Before Watchmen

Status
Not open for further replies.
Norris

Norris

Vagabond said:
See what happened there was different. The original works are still (mostly) that, original. They haven't been revisited with alternative viewpoints or prequels or whatever. No one wrote a book detailing the adventures of M in Live and Let Die, or....something about Star Trek (I have no idea there). Instead, the continuities soldiered on with new stories set within the same universe.
Click to expand...
No, it really isn't. There was a five book long Young Bond series last decade, detailing James Bond's adventures as a teen in the 1930's. Around the same time, there was a trilogy depicting the adventures of Ms. Moneypenny, M's secretary, which took place around established Bond novels and gave the character a first name for the first time since her introduction in 1953. Going back to 1973, you had the novel James Bond: The Authorised Biography of 007, which was portrayed as the biography of the "real" James Bond upon whom Fleming based his novels. In 1968, you had 003½: The Adventures of James Bond Junior, which was about James Bond's nephew (who was inexplicably named like he was James Bond's son) which was a Hardy Boys-type thing which flew in the face of established cannon which had explicitly labeled 007 as an orphaned only child. Most recently as the aforementioned Carte Blanche, which could reasonably be labelled "Ultimate James Bond" which re-imagined the character as 1979-born veteran of the ongoing War in Afghanistan (as opposed to a WWII veteran Cold War spy) in a fresh continuity, meaning no prior adventures. Its quite good, by the way, if you like the genre.

Star Trek has had, between all of its various novels and comics and filmed stuff, more prequels and side stories than you can shake a stick at. There are novels detailing Picard's time as captain of the Stargazer, novels detailing Capt. John Harriman (who was in Star Trek Generations for about five minutes) having adventures, novels that detail Worf's time at Starfleet Academy, at least one novel doing the same for Captain Kirk, a short lived comic book detailing Spock's adventures as a member of Captain Pike's crew, etc, etc.

And these are new stories set in the same continuity. A prequel is a new story. I happen to agree that, while Moore did a perfect job giving you everything you needed to know about the characters, there is wiggle room in the original story for adventures we didn't see because we didn't see many adventures from the old days. I'm not saying they'll be wonderful, but I don't find the idea inherently disrespectful or crass.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

Of course it is. But the new 52 has given way to some pretty good comics, like Animal Man and Batwoman. And the creative teams behind this are some of the best in the business.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

ThatNickGuy said:
Of course it is. But the new 52 has given way to some pretty good comics, like Animal Man and Batwoman.
Click to expand...
It also prematurely ended a whole lot more good comics that could have kept going, like Batman Beyond, Gotham City Sirens, and Power Girl. Batman Beyond didn't even get 12 issues, despite selling well and being demanded by the fans for YEARS. It was supposed to get more issues after a break (starting with House of 10,000 Clowns) but who knows now...
 
Norris

Norris

Gryfter said:
Sorry, this is not an attempt at art, it a money grab just like the new 52 was.
Click to expand...
More along the lines of "just like the whole of the film, television, and comic book industries are". These industries exist to make money through the exploitation of their intellectual property. Batman Begins was a money grab too. Being a money grab and creating a quality product are not mutually exclusive.

AshburnerX said:
It also prematurely ended a whole lot more good comics that could have kept going, like Batman Beyond, Gotham City Sirens, and Power Girl. Batman Beyond didn't even get 12 issues, despite selling well and being demanded by the fans for YEARS. It was supposed to get more issues after a break (starting with House of 10,000 Clowns) but who knows now...
Click to expand...
I do. Though I admit the DC website isn't always up to date, I haven't seen anything proclaiming this book to be cancelled or delayed.

EDIT: SHIT, ninja'd.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Ahh... never saw the announcement. Complaint retracted, though I still think Gotham City Sirens should have kept going (even with a cast a change).
 
Gryfter

Gryfter

I disagree on Begins being a money grab. Batman Forever and Batman and Robin I would wholeheartedly agree with being done simply to get the fans to pay more money, but Begins was an attempt to do something different with the Bat franchise (to do as realistic a Batman as possible) and it has succeeded.

These watchman books are doing a prequel to a story that already had tons of solid backstory. This would be like doing a Superman story but having it take place while he was traveling to earth in a space capsule, because nobody has really explored everything that could have happened to him while his rocket was speeding to earth.
 
