quote: (post)

Originally posted by Digi
lol at the Moore hatred. It's his creation, he's entitled to be upset if he wants. Frankly, I kind of agree with him...this is pretty shameless. Nothing else needs to be written in the Watchmen-verse for it to be complete, but they're dredging it up for sales. If they cared about artistic integrity, they'd try to bring Moore back on or drop it entirely.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Digi
lol at the Moore hatred. It's his creation, he's entitled to be upset if he wants. Frankly, I kind of agree with him...this is pretty shameless. Nothing else needs to be written in the Watchmen-verse for it to be complete, but they're dredging it up for sales. If they cared about artistic integrity, they'd try to bring Moore back on or drop it entirely.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Digi
Disgusted probably isn't the term I'd use. JMS makes the point that Moore has written stories for many characters created by other authors, including very famous characters like those in League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. JMS calls it a double standard to say Moore can do that, but others can't use Moore's work. Of course, it's wrapped in all kinds of praise for Moore so as not to seem callous.

It's a fair point. But I think the fault is that many characters (Superman, for instance) were serialized. The mode of storytelling lent itself to ongoing adventures. Others did not. Authorial intent should also be considered imo, as a show of decency. It might not be wrong to write this, but it's certainly insulting to Moore, so their hands aren't totally morally clean when they essentially ignore what he says.

Obviously, I can't bring myself to outrage of any sort. But I still tend to side with "it didn't need to be made."