WatchmenComicMovie.com Forum


Talk about the Watchmen comic book mini-series and film
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:36 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 8:51 am 
Offline
Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 4978
AYBGerrardo wrote:
A fascinating discussion from 1988 where Moore and Gibbons discuss the idea of a Minutemen prequel vs a Comedian prequel.

Quote:
Steve Whitaker: The Comedian’s is probably the one story begging to be told.
AM: The only possible spin-off we’re thinking of is—maybe in four or five years time, ownership position permitting—we might do a Minutemen book. There would be no sequel.
SW: The story I’m thinking of fits the gap between the end of the Minutemen at the beginning of the 50s and the Comedian’s career—with Ozymandias’ interruption of that…
AM: Hooded Justice.
DG: I think that’s one of the things that adds to the book. When you think of people you know, there are certain areas of their lives you know a lot about and there are other areas you know nothing about—you get years and years where you don’t know what happened to them. At one point that Comedian storyline was suggested to us by DC, to fill in the mosaic and define things. All it would do be to destroy the reality and dilute the whole thing. I think if you read the book closely and you’re fairly intelligent, you can fill in that kind of thing… just as any work of art—a painting, a drawing or any written form of art—leaves a lot to your imagination anyway.
SW: Perhaps it is to the credit of the series that I’ve become particularly interested in one or two characters. I like what you were saying about James M. Cain earlier, Dave—I have a similar fondness for Raymond Chandler which has advanced to the point where I want to read biographies and correspondence.
AM: You just want a little more of him.
SW: All we read here is a series of events around these characters stretching over 12 weeks—something else that I thought was quite neat.
DG: Now I didn’t know that.
SW: Well, it it ends on December 28th it’s 12 weeks.
AM: I’m not surprised.
DG: That’s amazing because the story dictated how much time things took.
AM: Just before we get off the subject of serialisations, continuations end sequels: when I set out to do Watchmen, and I imagine that Dave felt the same way—that we didn’t want to give people what they wanted, we set out to give them what they needed… and the same applies to sequels they may want sequels really badly…
FJ: …but they don’t need them. Sequels are the bane of comic books.
AM: Watchmen is a novel, it’s there and it’s got a beginning, a middle and an end… complete. Frank Herbert managed to turn Dune into a Perry Rhodan for the ’80s with all those sequels. It was a wonderful book to start with that was unreadable by the time it was finished.
DG: It should be very clear in your mind who’s in charge of any artistic endeavour. Obviously, Alan and I could make ourselves a fortune on Watchmen 2 next year. I just can’t think of any reason to do it other than the obvious monetary ones. Minutemen appeals because it’s a different era and a different story.
SW: Lesbian and Homosexual relationships and costumed kinks in a 40s environment…
ALL: Hmmmmmm…


Who's FJ?

_________________
Say, Doc, did I ever tell you I'm the only metal that's liquid at room temperature?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 9:03 am 
Offline
…a puppet who can see the strings.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:42 pm
Posts: 8538
Location: A stronger world
A comics journalist called Fiona Jerome, I think, sorry. Here's the interview in full:

http://www.johncoulthart.com/feuilleton ... /watchmen/

_________________
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
it was tying it into the rape-revenge stories and making light of a verys erious sub-genre that kind of offended me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:03 am 
Offline
Government-Sponsored Weirdo
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:39 am
Posts: 7191
Location: Everywhere, Everywhen, UK.
Smutty wrote:
AvatarIII wrote:
Dr. Brooklyn wrote:
feliciano182 wrote:
In any case, as much as Stan Lee likes to keep quiet about it (because nobody bothers to ask him), he was also a businessman in the comic book world, it's a different situation.


My point was... Lee signed contracts probably worse than what moore did and nobody is out crying for him. Think of all the crap his characters have been put through Spidey has signed deals with the devil, Iron Man is an alcoholic, etc.


The difference is, he's purposefully kept himself connected with marvel and his characters, I wouldn't be surprised if he's consulted when writers do stuff like that, not out of any contractual obligation, just out of respect.


I do remember a couple of years ago Stan Lee spoke out against Garth Ennis's interpretation of Nick Fury in the two FURY miniseries

That's fair enough though, the Max imprint is supposed to be extreme, and totally against Lee's vision of what comics should be, but main universe, Lee's well within his right to complain if he doesn't like something that happens to one of 'his' characters, but he doesn't

_________________
We're all actors, Laurie. I'm just an actor who read the script. :?
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.092s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]