Comic Books

[Sci-2]

I think it will be entertaining. I hope they make tons of money off it and that it keeps other titles, specifically those in the Vertigo line, afloat with the revenue.

Really, to me, Watchmen was great, but companies exist to make money. There are probably a lot of hard working people at DC who could use a raise. (I knew a guy in their marketing department who said the pay was less than you'd expect for the level of work involved.)

But I might be more on Moore's side if he wasn't such a whiner.

[Ran]

He could be the baby-eating Bishop of Bath and Wells, and it would not make an iota of difference to a rational view on the ethics of the matter. DC is morally in the wrong, and any artist or writer who is a participant is ethically challenged.

[Sci-2]

He could be the baby-eating Bishop of Bath and Wells, and it would not make an iota of difference to a rational view on the ethics of the matter. DC is morally in the wrong, and any artist or writer who is a participant is ethically challenged.

Why are they wrong to seek profit from a property that they own?

ETA: Mind you, I can see the argument for it being in bad taste.

ETA II:

His Punisher run was good stuff. He writes a nasty-ass Kingpin. I think his writing is probably better suited to the Crime genre than it is to the Cape stuff. I wasn't crazy about his Wolverine run either.

Punisher run is one of my all time favorite stories. The whole thing with Bulls Eye was just incredible.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Why are they wrong to seek profit from a property that they own?

I think the primary argument against D.C. is that they didn't live up to the spirit of their contract with Moore regarding Watchmen. The rights to the book were supposed to revert back to Moore once the book went out of print. As we all know, the book proved to be incredibly popular and thus never went out of print, therefore D.C. retains the rights.

[Ran]

And it's a property that past publishers at DC have basically understood they should not own, as they have at various times made noises about handing back the rights, but didn't have the spine to do it without some kind of quid-pro-quo since the corporate paymasters at Time-Warner (the true people behind this Before Watchmen nonsense, BTW, according to Bleeding Cool's reporting) would toss them into the street otherwise. And as Moore, unlike them, does have a spine and principles, refused having any kind of strings attached to the reversion of rights that everyone understood should have happened a long, long time ago.

This is not a project built on artistic integrity, from editorial on down to creative. These are not stories that must be told, sparked by a sudden flash of creative genius that could not be denied. It's greed, it's a grab for money, and it sucks that creators I admire are erring in being a part of it. I have no objection to writers making a living, or to a business turning a buck... so long as they're doing it ethically.

This isn't ethical, contract or no.

[Sci-2]

Bad luck on Moore's part then, but it doesn't make DC in the wrong.

Moore seemed to benefit from the same bad deal against creators when he took part in writing Superman comics.

Obviously this is to make money, that's what the people are being paid for, it's why publishing as an industry allows us to have nice things. It doesn't make sense, IMO, to see it as anything other than the reality of business.

I have far greater qualms about corporations than how it affects artists whose names I wouldn't know - and might've died penniless - if not for publishers like DC.

ETA: Like how much of my clothing comes from sweatshops, or what goes into the food I eat.

I suspect if Moore hadn't been such as ass talking shit about creators he doesn't even read these other creators might've been more hesitant to go along with Beyond Watchmen.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

And it's a property that past publishers at DC have basically understood they should not own, as they have at various times made noises about handing back the rights, but didn't have the spine to do it without some kind of quid-pro-quo since the corporate paymasters at Time-Warner (the true people behind this Before Watchmen nonsense, BTW, according to Bleeding Cool's reporting) would toss them into the street otherwise. And as Moore, unlike them, does have a spine and principles, refused having any kind of strings attached to the reversion of rights that everyone understood should have happened a long, long time ago.

This is not a project built on artistic integrity, from editorial on down to creative. These are not stories that must be told, sparked by a sudden flash of creative genius that could not be denied. It's greed, it's a grab for money, and it sucks that creators I admire are erring in being a part of it. I have no objection to writers making a living, or to a business turning a buck... so long as they're doing it ethically.

This isn't ethical, contract or no.

