×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

DC Comics Announces "Before Watchmen"

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the watchmen-kids dept.

Entertainment 130

eldavojohn writes "Currently DC Comics' site has a banner announcing a new series called "Before Watchmen." Unfortunately the blog pages for this new series appear to be experiencing high traffic and are unreachable. But a number of sites are breaking down these new endeavors that will be giving backstories to the seven characters and who will be creating each of those series. There's also speculation ranging from how much this must upset Alan Moore (egg frying on his forehead seems to be the popular guess) to the theory that this is simply for more movie material. There's an abundance of information from interviews released today."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

130 comments

Before. (4, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894193)


I heard rumour that before Big Blue Wang there was Massive Pink Vag. Unfortunately the site is down and this can't be confirmed.

Who cares? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894197)

Why is this on /. again? Comic book news?

Re:Who cares? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894255)

Yea, I mean, what the fuck? This site is supposed to be "News for Nerds". Has anyone ever heard of a nerd who likes comic books? That's just ridiculous, everyone knows only jocks and hipsters read comic books.....

Re:Who cares? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895053)

Why is this on /. again? Comic book news?

Worst comment ever.

And... (1)

TheFoxMan88 (2528592) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894225)

the nightmares of the blue wang come flooding back

Re:And... (4, Funny)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894291)

I came to this movie because it was Watchmen, not because I wanted to, you know, watch men.

=8 ) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895725)

I came to this movie because it was Watchmen, not because I wanted to, you know, watch men.

:)

brilliant!

Re:And... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894577)

The sight of a male member causes you nightmares? Fair enough, it's blue, but have you considered getting professional help?

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894783)

I've seen enough Sonic the Hedgehog porn that a big blue cock was no shock

Re:And... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38897311)

That's what I was thinking. It just goes to show just how hyper-prudish North America is. It was depicted in an entirely non-sexual way, but still everyone screams bloody murder that this is absolutely unacceptable. On the other hand, depictions of a dog with its head axed open, or someone exploding into a fine mist, or hell... even the idea of millions of people murdered by a blast of energy... all of this is fine. But a penis. OH HOLY MOTHER OF GOD, WE'RE ALL GOING TO HELL FOR SEEING IT! But seeing cold-blooded murder? Eh, whatever, it's a Tuesday.

It's just as bad as that girl during the oscars a few years ago (I think it was Mariah Carey?) where their breast was every so slightly exposed for like... 1/4 of a second. HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF COMPLAINTS. I mean sweet christ, what the hell is wrong with this situation?!? The perfectly natural human body (well, in Watchmen it was blue, but you get the idea) is reviled, and considered disgusting to show, but murder, dismemberment, and any and all forms of violence are perfectly fine?

Holy fuck, society, you have no idea just how fucked up you are. Keep walking down this path, and we might as well be Iran. It makes me very sad to be alive in these times, and is one of the many reasons why I actively hate society here as a whole. If only countries that didn't have these fucked up priorities didn't have their own severe problems.

I've heard Iceland isn't that bad...

Finally it's here (5, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894239)

I can't wait to have Alan Moore sign my copy of Watchman Babies: V for Vacation!

Re:Finally it's here (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894441)

Be sure to wear your Saturday Morning Watchmen [youtube.com] T-shirt, to show your loyalty to, and understanding of, his artistic vision. It'll make him more likely to cooperate.

Re:Finally it's here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894817)

Oh god, I forgot how awesome that was.

Re:Finally it's here (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894809)

I can't wait to have Alan Moore sign my copy of Watchman Babies: V for Vacation!

Shouldn't that be: V for Vaccination?

Next up: Watchmen Babies - The Weening.

Greed (5, Insightful)

sjpadbury (169729) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894263)

Meanwhile, DC continues to show there is no move too desperate that they won't risk alienating their fans in the quest for the dollar.

(Note: Not multiple dollars, they'll do it for just 1....)

Re:Greed (2)

getto man d (619850) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894317)

b-b-but think of all the opportunities (revenue) for the ensuing movies! I'm sure they'll be amazing too! The big studios sure know what fans want.

Re:Greed (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894369)

Pft. No matter what, some fan will be unhappy, some will be happy. That's the way of things. For everybody wanting MOARHS SUPERMANS there is another who wants BAZTZMEN!

Oh sure, there's stuff they can do that's universally panned, but that's the exception more than the rule. And there are folks at DC who recognize that, just want the final episode of Brave and the Bold.

