Customer Discussions > Comics forum

Watchmen 2 !?!?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 79 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Dec 6, 2011 5:38:29 PM PST
First reaction: Aaaaggh! What, are they crazy? How could they do this? AAaaagh!
Second reaction: Maybe it won't be completely awful.
Third reaction: ... Aaaaagh!

http://m.io9.com/5864267/we-warned-you-watchmen-2-is-really-happening

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 6, 2011 5:50:01 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 6, 2011 5:50:12 PM PST
d says:
At least it looks like they're talking about a prequel not a sequel.

Posted on Dec 6, 2011 9:47:07 PM PST
Grant says:
I'm against a sequel, but I'd like to see some prequel stories. As far as the notion of prequel stories offending Alan Moore, eh. Moore himself was going to do prequel stories before all the legal hassles started. And as far as prequels harming the integrity of the original artistic "vision", eh. The existence of the inferior sequel Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom doesn't ruin my enjoyment of Raiders of the Lost Ark. So really, I'm not sure what the big deal is.

Posted on Dec 7, 2011 4:16:03 AM PST
J. R. Buck says:
It's just a money grab. Everything that was needed to be said with Watchman was already said. The story is done, they just need to leave it alone and come up with something new.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 7, 2011 7:40:11 AM PST
Grant says:
isn't every comic ever made a grab for money?

Posted on Dec 7, 2011 11:46:52 AM PST
Billy says:
Batman Begins was a great movie, but if they hadn't tried a sequel, we wouldn't have The Dark Knight.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 7, 2011 4:47:16 PM PST
Allen says:
Yeah, but "Batman Begins" and "Batman" in general wasn't based on a single book like Watchmen was. Making a Watchmen sequel is like makeing "Romeo and Juliet 2" or... "Hamlet 2" (I didn't intend to go this direction, but I'm glad I did.)

In all honesty, "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight" was the worst possible example. Batman is a huge franchise. No s**t there's going to be more, just like there were 5 before it.

Posted on Dec 7, 2011 5:07:52 PM PST
Why would anyone expect DC to act with integrity? Moore has said goodbye to these characters long ago. He knows the score. At one time it was thought that these characters might be left alone, but c'mon... after that movie, all bets are off!

@Grant: Zap #1 (among others) certainly wasn't "a grab for money"...

Posted on Dec 7, 2011 7:52:16 PM PST
D. Maulding says:
I'm in the camp that feels that Watchmen was complete and doesn't really need to be revisited in any way, but I always keep an open mind about anything until I read it. The knee jerk reaction is associated with geek culture and it's not completely wrong. That said, I wanted to like the movie and it was terrible. I'd be alright with the property being left alone.

Grant, Temple of Doom was a prequel! It took place in 1935. Raiders was in 1936. haha. We'll go with Crystal Skull for your example.

Al, there IS a Hamlet 2, also! Not a serious sequel, but still. :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet_2

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2011 12:51:03 AM PST
Grant says:
Diamonddulius:

Zap had a price on the cover, did it not? 35 cents I believe. Or is it your assertion that Crumb had no desire to make a living?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2011 12:57:35 AM PST
Grant says:
DM:

re: "Temple of Doom was a prequel! It took place in 1935. Raiders was in 1936. haha. We'll go with Crystal Skull for your example."

That's the whole point. They are going to do "prequel" stories for Watchmen, not "sequels". The stories will take place "before" the original story. Those against it are saying that it will somehow damage the integrity of the original story (among other things). Temple of Doom...a prequel....didn't have any damaging effects on Raiders of the Lost Ark.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2011 12:58:32 PM PST
Art Franklin says:
Based on the more famous documentary, R. Crumb was the biggest capitalist sell-out in his family!

Of course, I'm not insulting him - more a comment on how insane a family he comes from.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2011 1:21:34 PM PST
Crumb was making a living at American Greetings... his comics were done out of love and compulsion. Only afterword was there any thought of actually selling them... there's no way any publisher would touch them. And just having "a price on the cover" doesn't necessitate "money grab", specifically within the parameters of this conversation.

@Art Franklin: You are correct... of course "biggest capitalist sell-out" could also be replaced with "most functional" and still be correct... however, I just heard that Maxon is apparently making some sort of splash in modern art...

Posted on Dec 8, 2011 2:42:40 PM PST
Stan says:
Whether if its a prequel or not, if Alan Moore isnt involved then its an awful idea. I cringe at the thought of who is going to tackle the writing on this project. Whoever it is will be setting themselves up for a major fall. I almost hope it is some current "stud" (like a Bendis or Johns) only so I can witness the Icarus like fall back to a reality where they know they can't hang with the likes of Mr. Moore. Sadly, a young hopeful will probably get suckered into it resulting in a backlash that will even surpass that of one Rob Liefeld. Now that I think of it I am suprised it didnt happen years ago as nothing is sacred in corporate comics.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2011 3:27:20 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 8, 2011 8:31:33 PM PST
Grant says:
Crumb made Zap, Crumb sold Zap, Crumb made money off Zap. And I bet (gasp) that it made him happy to make money off doing what he enjoyed. I'd also make the point "within the parameters of this conversation" that the majority of people who go into the comics business do so out of "love and compulsion". Crumb doesn't have the exclusive on that.