I pretty much agree with you outside of the assumption that none of these creators isn't motivated by a story "they have to tell". I have to imagine that many of these writers were influenced or inspired by the original story at some point. Only the finished product will shed light on whether or not there is some inspired creative genius behind it. That being said, I'm with you in that it is ethically questionable for these guys to actively participate in an undertaking that invariably involves screwing over one of their own.

[AverageGuy]

But even the latter can work - good work has come out of such circumstances before. The real test is this: does the story matter, in the end? Have these creators got a good story to tell, using the Watchmen characters? Can they show that the use of these characters was something more than a way to get people to buy comics on the strength of the Watchmen brand? I strongly suspect not, notiwthstanding the pedigree of some of the writers.

I agree. Watchmen definitely had an impact on comics, so much so that comics have explored the concepts behind it again, and again, and again. So that leaves, what, exactly? The Watchmen characters in standard superhero stories? BW might not suck, but it's hard to imagine it surpassing mediocrity.

[red snow]

It's tricky. Part of me still thinks leave it alone. Other parts think "lets see".

I think one way of looking at it is thinking of Batman and how 90% of his comics are bad or completely forgetable but we still get the occasional gems. The shit batman comics don't really make Dark Knight or year one any worse. The Dark knight returns doesn't ruin dark Knight for me. At the same time if They'd stopped doing Batman comics after Dark Knight we'd never have gotten Morrison's run or Azzarello's Vengeance story.

I think the same could be true of Watchmen. This prequel series may be awful, the one after it may be awful too. Then again we may eventually get a story with the watchmen characters that is amazing. I can ignore the bad ones by reading reviews and if there's one that's amazing I'll be more inclined to give it a try.

I know there's the whole ownership thing but legally it seems like DC are technically covered. It may be mean-spirited of them but they aren't breaking any contracts by the sounds of things. It also seems like Moore was forever finished with them anyhow because I suspect they wouldn't have done the prequels if Moore had offered to write anything for them.

[mormont]

Bad luck on Moore's part then, but it doesn't make DC in the wrong.

Moore seemed to benefit from the same bad deal against creators when he took part in writing Superman comics.

Oh good grief. The moment one moral midgetry argument is knocked down, another is propped up.

I could point out that this one is even weaker than the last, but that would be to distract from the fact that you're missing the point. It's irrelevant whether Moore uses other people's characters, once wrote a Superman comic, or said some mean things about modern comics writers: it would be irrelevant if he regularly kicked puppies and funded a campaign to abolish the giving of birthday presents. That has nothing to do with whether DC have a moral - not legal, moral - obligation to revisit the issue of copyright on Watchmen. (Ironically, although legal disputes are still active, DC did at least openly acknowledge they had a moral responsibility to Siegel and Schuster over the Superman issue - which is more than they have done in this case.)

Had Moore signed the same deal today, that case would be weaker. But there's no dispute that when he did sign it, every party to the deal - including DC - was doing so on a clear understanding that the rights would revert to Moore sooner rather than later. That DC may have lucked out and Moore suffered as a result is, if anything, reinforcement for the moral duty argument.

I pretty much agree with you outside of the assumption that none of these creators isn't motivated by a story "they have to tell". I have to imagine that many of these writers were influenced or inspired by the original story at some point.

The trouble is that the only indication we have so far is the Straczynski quote:

it's always bothered me that someone as brilliant and precise about time as Jon could just blithely walk into the intrinsic field test chamber as the time-lock closed. He'd know better than that. But since it did happen, you now have to say, "Okay, that being the case, how did it happen? Is there something we don't know? Or more to the point, was there something he didn't know?

This sounds less like valid artistic inspiration and more like an extremely belated attempt to win a No-Prize*. I'm with AG: I think we can expect some pretty mediocre stories. Not awful, but not striking stories that needed to be told.

*OK, wrong company. But work with me, here.

[Sci-2]

Oh good grief. The moment one moral midgetry argument is knocked down, another is propped up.

Sorry my morals don't agree with yours. People get fucked by bad contracts all the time, oftentimes in much more deceptive cases. DC helped make Moore a star and, IIRC, a millionaire.