Re:Greed (4, Insightful)

localman57 (1340533) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894415)

Meanwhile, DC continues to show there is no move too desperate that they won't risk alienating their fans in the quest for the dollar.

(Note: Not multiple dollars, they'll do it for just 1....)

What dollars? Wasn't the original Watchmen a huge financial bust? Along the lines of the studio guys saying they'd never do an R-Rated Comic movie again?

Re:Greed (2)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894429)

The movie lost money, mainly because special effects are expensive and R cuts the audience. The comic was a huge money maker.

Re:Greed (1, Interesting)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894879)

"The movie lost money, mainly because special effects are expensive and R cuts the audience."

And because it was stupid and intensely boring.

One of the few regrets in my life is that I actually sat through the entire sixteen hours of the movie to see whether it would improve, whereas my girlfriend was smart enough to give up after half an hour.

Re:Greed (2)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895225)

If you didn't like the movie you wouldn't have liked the comic. The movie was fun for fans of the comics and the sorts of people who would have liked the comic a generation later. That ain't nearly enough to make a major blockbuster special effects movie a financial success.

Re:Greed (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896005)

I read the comic and found it boring too. Sure, it may have been a step above most comics of its era, but that doesn't make it good when compared to other forms of fiction.

I'd agree that the movie was only going to appeal to fans of the comic, which is why it was a silly idea in the first place.

Re:Greed (1)

CarsonChittom (2025388) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896987)

Counter data point: I really liked the comic (though I didn't read it until 2004? maybe 2005?), which was why I put the movie in my Netflix queue. The movie bored me: the pacing was terrible, the acting was wooden. It was a pretty movie, sure. But pretty alone does not a good movie make.

Re:Greed (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894769)

According to typical Hollywood accounting practices no movie has ever made money

Re:Greed (1)

ZipK (1051658) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894957)

What dollars? Wasn't the original Watchmen a huge financial bust? Along the lines of the studio guys saying they'd never do an R-Rated Comic movie again?

As noted by others, the movie wasn't a blockbuster, but the graphic novel is a perennial that's sold 2 million copies and counting.

Re:Greed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38897447)

What dollars? Wasn't the original Watchmen a huge financial bust? Along the lines of the studio guys saying they'd never do an R-Rated Comic movie again?

I don't know the numbers in this particular case, but there's a long tradition of "Hollywood accounting" under which all movies are huge financial busts regardless of how profitable they were for the various sub-contractors and shell companies involved in their production and distribution.

Re:Greed (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894419)

Don't be absurd! Nothing sells better to a changing, increasingly diverse market than taking your old formula and pushing it to extremes that no one has asked for! It works for celebrities and reality television!

Re:Greed (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894767)

Don't be absurd! Nothing sells better to a changing, increasingly diverse market than taking your old formula and pushing it to extremes that no one has asked for! It works for celebrities and reality television!

Television viewers, for the most part, are not buying individual issues - they are tuned into a show and either watch it or not, or the network drops it due to ratings.

Comics have been becoming a parody unto themselves. All this seriousness... geez. It's like Soap Opera in graphical format. I expect even Comic Book Guy has to be wondering at some point where the magic went when it left comics.

Re:Greed (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894491)

I can't believe DC or Marvel would compromise artistic integrity for a buck.

Re:Greed (1)

PessimysticRaven (1864010) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894703)

I can't believe DC or Marvel would compromise artistic integrity for a buck.

They're businesses. That's written into the Mission Statement.

Re:Greed (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895019)

I can't believe DC or Marvel would compromise artistic integrity for a buck.

They're businesses. That's written into the Mission Statement.

Right under where it says, "Will sell out for money"

I kinda wonder if this is going to be like Lucas did with Star Wars .. in a few years another line will begin with the After Watchmen and then the Pre-Before Watchmen and like that there, culminating with factions of fans split between which was better before or after reimaginings of everything.

Re:Greed (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894881)

I can't believe DC or Marvel would compromise artistic integrity for a buck.

Well done. Great use of sarcasm.

When I look at my two cartons of classic comic books which are worth about nil, thanks to their reprinting of comics, I realize you can never again look at them as something which could be considered 'investment' ever again. Buy 'em if you like them, but don't expect to get anything for Issue #1 or the Special Series or even the one where ____ kills off _____. Because they'll have them all re-printed and bound for people who want to just buy the whole collection in one volume.

