Why doesn't some like Doomsday Clock?

[superduperman]

It was designed to fix problems that could otherwise be fixed by other means.

It's very clear that the story changed halfway through whatever the original plan was (Saturn Girl)

Using the Watchmen characters. This is a huge ethical conundrum among fans.

Clearly irrelevant since this Death Metal thing now that the infinite multiverse is back anyway.

[Timber Wolf-By-Night]

It's also the second of three times that Johns, self-described major fan of the Silver Age, has addressed a story written by Alan Moore and seemingly attempted to refute Moore. Johns may have his strengths as a writer, but compared to Moore, he's a lightweight who embarrasses himself trying to "tsk tsk" Moore.

[skyvolt2000]

That's what made me post the questions here.

But your right, despite it being critically acclaimed and reviving good reviews some people here don't like it for one reason or another.

If you take it for what it was-then those reviews are justified.

However if you take it for what it could or should have been in relation to DC overall-then you get the varying opinions.

The top selling comic from Marvel Comics was X-Men (2019) #3 in slot 2 with an estimated 105,708 units and for DC Comics was Doomsday Clock (2017) #12 in rank 1 with an estimated 117,926 units.

There are book no matter how bad or dividing they are-comic book stores will still order too many. Based on who is the creative team or who is in it.

If Doomsday Clock was about Milestone or Wildstorm gang trying to fix DC Universe and all those delays-you would be lucky if you saw 10K.

[superduperman]

It's also the second of three times that Johns, self-described major fan of the Silver Age, has addressed a story written by Alan Moore and seemingly attempted to refute Moore. Johns may have his strengths as a writer, but compared to Moore, he's a lightweight who embarrasses himself trying to "tsk tsk" Moore.

The irony is, that Watchmen has had so many "sequels" that aren't connected to each other that there is no "official" sequel to Watchmen. Johns isn't half the writer Moore is. And Moore's grievances with DC are valid. They made a deal with him and then went out of their way to worm around it.

[lemonpeace]

Basically everything lemonpeace said.

I'll add that I don't think Geoff Johns is a very good writer anymore and this highlighted everything I dislike about his work in the six issues I read before dropping it and skimming the rest in my LCS.

Long drawn out nothing scenes with implied meaning but no actual depth. Unpleasant status quo/character changes with no rhyme or reason (remember when DC promised the books would catch up to Doomsday Clock? Lol!). Characters acting the way the story needs rather than in line with their established character. Characters knowing things the story needs them to know without explanation. Heroes losing/being ineffectual. Heroes being thin-skinned and ready to spat with each other. The public turning on heroes out of nowhere. Writing that is both spiteful to the characters and, frankly, those who follow them. Any scene with Batman.

It's Geoff Johns, so obviously there's pet characters that take up waaaay too much page space while adding very little. Also, the pure amount of time spent without mainline DC characters instead following the original characters he's interested in while allegedly writing a mainline DC universe book.

The fact that the whole thing is aping the work and style of a much, MUCH better writer and comic without even the basic understanding of why Watchmen is considered the classic it is. He copied the format and lifted the characters but didn't get anything else. There was no attempt made to combine the two comic book styles (Watchmen and a standard DC comic), he just shoved a handful of DC characters into his Watchmen fanfic.

Also, I understand that Gary Frank is a technically fantastic artist but I find his work is lifeless and dull. I'm glad he toned down drawing Superman as Christopher Reeve, which I found creepy.

If you liked it, that's cool. This was never going to be everybody's cup of tea.

I consider Doomsday Clock to be a bad comic by a weak writer and it ultimately being meaningless (cut from continuity) would be a good thing if I cared about continuity. Which I don't.

(except the Gary Frank part. I love that guy)

[Menacer]

The irony is, that Watchmen has had so many "sequels" that aren't connected to each other that there is no "official" sequel to Watchmen. Johns isn't half the writer Moore is. And Moore's grievances with DC are valid. They made a deal with him and then went out of their way to worm around it.

Wasnt the core component of the idea that as long as it remained in print all rights remain with dc.

