Parting Shot: Image Comics Publisher Calls Watchmen Prequels 'A Dirty Deal'

If you are so passionate about creators' RIGHTS, stop making stupid deals with the devils!

What is funny about some people's reaction is that they blame DC for keeping Watchmen in print but around 90% of them probably purchased a post 1988 reprint, hence participating in the "dirty deal".

Ironic.

ec is absolutely the most important voice in comics right now IMO

I am disappointed that Stephenson is supporting Alan Moore rather than dogpiling on the comics internet straw man with everyone else.

This is not how things are done.

With comic book sales shrinking, DC's "Before Watchmen" is an act of sales desperation. It also shows DC is absent any original ideas and like Marvel, they feel the need to retread the same old stuff. I find myself buying less DC/Marvel as I get older because of garbage like Avengers vs. X-Men and Before Watchmen.

While I still think DC violated the spirit of its original agreement with Moore and Gibbons, there's another point I haven't seen discussed here (though it's been mentioned elsewhere).

Alan Moore has a history of falling out with his co-creators and disowning his old work. He has actively prevented Bissette and Veitch from getting 1963 collected.

Who knows what would have happened if Moore and Gibbons had retained ownership as intended? Maybe Watchmen would still be in print. Maybe it wouldn't. Maybe Moore would have decided he was sick of Watchmen and sick of Gibbons and done everything in his power to bury it, leaving it like 1963, fondly remembered by a few but uncollected and largely forgotten -- and not making any money for the collaborator who would really have liked some.

Bissette's as big an advocate for creator ownership and opponent of work-for-hire as you'll ever see, but he's wryly acknowledged that his creator-owned collaborations with Moore are no longer worth any money to him, while his work-for-hire, DC-owned collaborations with Moore continue to bring in checks.

And again, who knows -- maybe it wouldn't have gone down like that at all if Moore and Gibbons had gotten the rights. Maybe they would still be friends. Maybe the book would be just as highly-sought and highly-regarded as it is.

We don't know just what would have happened -- and I still think Moore and Gibbons should have gotten the rights back. But it does bear remembering that Moore hasn't always supported his collaborators, and the trouble with creator-ownership in a collaborative medium is that one partner has the power to hurt the other.

This guy gets it.

DC apologists take note.

I think Comics Alliance should give out awards for Backseat Editing. That's all articles like this seem to be encouraging.

I am deeply torn on the subject. As Stephenson says, it is a double-edged sword. But there is a sense of poetic symmetry in the Before Watchmen project as Len Wein will be writing a couple of the stories. It is like history comes full circle since it was Moore who remade Wein's character, Swamp Thing. It gives me a morbid curiosity as to how this will come out.

I do find it a disturbing, however, that many people's argument that Moore should be OK with the situation because of money. If you have ever seen and heard this man, you will realize, money means little to nothing to him. It is just pretty printed pieces of paper. Money can be made anywhere, clearly, because he is still making it. It really shows a deep reflection of the fans that do put so much weight on money.

It seems to me, many people feel some sort of betrayal because Watchmen can create such an emotional response that you can become attached to the characters, as you do real life people. In turn this emotion is applied to the author(s). The betrayal comes when Moore speaks out against the contractual situation that occurred during the creation of Watchmen. I believe some of you feel hurt by the fact that company that funded Moore's work and allows you the ability to still read it today, essentially pulled the proverbial wool over Moore's eyes. You don't want to be upset at DC, since they allow you the chance to still read the work and provided the means to read to begin with. By all rights, DC has actually done a really good job with taking care of the IP, they have repackaged it many times, but I don't believe ever really bastardized it. Back to point, so many of you try to find some sort of rationalization for your own moral turmoil, and you turn to money. "Well he got paid... A LOT."

Otherwise, if you honestly just think getting rich off something makes everything OK, then it is YOU who are making a mockery of Moore's work, because you would have completely missed many of the points made throughout Watchmen.

Moore did Watchmen because he wanted to make the "Moby Dick" of the comic world. That is an amazing, however, very arrogant, reason to create something. The point is, he wanted to make the one comic story that would last the ages. He succeeded. I don't think he is as upset at the situation as many of you think he is. This could be because of his portrayal of the situation, but let's face it, he is a very dramatic person. Seriously, have you ever seen this guy? But that's OK too. Despite the legal situation that ensued the creation of Watchmen, we can all agree that Moore is proud of what he created, and he gets that recognition. I think in the end, he was hoping for Lucas/Star Wars control of the IP, where he can direct what happens to the characters, but not for greed, but to protect it from "the System." But like I said, I think DC has done a good job with it. After all, it has taken them 30+ years to even expand the Watchmen universe. They are being careful with it.

People seem to be forgetting the fact that Moore and Gibbons signed a contract that actually made them both quite a bit of money, especially for being in this business. It also made them not-quite-household names when the book took off.

If you were the head of DC, and despite Watchmen making a bunch of money year over year, you decided to give the rights back to Alan and Dave, you would be -destroyed- by the shareholders. You'd get sued into oblivion, and the company would take a hit on stock valuation because management was dumb enough to _give away money_.

DC spent years and years negotiating in good faith with Alan, and he said no. He hated the idea of the movie - which was extremely faithfully executed, to the point of costing it mass market appeal and therefore more money for Warner/DC - and gave his profits from it to Dave Gibbons, last time I heard.

This isn't the kind of thing a man that's just pissed off does, this is the kind of thing a religious zealot does. Moore made a bunch of money by writing Watchmen, and even though it didn't work out as he expected, it was an unprecedented deal in the industry at the time and still is even without the rights returning to him.

I'm actually looking forward to the prequels, because I know DC won't do it lightly.