Thanks comic companies.

Re:Greed (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895193)

When I look at my two cartons of classic comic books which are worth about nil, thanks to their reprinting of comics, I realize you can never again look at them as something which could be considered 'investment' ever again

...and that's a good thing.. The popular perception as comics as an investment back in the 90's coincided with a huge decline of the quality of comics. Buy comics if you want to read them, not as a potential investment. Why should they be treated any differently than any other form of book or magazine?

Re:Greed (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38897165)

What, you mean my stack of shrink-wrapped foil-cover never-read limited-edition collector's-issue Issue #0 of "Like Conan but with Machine Guns" aren't worth ANYTHING?

Re:Greed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895207)

Wait, you're complaining that they're letting new fans read classic stories, rather than locking them away so that only collectors can ever see them? Seriously?

I dunno who sold you on comic books being an "investment" but if he starts buying stocks I suggest you short his portfolio.

Your Investment's Value not an "Artistic" issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895289)

I can't believe DC or Marvel would compromise artistic integrity for a buck.

Well done. Great use of sarcasm. When I look at my two cartons of classic comic books which are worth about nil, thanks to their reprinting of comics, I realize you can never again look at them as something which could be considered 'investment' ever again. Buy 'em if you like them, but don't expect to get anything for Issue #1 or the Special Series or even the one where ____ kills off _____. Because they'll have them all re-printed and bound for people who want to just buy the whole collection in one volume. Thanks comic companies.

So you're saying that you're annoyed because they reprinted some comics and your collection is less valuable.

Firstly, what does that have to do with artistic integrity, and secondly, why are *you* taking that line of complaint when it sounds like you bought the lot for investment purposes (or at least expecting to make money on it) rather than because you appreciated their artistic value or, you know... enjoyed them?

Even if they implied that you were going to get stinking rich by buying "Alternate Universe Spiderman Where He Has Three Nipples And Wears His Underpants On His Head Special Edition #1 (Limited to 7 1/2 copies)" for $17,000.39, then they went and printed 54,000,001 and gave them away free with TV Guide the next week, this has sod all to do with *artistic* integrity.

Re:Greed (4, Interesting)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895511)

There's a simple lesson here: Never treat something as an "investment" when the value is based entirely on artificial scarcity when the organization controlling the scarcity has no financial incentive to maintain the scarcity!

Money or stocks can be good investments because even though governments or corporations can issue new money/stock, it is detrimental to their own finances to do so without limit because they use that money and stock. So they have to balance reducing the scarcity with the resulting loss of value.

Marvel doesn't buy things with copies of Amazing Spiderman #1, the value of that comic has no direct effect on the company, so why would anyone assume they'd never do anything to tank its value?

Because publishers love secondary markets where they themselves don't see any of the profit, am I right?

I saw the same thing in Magic: The Gathering. Someone would pay hundreds of dollars for a rare first-print power card, and would rationalize it as an investment. Ha! Then -- to the surprise of only a few morons -- WotC reprinted most of these cards and made the originals next to worthless.

So, yeah, thinking of them as a long-term investment was kinda silly to begin with. And as the ACs pointed out, this has nothing to do with "artistic integrity" (it's about their money-grubbing vs yours), and is in fact better for the community at large because they get to enjoy the thing that before only a few did.

So yeah, thanks comic companies for spreading enjoyment and teaching people valuable economic lessons!

Re:Greed (1)

luke923 (778953) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896881)

So, yeah, thinking of them as a long-term investment was kinda silly to begin with. And as the ACs pointed out, this has nothing to do with "artistic integrity" (it's about their money-grubbing vs yours), and is in fact better for the community at large because they get to enjoy the thing that before only a few did.

Maybe they should have called it Occupy Magic the Gathering.

Re:Greed (3, Interesting)

alexander_686 (957440) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894735)

Meanwhile, DC continues to show there is no move too desperate that they won't risk alienating their fans in the quest for the dollar.

Actually, DC & Moore’s original plan was to write a prequel – so it’s not like it a total violation of Moore’s idea. (That being said, what’s the chance that the writer will be able to match Moore’s original script?)

Re:Greed (1, Offtopic)

houghi (78078) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895739)

Take a stand. You can do this now or any other event that would allow this.

Set up camp for weeks to be the first to buy tickets, a new phone, whatever. See that there are a LOT of people and that there is a LOT of news coverage to see the hype when the store opens.

