Rather than answer the questions about Watchmen piecemeal in separate topics, I figured I’d address the key ones here, all in one place.
Let me start out by tackling head-on the most frequent question: “how would you feel if Babylon 5 was being done without your permission?” It’s a fair question, and it needs to be fairly answered...but it has to be an honest comparison, apples to apples, not apples to pomegranates.
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. DC wasn’t making creator-owned deals back in the 80s. Moreover, they were variations on characters that had been previously created for the Charleton Comics universe. Main point is: neither of us owns these characters in any significant legal way. Consequently, neither company needs our permission to do anything.
But I get that we’re talking about the emotional aspect of all this, not the legal stuff, which is pretty cut and dry. 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.
If at any point in the last 25 years, Alan had said, “you know, there’s a Watchmen story I’d like to tell,” there’s no question that DC would have given him both the freedom to tell that story and a check big enough to dim the lights at their offices for a week. And there were frequent overtures for him to do just that. In 2005, DC actually offered to give him ownership of the characters if he’d come back to do more stories with them.
They wanted his involvement, solicited his involvement, would have been thrilled at his involvement. 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. 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.” (Actually, they made that offer last year, and I said yes enthusiastically, because I love these characters and that universe. At the eleventh hour the distribution system they had been trying to put together fell apart, and so did this, but let’s stick to the subject, shall we?)
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?”
“No,” let’s say I cried, “no, no, a thousand times no.”
“How about just to meet with us? Just for an hour?”
“No, absolutely not, nuh-uh, no way, not a chance.”
“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?”
“Fie, I tell you, fie!”
Well, where does that leave us?
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. Because it was my choice to remove myself from the process, it wasn’t something foisted upon me by anybody else.
And frankly, and I’m only talking about me here, if I made that choice, I would be an idiot. Because I love those characters and that universe, and would greatly enjoy the chance to play with them again. Every TV writer in town would show up at my door just to personally kick the crap out of me, and they'd be right to do it.
On to the next topic.
“These were one-off characters, they were never intended to be used again.” A really good point whose only problem is that it’s not actually true. That was certainly never DC’s perception of the characters, and Alan himself floated an idea about doing a Minutemen prequel back in 1985.
Alan didn’t walk away from Watchmen for artistic reasons, he walked away over contract language regarding ownership issues. It was a contract dispute. In time that morphed into something else, but that was not what happened at the time.
“These characters are sacred, nobody else should write them.”
If we’re going to talk about the sanctity of characters, let me point to an observation I made in one of the interviews:
“Alan has spent most of the last decade writing some very, very good stories about characters created by other writers, including Alice (from Wonderland), Dorothy (from Oz), Wendy (from Peter Pan), as well as Captain Nemo, the Invisible Man, Jekyll and Hyde and Professor Moriarty. I think one loses a little of the moral high ground to say, “I can write characters created by Jules Verne, HG Wells, Robert Louis Stevenson, Arthur Conan Doyle and Frank Baum, but it’s wrong for anyone else to write my characters.”
Some folks have replied to this with “well, Alan says this is different because he’s using those characters in different situations.” (I’m not vouching that Alan said that, only that this is the most common reply. If he never said anything to that effect I’m happy to be corrected.)
I’m really good with the English language, but I’ve turned that sentence over several times and I can’t parse it in any logical way. What the heck does it even mean? The moment you have Mr. Hyde do anything not in Robert Louis Stevenson’s book, it’s a “different situation.” I think that the argument being made here is that by putting Mr. Hyde in a modern context, then that makes it Alan’s and that makes it legally and morally okay.
If that’s true, then I invite Alan to try that with James Bond, or Jason Bourne, or any other character where the writer or the estate is still around to fight for the rights of their characters. Legally, yes, you can do what you wish with public domain characters. But one ends up on a slippery moral slope to say that all of these other writers' characters are fair game but Alan’s characters are sacred on a moral or emotional basis.
I would suggest that there are just as many people around the world who hold Wendy from Peter Pan sacred, or who might think it untoward that Alan had Mr. Hyde literally sodomize the Invisible Man TO DEATH after the latter serially raped a bunch of girls at a private school. How would Robert Louis Stevenson or H.G. Wells have viewed such a story?
Despite this, somehow, by Alan’s lights, that’s not just okay, it is right and proper. I’m not saying he shouldn’t have done it. Alan’s a genius, and if it were in my power I’d set him up with a big distribution system, ten million dollars, and publish anything he wrote, up to and including the phone book.
I’m just suggesting that one needs to be consistent in one's moral stance if one wishes that moral stance to be taken seriously.
“This will dilute the legacy of the original Watchmen.”