Posted on Dec 8, 2011 4:01:17 PM PST
Nicos says:
Oh god. Mark Millar as the writer and Rob Liefeld as the artist. The thing will sell like hotcakes.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2011 4:07:20 PM PST
And you don't see the difference in the motivation of Crumb doing Zap and Warner's motivation for hiring someone to do Watchmen 2? They are the same "money grab" as Grant implies? I mean, Crumb practically invented a genre that had absolutely no track record of producing sales. He sold it on a street corner in a baby stroller. Very few artists are possessed by that kind of compulsion, and I doubt any mainstream cartoonists currently working for DC or Marvel are. I'm sure everyone who gets into comics these days loves them, but given an option, most would get out if it meant more money... I'm thinking of someone like McFarlane (unless he's started doing comics again) or Steranko. Crumb never left comics... it's all he wanted to do. Crumb may not have any kind of exclusivity on it, but his goes up louder than anyone else's, if you catch my drift...

...and you misquoted me... I'd never spell "compulsion" with a "u", unless I started titling porn movies.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 8, 2011 8:31:12 PM PST
Grant says:
I'm afraid I don't put Crumb or Moore up on the same pedestal as you. I didn't see Moore knocking on Ditko or Gill or Morisi's door to get their blessings before doing Watchmen. Moore was given a job to do, he did it, he got paid. Intentions and motivations become much more, shall we say "foggy", once the checks are cashed. This strange, McCarthy'istic attitude towards writers or artists who dare defile the precious memory of Watchmen by doing their job seems to me to have it's roots in a sort of uninformed zealotry and sanctimony.

Posted on Dec 9, 2011 2:39:29 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 9, 2011 2:41:52 AM PST
Frankly, I don't think even Moore could do a decent sequel or prequel to Watchmen, even if he wanted to, now -- it'd be THE DARK KNIGHT STRIKES AGAIN all over again. So my expectations are pretty low. That said, I like to keep an open mind until I actually see the potential work in question, so... we'll see.

In other news, Art Spiegelman just announced his prequel to MAUS. JK -- lol !

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 9, 2011 10:39:15 AM PST
Art Franklin says:
"In other news, Art Spiegelman just announced his prequel to MAUS. "

MAUS II: The Squeekening!

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 9, 2011 12:36:40 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 9, 2011 12:37:05 PM PST
Well, as long as Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson aren't involved, Watchmen might be safe. Or George Lucas. Or whoever wrote Catwoman (the movie). Or...

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 9, 2011 2:24:27 PM PST
What pedestal did I put him on? I've made no judgment on his art, I'm just saying that his motivation for making comics is vastly different than Time/Warner's. And Moore was told nothing else would be done with the characters once he wrote the original mini series... part of Moore's blowup with DC was PoP merch that was being distributed and sold without Moore knowing about it. And I don't give a crap about Watchmen... DC simply wasn't as truthful with Moore as they should have been, and they've done that to him a couple times... of course, why would he continue working with them? Who knows...?

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 9, 2011 3:04:12 PM PST
Grant says:
"I'm just saying that his motivation for making comics is vastly different than Time/Warner's."

It's funny that you say "Time Warner" as though some entity, some multi headed King Ghidorah creature named "Time Warner" writes, pencils, inks and colors the comic books. You're comparing the motivations of one individual to a conglomerate. There are people, individuals, who will be doing the writing and art on any Watchmen prequels. I'm glad you have your own personal window into the mind and hearts of Crumb and the various "individuals" who work for a COMPANY called Time Warner. I, don't have the powers that you seem to have, that of knowing beyond any doubt what anyones own personal intentions are for doing anything. I have the burden of giving "people" the benefit of the doubt.

Posted on Dec 9, 2011 3:51:18 PM PST
Well, y'know, it's not just me that says Time/Warner is truly the author of their line of comics... their work-for-hire contracts do. Just like Marvel. And I don't have any personal window into the mind and heart of Crumb... I STUDY!!! There's films, books, magazines, etc... all about him. His stance isn't that hard to find. But I didn't start comparing a single person's motivation with a corporation's until YOU did!

As far as the people's motivation for doing another Watchmen, well I don't know, but I'd assume it was money. I'm sure they like the characters fine, but keep in mind Crumb did not only the first 2 issues of Zap with no intention of publishing them, but also "The Big Yum Yum Book", which was a graphic novel, of sorts... that was done as an exercise. No "money grab" going on there. I doubt anyone working at DC or Marvel is anywhere near as dedicated.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2011 4:29:13 PM PST
Grant says:
read any volume of "Modern Masters" or any interview with any writer in Alter Ego or Back Issue or Comic Book Marketplace and you won't see any artist who got into the field for money. If you're going to lionize Crumb then I suggest you continue to "study" about all the other people in the industry that you apparently know nothing of but seem to like drawing conclusions about. I'd put Roy Thomas' "motivations" up against St Crumb any day of the week. Jim Shooter as well for that matter, lol.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Comics forum (540 discussions)


Active discussions in related forums  
   
ARRAY(0x978a833c)
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Comics forum
Participants:  18
Total posts:  79
Initial post:  Dec 6, 2011
Latest post:  Dec 22, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions