in world where people love to shit on Rob Liefeld online and in shops like its a comics national past time. Just because a person is 30 doesn't mean they can't make a bad decision and not like that they were played.

Again, I agree. My point is that when someone at Moore's age and experience level (when he signed the Watchmen and V for Vendetta contracts) gets played like Moore claims he was played, there's a substantial degree of personal responsibility involved.

That's like hating on the Superman creators cause they first ones to get got and be salty about it.

i don't think it's the same thing. Superman's creators were part of a newly-developing industry in a very different time. Moore had half a century of comics exploitation to look back on and see the possibility that he just might, need to be careful about signing a contract. He was aware of what had happened to Kirby, Gerber, Siegel and Schuster and others. He had friends and experience in the business and the mere fact that he was seeking to keep rights to the material shows that he was at least somewhat aware of these issues. All he had to do was read the contract carefully or have a lawyer look it over and he could have avoided being "played" but by his own admission, he didn't look at the contract very carefully.

Again there are plenty of artists who got screwed by signing some deal even after being in the business and have been public with their dislike of it.

That's true and I don't have a problem with that. Moore is free to be public about his dissatisfaction with the way he was treated. I just don't see him as a victim of much more than his own carelessness.

On the friendship stuff, Gibbons was wrong. He knew he was wrong. That was supposed to be his mans. And he asked him not to talk about that shit and he did anyway. He chose the dough and company over his homie.

I don't buy that. Gibbons is a co-author of the work. He has as much right to continue working with DC and approve of a Watchmen movie (or prequels or whatever) as Moore has to dis-own it all. Consequently, he didn't cross a line by pursuing those business interests. Both he and Moore are entitled to take their own path and Gibbons shouldn't have to tow Moore's line any more than Moore should have to follow the path Gibbons chooses.

I've seen people cut for less. He line stepped. Also I don't think it's too much to ask for a thank you after you basically give a person probably 6 figures at minimum.

Moore chose to give him the money and it sounds like Gibbons was grateful at the time. Why is the follow up call necessary? It's a weird little condition imposed by Moore and nothing to end a long friendship over. A thank you call would have been courteous but maybe Gibbons felt Moore was on a little power trip and didn't feel like playing along.

At some point, one has to look at the path of broken relationships Moore seems to leave behind him and wonder if the one common denominator in them (Moore himself) is the most likely cause.

I'll drop this now...

[JimN]

LOL! Thanks, Lawrence. The "invisible freelancer" gags in that strip were pretty funny.

Jim

[Lawrence]

LOL! Thanks, Lawrence. The "invisible freelancer" gags in that strip were pretty funny.

Jim

"Maybe I'm Len Wein" 

[RickV]

Has this been posted here?
http://watchmen2creatordarwyncooke.tumblr.com/

Because it just makes me so so depressed.

[Jeppe]

Seriously, why is it taken for granted that Moore is the best of all living or dead comic book writers? Are the possibilities of the field really that limited? Sure Alan Moore is an immensely talented genre writer, and quite productive, but I don't understand why the majority of people seem to default to him being the objectively best writer to ever operate in the medium. What about Lewis Trondheim, Jim Woodring, George Herriman, Will Eisner, Art Spiegelman, Neil Gaiman, Hergé, Hugo Pratt, Osamu Tezuka, Jodorowsky, Carl Barks, Jeff Smith, Tony Millionaire, Michael Kupperman, Daniel Clowes, or David B.?

And no, my point isn't that any of those guys should substitute Moore as numero uno. Trying to define one guy as the best of the best is just so bizarre to me. I don't really find that type of hero worship in other art forms, hell it doesn't even seem present among comic book artists, and it probably goes a long way towards explaining Moore's inflated ego. But I'm sorry, I know this is extremely well-tread ground, so I'll just shut up now 

[S. Earl]

Has this been posted here?
http://watchmen2creatordarwyncooke.tumblr.com/

Because it just makes me so so depressed.

If the person that posted that's intent was to show the world they have too much free time on their hands, then they succeeded. 

[RickV]

If the person that posted that's intent was to show the world they have too much free time on their hands, then they succeeded.  

That is just how Abhay is.

[JimN]

Seriously, why is it taken for granted that Moore is the best of all living or dead comic book writers? Are the possibilities of the field really that limited? Sure Alan Moore is an immensely talented genre writer, and quite productive, but I don't understand why the majority of people seem to default to him being the objectively best writer to ever operate in the medium. What about Lewis Trondheim, Jim Woodring, George Herriman, Will Eisner, Art Spiegelman, Neil Gaiman, Hergé, Hugo Pratt, Osamu Tezuka, Jodorowsky, Carl Barks, Jeff Smith, Tony Millionaire, Michael Kupperman, Daniel Clowes, or David B.?