Then you and your few hundred friends go in one by one and clearly state why you DON'T want to buy a ticket. (SOPA/Copyrights/...) Have a clear statement ready for the press who will be there. And be sure you do this to a company who deserves it.

This idea is in the public domain and is intended for story telling only. Any resemblens of current or future events will ... aw sodd it. If they want me as a scapegoat, THE MAN will fuck me over anyway.

[reading from journal] (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894287)

Rorschach's Journal. October First, 2013: Intellectual property carcass in alley this morning, tire tread on burst stomach. This company is milking me. I have seen its true face. The sequels are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scrape bottom, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their exploitation and mediocrity will foam up about their waists and all the producers and hacks will look up and shout "Save us!"... and I'll whisper "no."

Re:[reading from journal] (1)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894475)

Darn I have mod points but didn't read this one until I'd already commented above. Well done!

Re:[reading from journal] (1)

c0d3g33k (102699) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895277)

What would Rorschach's journal read if it turns out to be really good?

Re:[reading from journal] (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895753)

Probably pretty similar. There was just no pleasing that guy. If he couldn't turn his frown upside down at the prospect of not nuclear war, I doubt that a franchise cash-in not sucking would even register.

Go ahead, DC... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894319)

as if the first movie didn't suck enough. If you haven't read the comics, you should. The movie does the comic books no justice at all.

Re:Go ahead, DC... (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894915)

as if the first movie didn't suck enough. If you haven't read the comics, you should. The movie does the comic books no justice at all.

Bad movies don't matter. They'll just reboot and try again in a few years. The public apparently doesn't notice.

Watchmen 2: Revenge of Bubastis (3, Funny)

lrnj (1986582) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894421)

A skeleton appears in a flock of penguins, and meows for 7 minutes.

A circulatory system stalks a walrus.

I can't hate it until I actually read it. (3, Insightful)

Lashat (1041424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894493)

Having collected the original 12 issues of Watchmen in my youth I certainly loved it. It expanded my own ability to digest a story with moral and societal issues in the forefront and still be entertained.

No one can write better than Moore when he is on his game.

I have mad respect for Alan Moore's genius and for the story he created with Dave Gibbons in the Watchmen, but have you seen him lately? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Moore [wikipedia.org] Looks like Rasputin's cousin.

That said,

Please forgive us o' Lord of the Comic Book medium. Some of us want to enjoy the characters you have brought into our imaginations further than you would like us too. We *know* you could have done better than these other talented writers and aritsts. We will treat these pre-quels and the movie and all other non-Moore Watchmen writings as apocrypha, outside of the true Watchmen canon.
'nuff said

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894677)

he has looked like rasputin's cousin for a very very long time. His stories are problem better because of it.

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

Lashat (1041424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894771)

No doubt. Mad hermits always have useful dialog. They are just so hard to find.

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894961)

No doubt. Mad hermits always have useful dialog. They are just so hard to find.

I think every character Alan Moore writes is autobiographical, in a Walter Mitty-esque way.

and if I were Superman when Superman gets old I'll be like this ...

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

Pope (17780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894765)

Wild hair notwithstanding, Moore's been at the top of his game these past 10+ years IMO. Dunno if I'm that interested in this one, although I did enjoy the movie.

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895009)

The original Watchmen series is a testament to Moore's genius, that series is an enigmatic milestone in graphic novel story telling. Its a study of the "Superhero" with their vulnerabilities and strengths, and how, ultimately, if they existed, would be ultimately human with human failings, and human virtues. The film was a faithful retelling of the story, right down to its look, and for that I really enjoyed it. Its a long film though, and I think it kind of lost its way with audiences unfamiliar with Watchmen as literature. The novel series was wildly successful, I bought it when it came out in the 80's and loved it, and caused quite a stir among the comic community then, as most of Moore's efforts. His latest however, that adult thing he's doing with his wife, I don't quite get it, unless he's had the kind of success that brings F-U money. If so I guess he's resting on his laurels now.

The V for Vendetta film was a pale copy of his original g-novel however. I don't think Moore translates well to the screen, or at least the attempts up to now have been inept.

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895429)

While I haven't read the graphic novel (comic, whatever), I rather enjoyed the V for Vendetta and Watchmen movies. Of course, I also enjoyed the Constantine movie, so YMMV.

