Watchmen

Originally posted by roughrider
Are you aware Alan Moore criticized his own work in The Killing Joke, considering it disappointing?

- Despite its popularity, Moore himself would later find much fault with his story, calling it "clumsy, misjudged, and [devoid of] real human importance." Moore, trying to present far more relatable characters that were like real people, found that Batman and the Joker were just presented as characters[13] and said, "I don't think [The Killing Joke]'s a very good book. It's not saying anything very interesting."[14]

He still gives praise to Brian Bolland's artwork, though.

And Moore holds Kirby in very high regard, by the way. He credits the boundry-busting he & Stan Lee were doing in Marvel Comics in the 1960's as paving the way for his own work in the 1980's. He sometimes has minor criticism for Lee, for seeming to take more credit for the work.

Kirby couldn't do the kind of work Moore did in his prime unless he worked in the indie comics medium of the day with it's heavy drug culture. Not a lot of Kirby's work is enjoyable reading today, but I give him full credit as an important trailblazer.

How is any of this relevant? Alan Moore doesn't like The Killing Joke much, ok, great. So what? It doesn't alter any of what I said, or any fact regarding the book. It DID change the DC universe, it IS considered by many to be A definitive Batman story and THE definitive Joker story. Him not liking it doesn't alter this.

Yeah, and about Kirby, what's your point? We all love Kirby's work.

Moore had to fight against the overwhelming conception that comics were for kids, he changed that in the eyes of a lot of mainstream public. If that's not out of the ordinary, I don't know what is.

-AC

Originally posted by roughrider
Are you aware Alan Moore criticized his own work in The Killing Joke, considering it disappointing?

- Despite its popularity, Moore himself would later find much fault with his story, calling it "clumsy, misjudged, and [devoid of] real human importance." Moore, trying to present far more relatable characters that were like real people, found that Batman and the Joker were just presented as characters[13] and said, "I don't think [The Killing Joke]'s a very good book. It's not saying anything very interesting."[14]

He still gives praise to Brian Bolland's artwork, though.

And Moore holds Kirby in very high regard, by the way. He credits the boundry-busting he & Stan Lee were doing in Marvel Comics in the 1960's as paving the way for his own work in the 1980's. He sometimes has minor criticism for Lee, for seeming to take more credit for the work.

Kirby couldn't do the kind of work Moore did in his prime unless he worked in the indie comics medium of the day with it's heavy drug culture. Not a lot of Kirby's work is enjoyable reading today, but I give him full credit as an important trailblazer.

Very true indeed...Kirby also created a modern day mythology in comics with The New Gods. He is among the great ones in 20th century with great writers like Tolkien and H.P. Lovercraft. All of course in their respective areas.

Originally posted by Newjak
Still very excited for this movie, and I like Kevin Smith so his thumbs up has me even more excited.

Same here man! We shouldnt be denied this film. 😄

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Very true indeed...Kirby also created a modern day mythology in comics with The New Gods. He is among the great ones in 20th century with great writers like Tolkien and H.P. Lovercraft. All of course in their respective areas.

Same here man! We shouldnt be denied this film. 😄

Kirby was amazing in that he did some new things, he was an innovative writer, not an amazing writer.

To call him a titan of 20th Century literature and not Moore is a bit radical.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How is any of this relevant? Alan Moore doesn't like The Killing Joke much, ok, great. So what? It doesn't alter any of what I said, or any fact regarding the book. It DID change the DC universe, it IS considered by many to be A definitive Batman story and THE definitive Joker story. Him not liking it doesn't alter this.

Yeah, and about Kirby, what's your point? We all love Kirby's work.

-AC

Well... 😖hifty:
As you seem to be a Yes Man for Alan Moore when he criticizes -
the filmmakers of V For Vendetta, the upcoming adaptation of Watchmen - I just wonder when you say The Killing Joke is one of the great comics and Moore says it is not...
Do you actually disagree?? 😄

And the POINT about Jack Kirby is - when you say that nothing Kirby has done can compare to Moore's achievements - is that if it wasn't for Kirby's work, Alan Moore wouldn't have had the freedom to do the kind of work he did years later. Moore himself says so. So, the comparison is moot.

Originally posted by roughrider
Well... 😖hifty:
As you seem to be a Yes Man for Alan Moore when he criticizes -
the filmmakers of V For Vendetta, the upcoming adaptation of Watchmen - I just wonder when you say The Killing Joke is one of the great comics and Moore says it is not...
Do you actually disagree?? 😄

V for Vendetta was a shit movie that bastardised and changed the story of the novel to apply to modern Bush-era America.

League was similar in title and characters only, and From Hell was Sesame Street compared to the novel.

How is that being a yes man? It's called recognising the movies for what they are.

As for the comic, Alan Moore doesn't get to decided what I do and do not like. I like a lot of things Alan Moore rips on; 300, Sin City etc.

So take the argument you just brought, and bring one that works, please.

Originally posted by roughrider
And the POINT about Jack Kirby is - when you say that nothing Kirby has done can compare to Moore's achievements - is that if it wasn't for Kirby's work, Alan Moore wouldn't have had the freedom to do the kind of work he did years later. Moore himself says so. So, the comparison is moot.

It was moot for anyone to ever bring up Kirby in the first place, though.

-AC

Dont know if this was posted already or not.

I AM SICK AND TIRED OF PRODUCTION COMPANIES AND THE COURTS WHILE THEY PLAY THEIR GAMES. It hurts the fans by delays etc... FOX SUCKS!!!!

