DC To Publish "Watchmen" Prequels

[MegoSteve]

But I don't see DC attempting to cash in on the Watchmen any more wrong or evil or less noble than it trying to cash in on Superman, Jonah Hex, Sugar and Spike or Batman.

Well, except that all those examples you cite were created as ongoing characters, not something for a self-contained miniseries. Watchmen is arguably the Citizen Kane of comics... a near-perfect classic story often held up as the zenith of its medium. I'd be just as upset if Warner decided to do Citizen Kane 2 or Poor Young Charlie Kane. It's a shameless cash grab.

That's fine, but I love the original, so an update by lesser creators is not for me. I lost a lot of respect for the creators involved. It's kind of skeevy and unprincipled for them to go in and work on this, knowing how Alan Moore feels he was screwed over.

[ctc]

BWAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!

As the Buddha said; “all things in time.”

I’m not really thrilled about this; partly ‘cos I wasn’t really thrilled by the original way back in the day, partly ‘cos this smacks of “new; but the same!” They’re playing it safe by bringing back a name fans will recognize. So again, right from the get-go they’re displaying an attitude of fear.... fear of experimenting, fear of doing something different, fear of chances....

I would MUCH rather see something new instead of constant rehashes of established characters.

Don C.

[The Toyroom]

That's fine, but I love the original, so an update by lesser creators is not for me. I lost a lot of respect for the creators involved. It's kind of skeevy and unprincipled for them to go in and work on this, knowing how Alan Moore feels he was screwed over.

Knowing that this would create controversy DC seems to have done a good job picking A-list teams on these books...I'm sure just the writers and artists alone will draw a lot of people in to buying these titles. I think it's sorta sad though that they could have put this much effort in to getting great teams working on some of the New 52 titles instead of some of the hacks that are on them now. Some books had totally new teams as of issues 4, 6, 7...Ridiculous.

[samurainoir]

Interesting to put this context alongside Steve Bissette's recent account of how Moore torpedoed the 1963 trade collection they were trying to do last year.
SRBissette.com - January Thaw (in Below Zero Weather)

Bisette is now doing 1963 sequels to the handful of characters he negotiated ownership from Moore and Vietch.

[The Toyroom]

^ Alan Moore seems to have made a "mess" at a lot of comic companies...He believes his own hype methinks

[samurainoir]

Knowing that this would create controversy DC seems to have done a good job picking A-list teams on these books...I'm sure just the writers and artists alone will draw a lot of people in to buying these titles. I think it's sorta sad though that they could have put this much effort in to getting great teams working on some of the New 52 titles instead of some of the hacks that are on them now. Some books had totally new teams as of issues 4, 6, 7...Ridiculous.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Given the incredible caliber of talent involved, I personally would have preferred that other than creating their own properties (Mark Millar is currently the poster child). JMS in particular IMHO is a much stronger writer on his own whole-cloth creations.

DC really should be putting this A-list line-up into shoring up the new 52 mainline monthlies (a strategy the Marvel has employed for the past decade). Instead, because of the musical creative chairs, they have once again given up the ground they gained to Marvel. If Azzerello and Barmejo were put on say, the Deathstroke book instead, it could be a Garth Ennis/Steve Dillon Punisher level comeback for the character (which led to two movies... not great movies, but that's two more that DC doesn't have).

But on the flipside of this equation, since the power-shift to Burbank and Levitz being put out to pasture, I'd daresay the reason why is pretty much staring us in the face.

In the past few years, Warner Brothers has spent millions and expended incredible resources turning Watchmen into a Global Brand. If they are not constantly trying to exploit that, from the perspective of the suits and bean-counters, it would be admitting that they are just dumping money into the trash. WB does not have that much already invested in Suicide Squad, Captain Atom, Hawkman, Firestorm, or even Wonder Woman or Supergirl for that matter.

Diane Nelson obviously does not fear Moore's Magic Beard!

[madmarva]

Well, except that all those examples you cite were created as ongoing characters, not something for a self-contained miniseries.

Interesting point. I don't know why DC has waited this long to exploit the Watchmen characters, but I do think it's a naive view of DC's business to believe the characters are unusable just because they were created for a mini-series, unless the contract for the work expressly states that. Publishing the continuing adventures of characters is what the company does.

The fact that Watchmen was great is all the more reason for DC to attempt to make more money off it from a business standpoint. I just don't see the work as something holy or untouchable. I'm guessing DC never tried before because it didn't want to take the chance of new stories hurting sales of the compilation. That's just a guess.

But, getting monthly sales and adding material for its collections is how DC sustains itself. Watchmen is now a resource DC feels it needs to tap. So, yeah, it's a cash grab, but isn't that what business is about? Producing a product that people want to buy?

As for Moore begrudging DC from mining his "25-year-old ideas," I think it's highly ironic that he's exploited the even older characters/ideas of Barrie, Baum, Carroll, Stoker, Stevenson, Wells and others to write a few of his comics. I don't know enough about Barrie and Carroll to hazard a guess, but considering Baum's writings and political beliefs, he'd probably be appalled by how Moore used his character "Dorthy" in "Lost Girls."