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

Zaphod The 42nd (1205578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895585)

You're seriously going to pass judgement on someone for how they look? In this day and age? ON SLASHDOT? Come onnnnn.

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

Lashat (1041424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895933)

Judgement, yes. But not in a negative way really. It's also not an insult. Moore knows what he looks like and he want to look like this for a reason. I was just pointing out the obvious difference between him and us masses. This man lives in his head and spends much less time on our "plane of existence" than I. (Many genius people do.) Or compare him to Gandalf to the rest of the inhabitants of Middle-Earth, if you can do without a nerdgasm.

My question of "have you seen him lately" was light-hearted and tongue in cheek as was most of my post.

Further, I challenge you to gander at this google image search of "alan moore" and not find the humor. If King Theoden doesn't make you laugh.. the Lego Man should.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sugexp=lttmoc&cp=23&gs_id=4&xhr=t&q=alan+moore+bio+watchmen&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1194&bih=723&wrapid=tljp132812956903400&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=I6YpT8TZMajm0QHVvtisAg#um=1&hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=alan+moore&oq=alan+moore&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_sm=s&gs_upl=59570l59570l0l60487l1l1l0l0l0l0l142l142l0.1l1l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=fcb8f53f3c5eaa37&biw=1194&bih=723 [google.com]

   

Re:I can't hate it until I actually read it. (1)

Zaphod The 42nd (1205578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896103)

There are obvious differences between EVERY one of us and "us masses". No man IS the average. We're all abnormal, really.

Speak for yourself, I live in my head as much as I can. Jersey Shore just doesn't hold the appeal that epistemology does.

Lol, he does look like Theodin. But... so what? Like you said yourself, he looks that way ON PURPOSE.
Its a barrier to keep the fools away who might be put off by things like the length of your hair or beard. Which is very silly, when things like morality and character matter much, much more.

Desperation they name is Comics Publishing (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894721)

Didn't really care much for Watchmen - I felt it didn't live up to expectations. Sounds like DC is thrashing around trying to find a new readership/revenue stream.

By Any Other Name (1)

magusxxx (751600) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894725)

So it's going to be called Sundialmen?

Re:By Any Other Name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895473)

So it's going to be called Sundialmen?

They were going to call it Watchboys, but it sounded too much like pedophilia....

Before Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38894925)

So If I get this right, this blog has been slashdotted before being announce on Slashdot ?

Should we call it "Before Slashdotted" ?

Milking material in their death throes? (1)

toriver (11308) | more than 2 years ago | (#38894995)

Marvel and DC are both struggling to retain a dwindling comic book fan-base, thrashing about with the 52 (though I am enjoying a few of those titles) and whatever Marvel has come up with when they are not busy republishing old material as e-comics or making half-assed movies. Maybe they should try and rein in their ambitions a bit - both of them.

Watchmen? Enjoyed the comics, enjoyed the movie adaptation, but I don't think it was popular enough to warrant any form of sequel or prequel...?

The problem is copyright (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895083)

If Superman, Batman and to a lesser degree Marvel properties like Spider-Man were nearing the end of their copyright existence, rather than being in a sort of perpetual copyright, they'd be could let their characters age, and possibly even die, as they near the end of their exclusivity. They'd also be more likely to develop new flagship characters to take their place. But the current copyright regime allows the characters to just continue existing, as they are, without any new creativity.

Re:Milking material in their death throes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895155)

It'll be ruined. I guarantee it

Re:Milking material in their death throes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895625)

The industry apparently isn't even *trying* any more to go after any semblance of the mainstream. You're right about the base dwindling....so the response is to raise cover prices and get ever more weird in an effort to target that outlier subculture, the (remaining) fans. I always think of how Comic Book Guy on the Simpsons is such a dead on accurate caricature. That's the only type of fan left. Meanwhile DC figures that, "Hey! If we throw enough turds against the wall sooner or later one of them will stick!"

Re:Milking material in their death throes? (2)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#38897679)

and whatever Marvel has come up with when they are not busy republishing old material as e-comics or making half-assed movies

Actually, Marvel's been pretty good lately what with their New Avengers / House of M / Civil War / Secret Invasion / Dark Reign / Siege stories. Notable exceptions being the "death" of Captain America and Spiderman betraying his morals to make a deal with Mephisto (Spiderman is the moral compass of the Marvel Universe).