Norris

Norris

Gryfter said:
I disagree on Begins being a money grab. Batman Forever and Batman and Robin I would wholeheartedly agree with being done simply to get the fans to pay more money, but Begins was an attempt to do something different with the Bat franchise (to do as realistic a Batman as possible) and it has succeeded.
Click to expand...
True, but that was simply the latest in a line of different spins and stories that Warner Bros. worked on so they could keep the Bat-Franchise going so they could have another blockbuster film. Christoper Nolan and David Goyer created a good film, but Warner Bros. would have remade the Adam West movie with Jack Black in the lead role if they thought it would have resuscitated the franchise.

These watchman books are doing a prequel to a story that already had tons of solid backstory. This would be like doing a Superman story but having it take place while he was traveling to earth in a space capsule, because nobody has really explored everything that could have happened to him while his rocket was speeding to earth.
Click to expand...
I would liken it more to deciding to write so stories exploring the adventures of Superman as a teenager, a time period that hadn't been examined at all. Oh wait, they did that in the forties. Stole Jerry Seigel's idea, which they had earlier turned down, when it became apparent that kid heroes like Robin sold well. And that blatant cash grab became a long running and enduring part of the mythos (at least until the lawsuit), leading to the creation of the Legion of Super-Heroes and Bizarro. Funny that.

Now, don't get me wrong, these comics have a massive problem - how do they tell a story that remains true to the original without retreading the same ground? How do they tell us something new about the characters or show us something worth seeing from/about their history? I don't know the answers, and I'm sure that at least some of the books will fail at it. That doesn't mean there's no merit in trying.

On another note, here's JMS' answers to criticisms of "How would you feel if someone gave Babylon 5 this treatment?
“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. [...] But I get that we’re talking about the emotional aspect of all this, not the legal stuff, which is pretty cut and dry,” he wrote. “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.”

Referring to repeated unsuccessful attempts by DC to convince Moore to revisit Watchmen — the most recent was in 2010, when the publisher offered to relinquish the rights to the comic if the writer “would agree to some dopey prequels and sequels” — Straczynski said, “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,” he continued. “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.’ [...] 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?’ [...] ‘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?’

“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,” Straczynski wrote. “Because it was my choice to remove myself from the process, it wasn’t something foisted upon me by anybody else.”
Click to expand...
 
fade

fade

Staff member
Well, Moore only gets half the credit for Watchmen first of all. That book could've been terrible without Gibbons's visual story telling and metaphorical art. The problem with a prequel is that it's been told already. Not in detail, but it's your assumptions about the characters before the story starts that makes it good (and also makes it a difficult first comic).
 
Espy

Espy

All I'm saying is that DARWYN COOKE doing a minuteman comic? I think thats why God made things to write and draw with.
 
Espy

Espy

I'm sorry, but I have never been able to take anyone who wears those kinds of rings like Moore even remotely serious.

Probably because the only people I know who wear them are the dorks turned "warlocks" who live in their mothers basements and wear a trench coat every day.
 
Espy

Espy

Covar said:
I'm pretty sure Alan Moore doesn't live with his mother. I could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure he lives in a giant mansion filled with paintings and statues of other peoples characters he's made money off having sex. Because he's so well adjusted you see. :p
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

I liked Alan Moore a lot more before he started insulting all of his long time friends and basically calling them cowards for not wanting to work outside the system like he does. He doesn't seem to realize that the only reason he CAN do that is because he's fucking Alan Moore.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
AshburnerX said:
I liked Alan Moore a lot more before he started insulting all of his long time friends and basically calling them cowards for not wanting to work outside the system like he does. He doesn't seem to realize that the only reason he CAN do that is because he's fucking Alan Moore.
Click to expand...
That's it in a nutshell. It's not that he writes necessarily better than his colleagues. He just gets to write about things that most aren't allowed to write about and get paid. And I doubt that's all on him.
 
Norris

Norris

Covar said:
I'm pretty sure Alan Moore doesn't live with his mother. I could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
SPACE IS AWESOME!

That's all. Completely off topic. I've just been watching Fourze.