Ie moore lacked faith in the work and believed it would only be in print for a year or so. Then rights would go to him...

Or am I missing something?

As it stands moore is a good writer but didnt know what he had nor understand the legalise... in addition general the big publishers wanna retain the rights to whatever material they publish, characters etc.

Moore was maybe niave. Was dc really being evil though? It's business.

[Hol]

Wasnt the core component of the idea that as long as it remained in print all rights remain with dc.

Ie moore lacked faith in the work and believed it would only be in print for a year or so. Then rights would go to him...

Or am I missing something?

As it stands moore is a good writer but didnt know what he had nor understand the legalise... in addition general the big publishers wanna retain the rights to whatever material they publish, characters etc.

Moore was maybe niave. Was dc really being evil though? It's business.

I agree. I tend to side with the publishers on a lot of these disagreements (Superman/Superboy...Brubaker & The Winter Soldier) but I feel like I am in the minority on these boards. These boards tend to side with the creators even in the cases when the creators were fully aware of the possible outcomes with respects to success. (like with Brubaker)


That all being said...I like Doomsday Clock. I think it was a really good read. It doesn't matter to me that Death Metal made it "matter" less. I don't care about that stuff. I also have little attachment to Watchmen. I don't think it is as brilliant as some do. As much as I have enjoyed Moores past work I have enjoyed much more of Johns work.


*ducks from flying tomatoes*

[achilles]

Not to re-litigate the creator's being screwed bit, but a lot of the best creative talent has been unaware of what their contracts said, or indeed rather ignorant of business in general. It just seems that many of the most creative people don't do well with business for whatever reason. And yes, DC and many other have taken and continue to take advantage of their talent.

That said, Doomsday Clock didn't do it for me. The delays, the uninspired plot and characterization...basically, it was pointless and poorly done IMO. Boring.

[Hol]

Not to re-litigate the creator's being screwed bit, but a lot of the best creative talent has been unaware of what their contracts said, or indeed rather ignorant of business in general. It just seems that many of the most creative people don't do well with business for whatever reason. And yes, DC and many other have taken and continue to take advantage of their talent.

I just feel like the issue keeps getting pushed even when creators in the modern day are fully aware of what their contracts say and the possible successes of their characters and people still act like Marvel or DC are the big bad wolf. Look at everything with Brubaker now. I have listened to many podcasts with Ed from 10 to 15 years ago where he was very aware of his rights and chose to do work for hire for Marvel anyway. And that work is still why his indie work gets the attention it does. Yet he and so many others act like they have been wronged.

I am all for looking out for the little guy to make sure they aren't being screwed but IMO this isn't it.

[Citizen Kane]

It's also the second of three times that Johns, self-described major fan of the Silver Age, has addressed a story written by Alan Moore and seemingly attempted to refute Moore. Johns may have his strengths as a writer, but compared to Moore, he's a lightweight who embarrasses himself trying to "tsk tsk" Moore.

It's even funnier when considering that Watchmen was also a critique/caricature piece on other writers (or at least their stereotypes) that were working in the comic book industry at the time. Geoff Johns felt he needed to one-up Moore on that, reversing the point of topic onto Moore. In that, Johns didn't even get airborne, let alone stick the landing (and I generally like Johns' work, but he was simply out of his depth with this one).

[superduperman]

In the case of Moore, I would say there was a bit of deception going on. Take Neil Gaiman. When he created Sandman, he knew DC held all the rights to anything created for it. He came into it fully aware what he was agreeing to. Compare that to Watchmen where an entirely new business model was created just to keep the rights. Trades were barely a thing. Whereas by the time Sandman came out, it was obvious that at some point, it would be collected into a trade. That having been said, even though it's obvious that DC will NEVER give up the rights to Watchmen, I do think they kind of have an ethical obligation to have a sort of "hands off" policy to the characters. And, to some degree, I think they kind of learned from the whole Moore incident about making it VERY CLEAR to creators that "Hey, we get to keep the rights to this. DO YOU FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS?" I doubt they want another Moore incident on their hands.