Can’t happen. The book is the book is the book. It will always be up on the shelf. You can read it alone, or after the prequels, or before...it doesn’t change a word of it. The original book has twenty five years of legacy standing behind it. It’s not that fragile. It’s a work of art, and art endures.
“So how come you left Thor because they were messing with the story?”
Apples, meet oranges. Thor was a work in process, versus a finished work in the case of Watchmen. No one's suggesting a mid-course correction in the original book. I would have been happy to remain on Thor for decades, but when I saw the ominous approach of an Event that would once again erase or damage the story that I had worked so hard to create, I opted out. By contrast, nobody is infringing on a story Alan wants to write. Finally, again, opting out of Thor was my choice, just as it’s Alan’s choice not to be involved in any further Watchmen projects. I have no more right to complain about what came afterward than...well, anyone else in that situation.
“You didn’t like what Mongoose Publishing did with Babylon 5.”
True. Leaving aside that they were trying to include novels into a licensing contract that was intended only for game books and reference...leaving aside that instead of going to quality writers they picked up fan fiction on the cheap from amateur writers...the books were dreadful and not in keeping with the standard that I applied to anything done in the B5 universe. I’d bounced a couple of properly authorized and sanctioned novels previously because I didn’t feel they were up to snuff. The quality was the issue, not my involvement, because under contract I was involved and had approval. Had the books been better, they would’ve come out. They weren’t, and they didn’t. Apples and oranges.
I think those are all the major points that have been repeatedly brought up here and online elsewhere. To which I would add only the following codicil.
When I met with the others in New York to discuss these books, I was in awe of the assembled talent. These were, and are, some of the brightest lights in the comic business. (And me, holding up the rear.) Listening to Brian A, I frankly thought I should be sitting at the children’s table, not here. And beside me was Len Wein, who was involved with the original Watchmen books. Amazing.
I wish you could’ve been there. I wish you could’ve seen the passion, the care, the creativity in their eyes and in their voices. There was no talk of money, or of deals, it was all about digging into characters for whom we all shared a profound reverence and appreciation. No detail was too small to delve into. What really happened to this character, who died or disappeared? Why did this other character dissolve into madness and alcohol? Who the hell was the Twilight Lady? There was an excitement and a dedication to preserve the quality of the characters that I wish you could have been present to witness firsthand.
It. Was. Awesome.
I have always put a great emphasis on doing right by the money fans have to spend on product. This is because I come from ridiculously poor circumstances, and equally ridiculous fannish circumstances. I saved all summer to buy a membership in the Supermen of America Club. Another summer got me a wonderful envelope from FOOM. I was the only kid in my neighborhood who not only ordered a pair of X-Ray Specs, but expected them to actually work...and was devastated when they didn’t.
So I’ve always viewed things from a perspective of, “Is this going to be worth somebody’s hard earned cash?” I won’t speak of my stuff, because the specter of enlightened self-interest raises its head...but when I think of what Brian and Darwyn and the others are doing with their books, the stories they’ve chosen to tell, and the reaction I think these stories will meet, the quality of the art and the storytelling...for me, as a fan, the answer is an enthusiastic “hell, yes.”
The books will speak for themselves.
Everything else is just foreplay.
Once I calmed down from my initial reaction, I began to dig what Moore was writing, but, honestly, I quickly separated The Watchmen from Ditko's originals. If I had held onto my original indignation, I would have missed out on one hell of a story.
In the same vein, I'll give the new teams the same chance. Heck, if I don't like it, I can stop picking up the books, grab my 'Watchmen' collection from the shelf, and reset my point-of-view.
And as much as I love and appreciate Watchmen, why all the hue and cry for poor Alan Moore. Yeah, his dealing with DC have been notoriously contentious. But are they worse than how other creators have and continue to be treated by both Marvel and DC?
I'd say a sight better. DC held off 25 years and has made repeated, though arguably inadequate, attempts to fix this professional relationship. Marvel is doing much of the heavy lifting legal-wise to get Moore's other 80s masterpiece Marvelman/
Could he be treated better? Sure, what creator couldn't, especially in the mainstream comics biz.
But he could be treated like Jack Kirby. Or Superman's creators. Every Marvel movie that comes out has a Stan Lee cameo, but barely a peep is made in the press about co-creator Kirby. I suspect his heirs are not consulted on what Marvel is doing with his characters and barely see a dime.
Superman's creators' estates continue to be entangled in legal battles with DC, and I would argue their treatment over the decades is far worse than anything DC may have done to poor Alan Moore. I don't think Alan is nearly blind, almost penniless, and having to sue DC for health care and a $20,000 a year pension when his creations have earned the company uncountable amounts of money. Ask Joe Shuster what it means to get screwed by DC.