It sucks for him, I agree, but I don't see the immorality. Nor did I see one in the Seigel/Schuster case TBH.

ETA: Though I'll admit my knowledge of the latter is incomplete.

[Nephrite]

Sorry my morals don't agree with yours. People get fucked by bad contracts all the time, oftentimes in much more deceptive cases. DC helped make Moore a star and, IIRC, a millionaire.

It sucks for him, I agree, but I don't see the immorality. Nor did I see one in the Seigel/Schuster case TBH.

Well, DC lied to Siegel & Shuster that they are losing money on Superman books. That's... immoral. Probably similar to what New Line Cinema did to Peter Jackson regarding LOTR, or what Straczynski is getting in regards to Babylon 5.

As far as Moore suffering... well, he's been getting payed regularly for years. I'm not sure what he would've done with the rights if he got them (bury them in that cave he has under his house, maybe). Like, the book was a success and DC said: "Hey, we'll keep publishing this, and you'll keep getting paid."

Then again, I just remembered that there was something about DC making some Watchmen keychains or something, selling them and not giving Moore his cut, and DC saying that it doesn't count cause it's promotional material. Shifty at best.

Regarding the whole thing, Mark Waid made some comments about the whole thing, and he worked s an editor at DC at the time:

First

Second

[Ran]

The always-excellent Tom Spurgeon has a number of thoughts on the matter. Worth reading.

[Nephrite]

http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2012/02/14/everybody%E2%80%99s-talking-about-before-watchmen-fast-company-edition/

Boy, do I love this. There's ol' DC posting a blog post about an article where Moore is complaining about Watchmen that even has the phrase "toxic cloud" in the URL.

Sometimes I think that a bunch of monkeys are running that company.

[Sci-2]

The always-excellent Tom Spurgeon has a number of thoughts on the matter. Worth reading.

Thanks for this, made me reconsider my position to an extent.

[Nephrite]

Well, the first arc of the JLA comic is done. And it's pretty much the worst Darkseid story ever. Here, he's just The Hulk with heat vision. And I'm pretty sure that The Hulk would've at least conquered the world for a week. Or at least a city block. Not get his eyes poked out at the same waterfront from 3 issues ago. Basically Darkseid stepped out of the boom tube then got his ass handed to him by a bunch of one-dimensional jerks that need to constantly repeat what they are all about. I mean it felt like everything Hal Jordan said if put through some BS translator would've been: "Me, me, me, me, me." Actually that might've been excellent characterization.

You really don't use Darkseid as the villain in the origin story. You need build-up. This seems like the perfect case of wanting to have your cake and eat it to. I bet Jim Lee really wanted to draw Darkseid, and since DC these days is like Image 2.0 (ARTISTZ RULZ) and nobody at DC really knows for how long he was gonna be on the book (not for long, my guess) so they just went for it. Off course it was written by Johns in the style of early Wildcats or the style of a 4-year old playing with toys. Depends on my mood.

[AverageGuy]

DC helped make Moore a star and, IIRC, a millionaire.

Is Moore actually a millionaire? Gibbons had to sell his original artwork for supplemental income, and I'd heard Moore was on the verge of bankruptcy in the early nineties until his Image work paid off. Of course, since DC eventually bought Wildstorm, I guess he was technically back in their employ at the end, even with the supposed buffer between them. Moore's been rejecting royalties from his work and telling them to give it to the artists for a few years, too.

[Nephrite]

He's giving the royalties from the movies to the artists. He's still getting paid for the work he actually did.

[red snow]

Yeah. I think jla is only good for the eyecandy of the art. too slow a story and pretty empty otherwise. it will be interesting to see how sales are without jim lee. i guess he will do another arc by end of year.

[dornish prince]

for interested parties, i just saw on my twitter feed that moebius has passed away. i still remember being blown away by a silver surfer story that he drew years ago. since then, i've always been a huge fan of his artwork.

the comics community is certainly poorer today.

R.I.P. jean