"Warner has argued that Fox should not be allowed to stop the movie"

News

No Watchmen Trial Until April or June?
Source:The New York Times
August 31, 2008

The New York Times has published an article on the joint report that was submitted to the federal court on Friday by lawyers for both Warner Bros. and 20th Century Fox about the Watchmen rights. Here's a couple of clips:

Fox has said it will seek an injunction blocking Warner's planned release of the film next March. Warner has argued that Fox should not be allowed to stop the movie, after standing by while Warner and its partners on the film, Paramount Pictures and Legendary Pictures, spent more than $100 million on the production, directed by Zack Snyder ("300"😉.

The report also outlined conflicting requests for a trial date: as early as next June, if Fox has its way, or April, if Warner prevails.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/watchmennews.php?id=7627

What are people whining about?

It's coming out either way.

-AC

Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Dont know if this was posted already or not.

I AM SICK AND TIRED OF PRODUCTION COMPANIES AND THE COURTS WHILE THEY PLAY THEIR GAMES. It hurts the fans by delays etc... FOX SUCKS!!!!

"Warner has argued that Fox should not be allowed to stop the movie"

News

No Watchmen Trial Until April or June?
Source:The New York Times
August 31, 2008

The New York Times has published an article on the joint report that was submitted to the federal court on Friday by lawyers for both Warner Bros. and 20th Century Fox about the Watchmen rights. Here's a couple of clips:

Fox has said it will seek an injunction blocking Warner's planned release of the film next March. Warner has argued that Fox should not be allowed to stop the movie, after standing by while Warner and its partners on the film, Paramount Pictures and Legendary Pictures, spent more than $100 million on the production, directed by Zack Snyder ("300"😉.

The report also outlined conflicting requests for a trial date: as early as next June, if Fox has its way, or April, if Warner prevails.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/watchmennews.php?id=7627

20th century Fox the A-hole....no surprise.

Trust me...when I say this...what goes around..comes around. Fox will get their ass penetrated with a flag pole for this. It will backfire on them and no one is going to be sorry for them.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
20th century Fox the A-hole....no surprise.

Trust me...when I say this...what goes around..comes around. Fox will get their ass penetrated with a flag pole for this. It will backfire on them and no one is going to be sorry for them.

Doesn't Fox have enough problems with the lousy box office year they're having? Bombs like Meet Dave and X-Files 2, and they're launching ill-timed lawsuits. Warners will eventually get them out of the way, I'm sure; Paramount will chime in as well, as they are handling foreign distribution.
The leadership at Fox is getting a toxic rep right now. Alex Proyas said the reason he won't make a Silver Surfer movie is because Fox will be handling it, and states he'll never work with them again after I, Robot.

Watchmen Trial Date Set for Jan. 6
Source:Variety September 3, 2008

Los Angeles federal judge Gary Allen Feess has set a Jan. 6 trial date for 20th Century Fox's lawsuit over Warner Bros. Pictures' right to make a film based on the graphic novel Watchmen.

Variety says the judge set the date Tuesday during a meeting between attorneys, setting the stage for discovery and deposition proceedings during the rest of this year. Warner Bros. has not backed off March 6 as the opening for Watchmen, directed by Zack Snyder.

Feess indicated Tuesday that the case was not suitable for preliminary injunction and that the issues were too complex to be resolved on an interim basis. The judge had already indicated that he wants the case to move quickly, asking the two parties previously for expedited discovery.

Two weeks ago, Feess denied Warner's motion to dismiss the suit, which alleges that Fox retained distribution rights to the graphic novel through a 1991 claim. Fox has asserted it retains the rights since producer Larry Gordon's option to acquire Fox's remaining interest in Watchmen was never exercised, thereby leaving Fox with its rights under a 1994 turnaround agreement.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/watchmennews.php?id=7636

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
20th century Fox the A-hole....no surprise.

Trust me...when I say this...what goes around..comes around. Fox will get their ass penetrated with a flag pole for this. It will backfire on them and no one is going to be sorry for them.

Nice touch on your sig WD....😄

Why does these big production companies always have to mess up the films when it comes to comics?

Fox is just looking for some money. Just because the case is being heard doesn't mean the film will be delayed - it's not in their interest, for a film already made to fail over this.
It's frivolous to have a lawsuit now. It should have happened before the film was shot - before Spider Man was eventually made, it was in the courts for years as different companies squabbled over who had the film rights.

What? Who's talking about Fox being great?

Oh, everyone.

-AC

Update on the Fox situation: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3id7efd5118ad0ac0728020a905a1f15ac

http://www.publiusforum.com/watchmen/watchmen_index.html

I wanted to post this and have a moan somewhere, and I didn't think it was really worth opening a thread for, so there it is.
What do people think?

I honestly thought the guy talked a lot of crap, especially as he was clearly as blindly right wing and with as distorted a view of liberals as he claimed Moore to be in the reverse.
Also, he seemed unable to accept a different political opinion, or even the fact that never in Watchmen does it proclaims that Ozymandias is ultimately right. I found it to be extremely objective, leaving the reader to make up their mind. Clearly, the writer of that essay did so.
I suppose it would have helped too if he'd checked his facts about the story before he wrote that. Did he miss that Laurie was conceived several years after Comedian's attempted rape of her mother? Wrong on two counts, there!
While he certainly had some good points, I really found that article to contain a huge amount of bullshit.
However, I was interested to see what others think...

You can argue for both sides, for or against Adrian Veidt and his decision to kill the Comedian and wipe out New York.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You can argue for both sides, for or against Adrian Veidt and his decision to kill the Comedian and wipe out New York.

-AC

Precisely. Watchmen is one of the few comics I can name which is almost completely objective.

Anyone read the Sam Hamm script? It was ****ing awful!

http://www.scifiscripts.com/scripts/wtchmn.txt