I'm not saying that because Alan got off comparatively lightly he has no right to complain. Just that all his fan-boy supporters need to see that other creators need their support too.
The new 52 launches, and there is no rallying cry for what the original creators would want to be done with Superman in the ongoing series.
But announce a limited series with Moore's Watchmen characters, and you would think DC had literally declared they were going to be dismembering his children, based on some fan-boys' reactions.
Sorry, if you're OK with them publishing Spiderman, Hulk, Batman, and Superman without original creator approval, you have to be OK with this too. If not, start as big of a public outcry with Marvel & DC for Ditko, Kirby, Kane, and Siegel/Shuster.
And JMS, I say enjoy playing with the cool toys when they're offered.
That's my 2 cents.
This will not, cannot affect your creation in any way that matters -- even if Disneee corporation (not Disney, mind you) gathers together 97 kabillion pages of dreck that appears associated with it, your name will still have the cache to actually sell "good stuff" in that vein.
More critically, this can often do things for the original creator -- Larry Niven is a prime case in point -- he himself believed his "Known Universe" to be tapped out, mined dry. Then he opened a largely untapped part of it ("The Man-Kzin Wars") up into a "shared" universe, allowing others to create stories within its context... and then later admitted that he saw new stories in the overall context solely and entirely because of the stimulation that others had given him to looking at things in a different way.
An IP economy works SO much better when there is a free flow of information in it. Ideas have no business being locked up and controlled by anyone. There's just too much magic in human ingenuity and inventiveness to allow such a thing. Copyright is and should only be about rewarding creators for creating, not for granting them control over their creations.
1. Alan Moore had his chance at making mends with DC, he had his chance to bring us more stories..hell he had the CHANCE to hire Stan Lee's lawyer just like Shuster and Siegel descendants did recently with the superman legal battles and caused yet ANOTHER relaunch type deal, but he didn't did he!
He's just an angry, narcissistic hack who thought that the world was his toilet and he was the shit. He could have taken the money and the story and he could have written the GREATEST story ever told and could have sodomized DC and WB in the process but he didn't did he..he had his shot at retribution many of times but he didn't have the balls to pull the trigger, in other words Alan and everyone who supports Alan should quit bitching and enjoy what should be a good ass story!
2. Out of all the writters to choose from to do a watchmen project, WHY YOU!
Nothing you're ever done cried watchman or Dr. Manhattan..you are nowhere near Alans level nor will you ever be, your stories have always been stale and half assed
Why would the DC brass pick YOU out of all the hard working monkeys they got laying around, you suck!
I understand Brian..hes as trippy a writter as they come, he's second to Grant and third to Alan..but WHY YOU?!
3. You ARE well aware that the only reason your book is highly anticipated is because you got two of the BEST Kuberts doing the art on it..I hope you're aware of that amigo.
Alan Moore: My understanding is that when Watchmen is finished and DC have not used the characters for a year, they're ours.
Dave Gibbons: They pay us a substantial amount of money...
Moore: ... to retain the rights. So basically they're not ours, but if DC is working with the characters in our interests then they might as well be. On the other hand, if the characters have outlived their natural life span and DC doesn't want to do anything with them, then after a year we've got them and we can do what we want with them, which I'm perfectly happy with.
Gibbons: What would be horrendous, and DC could legally do it, would be to have Rorschach crossing over with Batman or something like that, but I've got enough faith in them that I don't think they'd do that. I think because of the unique team they couldn't get anybody else to take it over to do Watchmen II or anything else like that, and we've certainly got no plans to do Watchmen II.
Read More: http://
The climax of the story is simply a question. As readers, we are invited to reflect on what Peter is actually thinking about the whole thing: Not a villain, not Aunt May, just his own life after the spider. After the fight with Morlun, Spider-Man displays one of the most human responses ever - after a mortal battle: he sits, and talks to God. I could relate to that; not only I'd understood it, but also felt it.
** For those who have no idea what I'm talking about, read the ASM TPB: 'Coming Home'.**
He made, alongside John Romita Jr, one of the best moments in Spider-Man's history - these hardcovers are right beside my Lee/Ditko/
Bottomline, Spider-man is my favorite hero, and Straczynski wrote him superbly. After that, I read 'Midnight Nation', 'Supreme Power', 'Strange', some B5 episodes and more of his stuff and gained more respect towards him.
I wonder, if he has done such great work with other character's, what wouldn't he be able to do with Watchmen? Let us remember that none of the writers assembled intend to change Moore's work. On every cover of these new series is written: 'before Watchmen'. So, the aftermath of the story (unlike Kubrick's "2001 - A Space Odissey" the sequel "2010") remains only in our imaginations.
