First DC has a crappy logo re-design and now they're going to taint the Watchmen series forever by making a prequel mini-series called "Before Watchmen" (how original, right?) This would all be fine and dandy, except neither Alan Moore or Dave Gibbons are on board. Just another greedy corporation trying to milk all of the money out of everything they can.

There's an article here that explains it a bit more:
http://comics.ign.com/articles/121/1217662p1.html



I have to admit that the art looks pretty awesome, though.
  • Obscure

    I want to love the watchmen film but i find it just ok. Comics are sweet and yea as usual anything creative gets milked till it isn't creative anymore.
  • A.Merkison

    People get all pissy over this stuff all the time, for no real reason though(happened with the movie). Basically, those who care know the difference between this and the original stuff. Those new to the series won't, but will likely enjoy it and form their own conclusions. People have to let go of the "untouchable historic literature" schtick with stuff like this. You have to understand if "evil corporations" like DC didn't retcon and resurrect/add on to existing IP's that they would go under. Bitching and complaining about this stuff, then expecting the company to continue to give you new stuff every month is completely unreasonable.

    For all you know, this will be an amazing add-on to the existing literature. It's not like DC handed it over to a bunch of scrub 1st-time writers. They split it up pretty nicely between some fairly well respected writers and artists so give it a chance before lambasting it.

    Edit: Also realize that one of the writers is Len Wein, who was the original editor for Watchmen working behind Moore and Gibbons. I believe the dude's credentials merit giving this a chance. Plus, the art porn of Adam Hughes will be in the Dr. Manhattan issues. Can never go wrong with that.
  • Tom Philibeck

    I hate DC, so I don't care if they go under. But you're right, it could be good. I was always for the movie because I knew Zack Snyder would stay pretty true to the source material, which he did. I knew plenty of people who were against the movie and I thought they were all stupid. This is different though, because you're having people come up with completely new material that wasn't written by the original creators. With the movie, you can just follow what happened in the comic.

    I hope it'll be good, but I just have my doubts. I'm nearly certain there is absolutely no way it'll be anywhere as good as what Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons did. It could be decent, but it won't be revolutionary like the original Watchmen.
  • WillDaBeast

    Whattttt Alan Moore isn't on this? DC WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
  • A.Merkison

    Nothing is ever revolutionary the 2nd time around. Even if Moore and Gibbons did come through with the long proposed Watchmen 2 series, it wouldn't have had any of the pull the original series did. Watchmen was the first true, dark comic to glorify the deaths of "heroes" and turn the world of comics away from the "always doing good" side it was in. It was one of the first series that glorified the anti-hero(Rorshach) as much as it did the hero with super powers. It was one of the first to exemplify "necessary risk" of creating a devastating event to control a previously escalating situation. It did all of this while building its story around what at the time was current events. It was the nerd's version of protesting in the mid-80's.

    Don't get me wrong, Alan Moore is a great writer who has penned many very good series throughout his career, but he isn't unblemished either. He isn't perfect and doesn't piss excellence like this pedestal most people put him on would suggest. If anything I think seeing the amalgamation of all these different artistic styles together might be an exceptionally awesome change of pace. You have the amazing dirty, noir-ish writing work of Brian Azzarello doing Rorschach and The Comedian(fitting of style for both, especially with JG Jones' dirtier looking artwork for Rorschach), Adam Hughes' beautiful color work doing Dr. Manhattan, etc. I see this as possibly being what The Killing Joke and Frank Miller's work was to Batman(especially the Dark Knight and Year One).

    I'll finish with this: If you have preconceived notions that you will not like it, you will end up hating it. Don't bother reading it if this is the case. Unless you can take the emotional aspect attached to the originals out of your opinions for this series, you are not giving it a fair chance so don't even bother reading it at all.
  • DanielAndHisArt

    Dont read it.
  • Tom Philibeck

    I don't think it will inherently suck, I just don't see why they need to mess with something that's fine the way it is. I'll see what people say and if it's good, then I'll read it. Otherwise, I'm staying far away. It's like the sequels to movies like The Crow and Donnie Darko. I love the originals, so I never watched the sequels because I know they'll be a major bummer.
  • Sushilove

    DanielAndHisArt said:I'll read it.
  • Jandro

    watchmen was good. this won't affect how good it was, in the same way that the star wars prequels don't change the originals.

    comics are always going to the back stories and expanding on the source material. so as long as you remember where it came from, it's ok. there's only going to be more eyes on it and more money going into comics, so I don't see the hurt.
  • Jupit

    WillDaBeast said:Whattttt Alan Moore isn't on this? DC WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

    that would've been an even bigger surprise/diappointment.
  • 8-bit ZOMBIE


    DC is on a roll.