And no, my point isn't that any of those guys should substitute Moore as numero uno. Trying to define one guy as the best of the best is just so bizarre to me. I don't really find that type of hero worship in other art forms, hell it doesn't even seem present among comic book artists, and it probably goes a long way towards explaining Moore's inflated ego. But I'm sorry, I know this is extremely well-tread ground, so I'll just shut up now 

It's well-tread ground but it's also a valid question. I don't get it either.

[RickV]

The major difference I see between Moore and that list is that most of them are the writer/artist and Moore writes his comics.

Which people tend to compartmentalize in different sections.

[steve bryant]

Has this been posted here?
http://watchmen2creatordarwyncooke.tumblr.com/

Let me get this straight, yesterday, you kept talking about the context of Alan Moore's comments in the interview, and today you link to a bunch of Darwyn Cooke quotes taken out of context... 

Seriously, why is it taken for granted that Moore is the best of all living or dead comic book writers? Are the possibilities of the field really that limited? Sure Alan Moore is an immensely talented genre writer, and quite productive, but I don't understand why the majority of people seem to default to him being the objectively best writer to ever operate in the medium. What about Lewis Trondheim, Jim Woodring, George Herriman, Will Eisner, Art Spiegelman, Neil Gaiman, Hergé, Hugo Pratt, Osamu Tezuka, Jodorowsky, Carl Barks, Jeff Smith, Tony Millionaire, Michael Kupperman, Daniel Clowes, or David B.?

And no, my point isn't that any of those guys should substitute Moore as numero uno. Trying to define one guy as the best of the best is just so bizarre to me. I don't really find that type of hero worship in other art forms, hell it doesn't even seem present among comic book artists, and it probably goes a long way towards explaining Moore's inflated ego. But I'm sorry, I know this is extremely well-tread ground, so I'll just shut up now 

...and my for Jeppe grows...

[RickV]

Let me get this straight, yesterday, you kept talking about the context of Alan Moore's comments in the interview, and today you link to a bunch of Darwyn Cooke quotes taken out of context... 

You guys looked like you were having so much fun...

[Julian Lytle]

I don't buy that. Gibbons is a co-author of the work. He has as much right to continue working with DC and approve of a Watchmen movie (or prequels or whatever) as Moore has to dis-own it all. Consequently, he didn't cross a line by pursuing those business interests. Both he and Moore are entitled to take their own path and Gibbons shouldn't have to tow Moore's line any more than Moore should have to follow the path Gibbons chooses.

Moore chose to give him the money and it sounds like Gibbons was grateful at the time. Why is the follow up call necessary? It's a weird little condition imposed by Moore and nothing to end a long friendship over. A thank you call would have been courteous but maybe Gibbons felt Moore was on a little power trip and didn't feel like playing along.

At some point, one has to look at the path of broken relationships Moore seems to leave behind him and wonder if the one common denominator in them (Moore himself) is the most likely cause.

I'll drop this now...

He crossed the line when Moore asked him to specifically asked him to not call him and talk about Watchmen anymore. Not about him pursuing anything business wise with Watchmen but to literally not do what your friend asked you to do in regards to interacting with him. There's a tinge of disrespect there.

He also explained why he added that weird little condition because of what happened with Lloyd. And if Gibbons felt that way then so be it but in all things you got a gang of money, your share and your partner's and you can't just say "thanks"...C'mon son. They teach you that in grade school.

[Dean S.]

It's well-tread ground but it's also a valid question. I don't get it either.

I'm right there with you.  I mean....he writes nice books, but I find the fawning of some of these fanboys to be really weird.  I can see acting like your hero can do no wrong when you're 8 years old, but most of these fanboys are grown men. It's just embarrassing to act like that as an adult.

[William Joseph Dunn]

I can't tell if it was good or bad that I posted that interview now...

[Lawrence]

I can't tell if it was good or bad that I posted that interview now...

Haha, it seems things have taken a turn for the worst. I'm going to go back to acting like an embarrassing 8 year old. 

[JimN]

He crossed the line when Moore asked him to specifically asked him to not call him and talk about Watchmen anymore. Not about him pursuing anything business wise with Watchmen but to literally not do what your friend asked you to do in regards to interacting with him. There's a tinge of disrespect there.

He also explained why he added that weird little condition because of what happened with Lloyd. And if Gibbons felt that way then so be it but in all things you got a gang of money, your share and your partner's and you can't just say "thanks"...C'mon son. They teach you that in grade school.

My point was that if someone gives you something and you say thanks and then they place a condition on their generosity and expect/insist that you make a point of calling them again to say thanks, that sounds a bit manipulative. Maybe Gibbons thought so too and that's why he didn't call or maybe there's an entirely different side to the story than what Moore is telling us. That wouldn't surprise me at all.

At this point, i don't care. It's their problem, not mine. I just think when you add all this stuff up, it doesn't paint a very pretty picture of Alan Moore.

I can't tell if it was good or bad that I posted that interview now...

It's good. You stimulated discussion and that's the point of an online forum, no?

[RickV]

I am kinda glad that no one posted the JMS interview from today on Ain'tItCool because that thing is