Overrated (0)

Kohath (38547) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895045)

Watchman seems very overrated. Since when is "everyone just plays along and pretends nothing happened" a good ending? The movie was better because the behavior of the characters and the rest of the world was less inexplicably weird. If someone seems to be acting strangely, the readers deserve an explanation other than "the writer wrote it that way".

Re:Overrated (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895297)

Huh? I remember the movie and comic endings being nearly identical, especially in that regard -- everyone but Rorschach plays along, because only Rorschach was completely sure he was doing the right thing in the first place. Everyone else is like "Oh, hey, maybe this was worth avoiding nuclear war."

I think I may be misunderstanding your point.

Re:Overrated (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896033)

I think the other characters didn't think it was justified, they just figured that now that it's done at least reap the benefit. They still wish they'd prevented it in the first place.

Re:Overrated (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896063)

No, you're right, it wasn't that the act itself was justified. It was that them keeping quiet about it and going along was justified.

Re:Overrated (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895559)

It made more sense than "psychic monster put together from the collective minds of supergenius graphic novelists like MEEEEeeeeee teleports in and makes everyone work together and say war sux let's not do it".

What really stuck in my craw was the wretched awful corny soundtrack. The opening theme using Dylan was well-done. Everything else had the subtlety and inspiration of a brick through the window. Hallelujah for a sex scene? Really? And I know Moore even penned in his "soundtrack" of All Along the Watchtower for the final arctic scene, but it was ridiculously hokey in print too. I half expected them to break out into interpretive dance just to drive it in.

Mayfair Games already did this with DC Heroes RPG (3, Informative)

JoshDM (741866) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895087)

Back in the 80's, Mayfair Games licensed the DC characters to create the DC Heroes RPG. There were three Watchmen products made (the direct contents of which I am paraphrasing and cannot recall exactly offhand): Watchmen Sourcebook, Who Watches the Watchmen, and Taking out the Trash. Here is an interview with the authors [comicbookresources.com].

To be honest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38895273)

You can't possibly please Alan Moore, it's just not doable.

Poor Alan Moore (1)

Zaphod The 42nd (1205578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895563)

Thats all I can say. If they're seriously doing this, and it has nothing to do with him, then all artistic integrity is gone, and this is an obvious media whoring.

Sucks to be a writer, I guess.

Was the Watchman film good? (0)

devent (1627873) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895617)

I watched the film, but was totally disapointed and bored. I'm no fan of the comic, in fact I only knew about the comic when I saw the trailer for the film. There was too many characters in the film and I didn't really care about them. The film don't introduce them to me so if you don't know them you don't care. Also there were too many characters and the film was always jumping between them with no real connection.

I think it was totally overrated and really just not a good film.

Re:Was the Watchman film good? (1)

Ksevio (865461) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896395)

I'd never heard of the comic before seeing the movie, but I learned everything I needed to know about the characters in the first few minutes. Did you get to the theater late and miss the starting montage?

Why oh why ? (2)

bigbangnet (1108411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38895989)

I do love watchmen, dont get me wrong here. it's a good story and all. But for the love of [enter god name here], can we just go forward with a story...not backwards. I hate this. Seriously, I want to know what happens next or just give me something about the story that is not in their passed. It seems to be the thing to do now a days. Do a movie and then go in the past.

Moore expected the rights back long ago (4, Interesting)

Dr. Jest (10116) | more than 2 years ago | (#38896283)

To everyone who sees nothing wrong with this, please remember the DC was supposed to return the rights to Watchmen back to Moore when the collection went out of print. Moore was the victim of the story's popularity, though, as it was one of the first graphic novels to sell enough to remain in print for a long time. I imaging Warner and DC have no intention of allowing it to be out of print at all now, following the letter of the contact but violating the spirit of the agreement.

Back story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38897109)

They all have back stories! Its in the damn comic book. I'm glad I stop reading comic books and stuck it out with hard cord porn.

Origins of Watchmen Characters (1)

dgharmon (2564621) | more than 2 years ago | (#38897541)

"When we were just planning to do an extreme and unusual super-hero book, we thought the Charlton characters would provide us with a great line-up .. the proposal would've left a lot of them in bad shape, and DC couldn't have really used them again after what we were going to do to them without detracting from the power of what it was that we were planning Alan Moore [twomorrows.com]

More Flashbacks? (2)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#38897625)

More than half of Watchmen is flashbacks. How are they going to add more material for a prequel without diluting the original?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...