EDIT: You know what? On topic - I've seen quotes from Alan Moore stating that he's mad at DC Comics because they had no intention of honoring their agreement. Now, their agreement was that if Watchmen and V For Vendetta (two comics that were pretty much unprecedented in the states and kind of risky at the time) were ever out of print for more than a year, he'd get the rights back. He claims that DC was malicious in this deal and that they never planned to let Watchmen go out of print. Of course, this blatantly ignores that Watchmen was a financial risk that paid off and became on the most influential graphic novels of all time. It's no more likely to go out of print soon than Harry Potter.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

That's actually a more complicated issue involving creator's rights and how the Big 2 think they should own every property they print explicitly because of the Watchmen scenario. To put it simply, yes, Alan signed a bad deal... but it was the only deal he was ever going to get. If he hadn't signed the rights of his creation away to DC, they'd have simply found someone else to write the story. Alan is talented, but he wasn't the only guy in the company.

The moves the Big 2 will take to retain authority over their properties are pretty awful. You should read up on Gary Friedrich sometime... guy created Ghost Rider, but he hasn't seen a dime from ether movie deal, isn't allowed to draw him except when Marvel says it's OK, and isn't allowed to profit from his association with the character in anyway... he can't even do paid interviews about Ghost Rider or claim he's the creator. Marvel recently made him pay them 17,000 dollars because he drew some prints to get by and sold them at conventions. He's currently penniless and destitute because he's been unable to profit from his creations... mostly because of a similar deal he had with Marvel.
 
ThatNickGuy

ThatNickGuy

They'll probably just say that all Marvel characters were created by Stan Lee and to hell with anyone else.

It worked for them in the past.
 
strawman

strawman

You have to protect your copyright. If they allowed him to sell items based on their copyright, they may have a much harder time proving that they own the copyright in the future, should they find the need to do so.

It would be no different if someone not related to the project started selling Ghost Rider merchandise.

Until he can prove that he has rights to do so, they can sue him for it.
 
Frank

Frank

Ash didn't mention that before Marvel went after him for his con stuff, Friedrich unsuccessfully tried to sue them for a bunch of Ghost Rider money (including movie royalties and such). He tried to bite a piece of the pie which he didn't legally have a right to and Marvel it looks like is using him as an example by going after him for something that tons of other artists do and that Marvel generally ignores.

Is it right? No, it's not, but it is what the current copyright laws in the USA make them to be.

Neal Adams:

Fellow creators, we can help Gary Friedrich without taking any kind of position in his case with Marvel. Gary is sick, and he’s about to lose his house, and though he will tell you he is not destitute, he needs help.

If I have to do it alone, I will see to it that he gets his mortgage paid, and gets some money in the bank. But I would like to ask you all to help.

Gary is a victim of the deficiencies of two very bad copyright laws, and the history in the comic book industry of poor practices on everybody’s part. There will be battles in the future, and good will come of them. But this is simply just a bad situation. Gary is one of us. And while we can’t save him from Marvel, and his small place in history, we can help him have a place to live, ongoing. And I can only promise you this. If you find yourself in a bad situation, whether for heath or other reasons, I and others, will join to help you. Just as you have helped to support William Messner-Loebs, Dave Cockrum and others.

While I hope that Marvel would step up and help out too, I can understand that they find themselves in such an unfortunate position that they cannot do so. I would like to believe that they would if they could.

It’s up to us. We will get information out to you as best we can. If you have a piece of artwork that we can sell or auction, you can send it to Continuity studios, 15 W. 39th St, 9th fl, New York N.Y. 10018. 212 869-4170.

Thanks so much for any help you can offer.
-Neal Adams
 
Norris

Norris

I don't think you'll find anyone who will dispute that work-for-hire agreements, especially in super hero comics, have a lot of drawbacks for the artist. They do. But the trade-off comes from them not being the ones taking the financial risks of publishing. For every one character Marvel or DC owns that hits big (long publishing history, other media adaptations, etc), there are a bunch more that don't. Combat Kelly and The Deadly Dozen or Captain Savage and The Leatherneck Raiders were just as much Gary Friedrich's creations, presumably under the same terms, at Marvel, but (and correct me if I'm wrong) he's not disputing their ownership.
 
Frank

Frank

Oh snap. Ty Templeton, a dude I've always dug for his multitude of appearances on this old weird Canadian comic book show called The Anti-Gravity Room I watched religiously as a kid, made this.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top