    Seems like a money grab to me. Why are they doing this now and not when movie came out? I'm sure the stories will be cool but to me the Watchmen characters really don't need to exist anywhere outside of the graphic novel. It's not like they are characters who have traded hands a million times already.
  • ChrisNeal

    Tom Philibeck said:I don't think it will inherently suck, I just don't see why they need to mess with something that's fine the way it is. I'll see what people say and if it's good, then I'll read it. Otherwise, I'm staying far away. It's like the sequels to movies like The Crow and Donnie Darko. I love the originals, so I never watched the sequels because I know they'll be a major bummer.

    These could not be as big a bummer as S.Darko, that film is a joke. The whole turn for DC recently has been really off putting. Not really been into any of it.
  • xjoshuabelangerx

    super excited about this. some crazy talent being brought on to handle the prequels. I don't think it's a money grab at all. i think it's a foundation for some rich storytelling. If Alan Moore wasn't such a pretentious child it'd be awesome to get him involved in some way. but they aren't his characters, never were, and there could be some incredible stories to tell with them. I think DC is trying to do this right.
  • xjoshuabelangerx

    plus logo aside, a lot of the new DC books are just fantastic. there's some shit, but they treat their core books like gold.
  • A.Merkison

    I pretty much agree with Josh. I think that's been the largest argument since DC bought the rights from Charlton. Moore(and by extention, Gibbons) has always taken the stance that the characters were directly theirs. DC did ask that they recreate the characters to a degree, but the basis of them were all based around the previously purchased characters. They dressed them up differently, SLIGHTLY changed their back stories and call it a day. To be fair, DC asked Moore to be a part of the continuation of the story arcs back when the movie launched(as that is when the continuation of the story was originally planned) and Moore said no.

    They re-created the characters to be used in their own stories, and those stories had a definitive end. HOWEVER, the nature of Watchmen is to tell the same story from each characters point of view, and that is certainly an area that can(and I assume by the way they are breaking the books down, will) be explored. In the original pages we got some back story from Rorschach's PoV(though honestly, most of the true backstory is in the form of Dr. Manhattan's recollection of his infinite timestream, where he sees all time at one concurrent moment), so that gives a lot of extra room to tell the story from other PoV's.

    I can certainly see this bringing more of the original heroes into play(Hollis Mason and Sally Jupiter being 2 characters they can really explore more of, as well as more of The Comedian when he was still the badass, care-free, bigoted killing machine he was in his heyday) and giving more back story to them than Rorschach/Doc Manhattan's brief memories of events.
  • Brock May

    they are actually putting some god honest effort into this believe it or not.
  • Tom Philibeck

    I'm not trying to be negative about it, so that's awesome if they really are gonna pull out all the stops and make it amazing. I just don't want to see the Watchmen name be tarnished just so DC can make some more money.
  • xjoshuabelangerx

    @tom i know my man, my kneejerk to the news was GTFO but seeing who they put on it. i'm sold. they could still mess it all up, but for now i'll be cautiously optimistic
  • chad manzo

    xjoshuabelangerx said:@tom i know my man, my kneejerk to the news was GTFO but seeing who they put on it. i'm sold. they could still mess it all up, but for now i'll be cautiously optimistic

    definitely. some good writers and artists on these, it's one of those either you hate them or love em comic books. but I'm really interested.
  • chad manzo

    xjoshuabelangerx said:@tom i know my man, my kneejerk to the news was GTFO but seeing who they put on it. i'm sold. they could still mess it all up, but for now i'll be cautiously optimistic

    definitely. some good writers and artists on these, it's one of those either you hate them or love em comic books. but I'm really interested.

Sign Up

Forgot Your Password?