As for "Citizen Kane," it's not only considered a classic for the story it told — a loose dramatization and conglomeration of Hearst and Welles' lives — but also for Welles' innovative use of cinematography, music and story structure. Certainly, how Moore and Gibbons chose to tell Watchmen is as much or more a part of its greatness — or genius — as they story they told, but comics creators have been mimicking or borrowing from their story-telling devices since the issues first began coming out, just like directors began using deep focus, various camera manipulations, layered soundtracks, flashbacks, and varied story viewpoints after Welles used them so effectively in "Citizen Kane."

Comics are better and more mature both in tone and structure today because of Moore and Gibbons' work on Watchmen.

But that still doesn't make the characters and concepts unusable by DC, in my opinion.

It will be interesting to see how well these comics end up selling. From what I've read online today, some people are totally uninterested in seeing more Watchmen. But, DC has signed excellent talent to work on the characters. The company better have given more than a few of them a lot of lead time if it plans to publish them monthly.

If I had an unlimited budget, I'd give em all a try. As it is, Minute Men is the only one I know I will try.

Because of budget constraints, I don't read a lot of comics featuring characters I don't know much about or genres other than super heroes. I understand that means I miss a lot of good stuff, but I like reading comics about the characters I fell in love with as a kid. There are novels, short stories, movies and TV for those other genres.

So I have no problem reading these creator's takes on 25-year-old characters that were adapted from 40-year-old characters. But honestly, I'd rather seen some of those creators working on DC or Marvel's primary characters rather than the Watchmen.

[samurainoir]

I think the main point of Moore's objections is that at the time he signed the contract around the original Watchmen characters he co-created, it was pretty much a given that ALL comic books went out of print. Dark Knight and Watchmen were the first to be "ever green" and continually kept in print. So he mistakenly assumed that they would get the rights back at the end of the series. Not that DC went into this with intentions of "swindling" him. They printed a trade to meet demand, and lo and behold it never stopped selling. Which was well within their legal rights, to the letter of the contract.

So Moore walked (in conjunction with disagreements over foreign reprint royalties and the ratings system that never materialized at DC). Over at his blog, Steve Bissette has expressed his opinion that Alan Moore does not take business considerations into account before leaping forward creatively, which is where the troubles stemmed with the 1963 situation.

Although when you think about it, Moore certainly would NOT have gotten a better deal had Giordano let him use the Charlton characters after all. Although arguable, it might not be the seminal work that it is now considered, if it had been handcuffed with company owned characters like Blue Beetle, Captain Atom, and The Question.

Comparatively you've got Neil Gaiman who came in after Moore and after the similar success of Sandman, managed to negotiate a much better deal for himself rather than kicking over the table. However, Gaiman's success also outgrew his original work for hire contracts with DC... to the point where he considered Sandman Endless Nights in the spectrum of a favour/charity to Karen Berger. In recent years, he's chosen not to do anymore Sandman since he makes much more money writing things he actually owns, and DC won't pony up to the negotiating table to lure him back. He does not stand in the way (too much) with Sandman spinoffs though.

[Figuremod73]

Basically what it comes down to is Moore sucks as a business man

[samurainoir]

Keeping in mind as well, because of that tight contract, WB/DC has exploited Watchmen in a way that they would not have with a purely creator owned property. As a result of this, co-creator Dave Gibbons is living quite comfortably and cashing big fat royalty cheques off of his work and characters he co-created. From convention podcasts on the DC site, he did not seem too pleased at the time about the idea of Watchmen sequels, but given his statement above, I'm sure they have come to a financial understanding without much effort at all on his part other than a public blessing.

Then you look over at Bissette's situation, where there is a work like 1963 that he should be able to make some money off of, but is blocked by a third of the creative partnership. You can well understand why he's eager to do his own follow up projects to cash in on whatever small cachet of marketability 1963 has.

Getting Len Wein onboard is also a fairly shrewd move on DC's part... here's the guy who let Alan Moore work on his creation, Swamp Thing.

[Figuremod73]

Len Wein is more than capable as a writer, thats for sure. Some of the best Daredevil stuff I ever read was by Wein.
Really can anyone blame a artist for cashing in on projects? Who wants to be a starving artist? It allows them to work without the worry which many times leads to better more meaningful work.

[samurainoir]

Although to Moore's credit, he does have a track record of signing over his shares to the artists and other writers... some say a ridiculously foolish or principled move, but you have to appreciate the sentiment. Bissette, Veitch, Totleben (and I believe Wein and Wrightson?), Jamie Delano, John Ridgeway, David Lloyd and Dave Gibbons got much larger cheques because Moore insisting on signing over his shares to them.

Of course the two Daves, Lloyd and Gibbons have reportedly become estranged from Moore because they did not adequately thank him for that gesture of the V for Vendetta and Watchmen movie money.

[kingdom warrior]

Basically what it comes down to is Moore sucks as a business man

No, i don't think so....I think he's made his money and has everything he wants.
He's an interesting person in interviews.

I think for the most part he writes something and moves on to the next thing....

[MIB41]

I will be curious if this expansion on the concept is supported with merchandise.

[torgospizza]

No, i don't think so....I think he's made his money and has everything he wants.

Didn't he buy Jimmy Page's house that Alistair Crowley once owned or something? That must have cost a chunk. I thought comic guys did kind of poorly, judging from the interviews with them I've read, but I guess not.

EDIT: On attempting to Google some info on that, I came up with nada. I don't know where I got that from about his house.