And also unlike his peers, JMS is the first to actually explain to us, readers (on facebook nonetheless!) how the whole thing came into fruition - because like us, he understands the true value of Watchmen and the implications of writing prequels (I repeat: 'prequels') of the story. On the top of it, he respescts Alan Moore; a lot, and Watchmen as well. It is original and unique, we all know that. But let us not forget also that the characters and the whole 9-panel visual structure of the GN comes from Steve Ditko's vision (Charlton characters / ASM layout page). From that point of view, Watchmen is not original, but it deserves the recognition it has for exploring the concept and possibilities of the comic book medium within a comic book story. So wouldn't it be nice to revisit that universe again and creating more opportunities for new readers to discover the original material and therefore bringing more support to the comic book art and market?
And c'mon! Darwyn Cooke will tackle the Minutemen and I'm sure it's gonna be cool too (especially after reading "The New Frontier" - the period is the same!).
Anyway, more than ever, my whole statement here supports JMS' (statement) on the whole thing. To me, he wrote Spider-man's Watchmen with JRJr.
He writes with his heart and inputs lots of more on his stories; Peter Parker, Barry Allen, Stephen Strange and even Clark Kent never sounded so real.
We all knew that the 'before Watchmen' is supposed to create controversy. And besides, none of us have read the thing, so at least shall we give the guys in the project the benefit of doubt.
After all, Alan Moore said himself in the end of the GN that he leaves it entirely in or hands, so...
THAT would be apples to apples.
I think there's more oversimplificat
I'm happy for Joe getting the new gig though and sad at the B5 news. Hopefully someone will let Joe some more B5 comics (or rerelease the old ones and books)
(I'll be sure to avoid presenting things in a way that would suggest/incite further perceptions of a "public quarrel" or anything of that nature, since obviously we all love Moore's writing and respect him as a great creative talent, and this is about disagreements over this particular situation in this particular context.)
Regarding you looking back through comics you've written for ways to improve your writing, I have one request. Could you tone down that thing you do where you have a character say a line and then repeat that line (or variations on it) for multiple panels? I can provide you with a number of examples of your having done this, if you'd like.
I know you're doing it for its perceived dramatic weight, but you've done it so many times in the past that it has begun to come across--to me, at least--as self-parodying shtick.
You may have already addressed this in your more recent writing. I haven't had the opportunity to read much of what you've written in the last handful of years.
That said, I've been a wedding DJ. I wound up playing nothing but requests. Like countless others, I've also had my writing published. I have my own shticks, and I don't think for a second there aren't people out there who have read what I've written without wanting to rewrite every sentence.
It's clear you're conscious of your multi-panel line repetitions, and I assume you will continue to want to do them. I know why you do it, and I don't think it's wrong to do it. I do, however, think the effectiveness of it is diluted by overdoing it. Like many of your fans, I'm taking advantage of the novelty of having a direct line of contact with you.
I suppose I could have used this direct line to tell you how solidly you plot things, how much I like "Night Fears" (from Murder She Wrote's eighth season), or how much I prize what you and everyone at Filmation managed to do with He-Man and She-Ra. Instead, as in life, I chose to focus on the negative. I take the positive for granted, and rarely praise it.
You have many fans glad to take your writing as-is. You don't need me to tell you this. You don't need me for anything, in fact, and I'm sure it doesn't take much effort for you to brush off anyone's armchair criticism. You've made a career out of writing. You clearly know what you're doing.
Like many others, I will be checking out Before Watchmen. I assumed you would be doing the Dr. Manhattan mini as soon as I read you were involved, and wasn't surprised when it was confirmed. It'll give you plenty of room for your patent existential musing, and you'll have a real talent working with you to communicate it visually. (I'm surprised Hughes is doing more than just the covers. Did he have a good head start? I know his style requires that he take a lot longer than most artists would take. I worry about him meeting deadlines.)
Yeah, I know the issues (legal, literary, historical, personal, whatever) involved, yeah, I know, for example, @ DC alone, that the Superman mythos alone changed significantly and often even before the Earth 1/2 split (ot to mention after), and then there were the subsequent "Crises," and then "The New 52" (the superhero comics event I'm REALLY upset about), but ...
... but unlike Superman et al., Watchmen really was the work of, if not quite a single person (I'm not so sure it isn't Watchmen without Gibbons, either), an auteur, perhaps, in the cinematic sense. I can't help but feel the way I feel about, say, the Dune sequels/
Or maybe the post-Kirby "Fourth World" stories are a better analogue. Here at any rate is to hoping that DC never subsumes Moore's/
This page is overseen and owned by Mira.















