I didn’t see the WATCHMEN movie, but ironically, i heard that it was too faithful to the comic book and lacked the necessary characterization, and that’s what made it dull. Of course, the complexity of WATCHMEN is a polar opposite of the simplicity that is Superman. Superman is a proven formula for success, that’s very much needed in this time of uncertainty when Americans are longing for the America they remember before Wal-Mart and president Obama came along. What an opportunity, but Hollywood seems clueless.

Yes, I know am I suggesting that America has lost all its vitality?

I’ll let the last Superman film answer that.

Got into comics because that and a few other books came out at the time i had to pick something to do for a living. Lot of us did.

I don’t know many working people who would NOT jump at this, crap a brick too, but damn yes.

That’s about as pretentious as the idea this book would actually kill superhero comics the first time. From what I’ve read in his interviews, Alan Moore has gotten over that idea long ago, i’ll take his lead.

It’s going to come down to the right talent, and leaving them alone. That’s the reverence it deserves, not being put in a box.

Also what’s with the crap about it having to come out on time? I was one of the many kids who were put off the first time when the original series was delayed, many times, the last half took a while to get done.

And man, we still freaking bought every one of them and love it today still. Whatever.

If they do this, the last thing they should do is give 2 F***in’ sh*t* about schedules.

Take your time,
take your time.

Those better be damn good scripts!

~

Coat

“Were I a comics professional, I would avoid this.
“1) If it fails, it’s a permanent Mark of Cain, a dead albatross, on your resume.”

Really? I think many comic book creators have things in their resumes that aren’t that great and that they are less than proud of. Comics seems quite forgiving of creators’ past fiascos.

“2) How can this succeed? How can you match the success of DC’s best selling graphic novel? Has a “classic” prose novel sequel ever matched the success of the original material? Especially “commissioned” sequels written by different authors?”

Very few sequels/spin-offs in any medium match the success of the original. That’s OK–all they have to do is make a profit and the publisher will be happy. If they can make a profit on a spin-off project, that will mean that they will have leveraged a bit more return on an intellectual asset than they would have otherwise.

“3) Would the people involved be considered pariahs by other comics professionals?”

I don’t know–but I think most people in comics are cognizant of the need for their colleagues to have paying work. They might feel sorry for the guy who has to write “Watchmen Year 1″ or whatever, but not disgust. At least, I would.

“4) If DC wanted to capitalize on a cool Alan Moore Watchman-like story, why not develop “Twilight of the Superheroes”?”

Because they probably feel they can leverage more value out of the Watchmen property.

“5) Why not take Moore’s model (archetypal super heroes in the real world) and create a “Watchmen-like” work? Just as the Charlton heroes were left unscathed by Moore, so could the Watchmen characters be left unscathed by DiDio. If it works, DC gets another property to merchandise. If it doesn’t work, you banish it to World #53, to be re-developed twenty years later by some hot writer.”

This is a business decision. So let’s look at if MBA-style. Let’s say DC is cash-constrained. They can only do one project in addition to the ones they are already committed to. So it will either be a Watchmen spin-off or “archetypal superheroes in the real world” (ASRW for short). The two projects cost exactly the same to produce. Which do you produce? (Remember, you are a beancounter–not an editor or a fan.)