[Menacer]

In the case of Moore, I would say there was a bit of deception going on. Take Neil Gaiman. When he created Sandman, he knew DC held all the rights to anything created for it. He came into it fully aware what he was agreeing to. Compare that to Watchmen where an entirely new business model was created just to keep the rights. Trades were barely a thing. Whereas by the time Sandman came out, it was obvious that at some point, it would be collected into a trade. That having been said, even though it's obvious that DC will NEVER give up the rights to Watchmen, I do think they kind of have an ethical obligation to have a sort of "hands off" policy to the characters. And, to some degree, I think they kind of learned from the whole Moore incident about making it VERY CLEAR to creators that "Hey, we get to keep the rights to this. DO YOU FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS?" I doubt they want another Moore incident on their hands.

Really???

Graphic novels had been around for at least 8 years prior to watchmens release according to this.

This was what I looked up
---------
While compilations of comic strip and cartoon stories have been published in comic book form since the 1920s, the genesis of the modern graphic novel began in the 1970s with the rise of malls and big-box stores and the decline of five-and-dimes. Since their creation, comic books had mainly been displayed on racks within pharmacies and mom-and-pop stores. Facing a hit to their fiscal bottom line, the comic book industry explored new avenues that would keep their product profitable. The Silver Surfer: The Ultimate Cosmic Experience (1978) graphic novel was comprised of an original story written by Stan lee and illustrated by Jack Kirby. Comic book companies soon began producing additional graphic novels containing original and reprinted stories as stores devoted to the sale of comic books and related merchandise became more plentiful and bookstores began selling graphic novels.

Some of the more popular superhero graphic novels include Crisis on Infinite Earths, Kingdom Come, Marvels, and Batman: The Dark Knight Returns. A handful of superhero graphic novels have been made into motion pictures, including Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and Hellboy.
--------

[Hol]

Really???

Graphic novels had been around for at least 8 years prior to watchmens release according to this.

This was what I looked up
---------
While compilations of comic strip and cartoon stories have been published in comic book form since the 1920s, the genesis of the modern graphic novel began in the 1970s with the rise of malls and big-box stores and the decline of five-and-dimes. Since their creation, comic books had mainly been displayed on racks within pharmacies and mom-and-pop stores. Facing a hit to their fiscal bottom line, the comic book industry explored new avenues that would keep their product profitable. The Silver Surfer: The Ultimate Cosmic Experience (1978) graphic novel was comprised of an original story written by Stan lee and illustrated by Jack Kirby. Comic book companies soon began producing additional graphic novels containing original and reprinted stories as stores devoted to the sale of comic books and related merchandise became more plentiful and bookstores began selling graphic novels.

Some of the more popular superhero graphic novels include Crisis on Infinite Earths, Kingdom Come, Marvels, and Batman: The Dark Knight Returns. A handful of superhero graphic novels have been made into motion pictures, including Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and Hellboy.
--------

Trades were barley a thing...but they were a thing. I don't think a new business model was created and not created to keep the rights to Watchmen.

[Menacer]

Trades were barley a thing...but they were a thing. I don't think a new business model was created and not created to keep the rights to Watchmen.

Yah so basically according wikipedia about 40 graphic novels were published from 1980 to 1987.

Honestly there is no way dc could have known it would have been so successful and remained profitable to be in print all this time.

Moore would have had no clue either.

But it was a gamble he lost fairly.

Dc didnt scam him. They own the characters fairly. It was an odd contract stipulation but arguably just as easily moore could have had an unsuccessful property that did go out of print but have no value to him anyway


Screenshot_20211014-215054_Chrome.jpg

[Hol]

Yah so basically according wikipedia about 40 graphic novels were published from 1980 to 1987.

Honestly there is no way dc could have known it would have been so successful and remained profitable to be in print all this time.

Moore would have had no clue either.

But it was a gamble he lost fairly.

Dc didnt scam him. They own the characters fairly. It was an odd contract stipulation but arguably just as easily moore could have had an unsuccessful property that did go out of print but have no value to him anyway


Screenshot_20211014-215054_Chrome.jpg

Yeah I have always felt the same way. And its even less an issue these days. (Example Brubaker re: Winter Soldier)