Ηow Will Alan Moore React Or Retaliate For DC Rebirth?

[Unfinishedsentenc]

Easy. With silence.

Though I myself am pretty pissed.

[Myskin]

Maybe it is just me. But in recent years DC has mined much of his work for stories: Blackest Night was related to a GL story he did, Before Watchmen, the Watchmen-esque/Charlton universe, their revitalized interest in Swamp Thing and Constantine, the constant callbacks to The Killing Joke (which Moore isn't particularly proud of, although I'm personally a big fan of it), and now this. It does seem like Moore's concepts are being used more and more by DCU, but I can appreciate your skepticism, there's no strong evidence that this is anything more than a coincidence. Still, I do see a pattern.

It's true. But I think that the reason is simply that they have no more creative ideas and they must find them somewhere. Moore's works at DC are so good and respected that they can still use them to get some relatively easy cash. That's the reason they are doing threequels and prequels of DKR, by the way.

[JackDaw]

It's true. But I think that the reason is simply that they have no more creative ideas and they must find them somewhere. Moore's works at DC are so good and respected that they can still use them to get some relatively easy cash. That's the reason they are doing threequels and prequels of DKR, by the way.

It would certainly be interesting to ask Geoff Johns the specific artistic reasons for using Dr Manhattan, as opposed to using half a dozen other ultra powerful characters...or just some non character explanation for universe change.

I suspect large majority of us believe it's purely down to calculation that using this specific character will sell a few more comics because he's a fan favourite.

And maybe..just maybe...it's a pissing contest to demonstrate that other creators can use character as interestingly as Alan Moore did. If so...most likely end up with a demonstration that the narrative magic was down to original writer, rather than intrinsic to character.

[Carabas]

It would certainly be interesting to ask Geoff Johns the specific artistic reasons for using Dr Manhattan, as opposed to using half a dozen other ultra powerful characters...or just some non character explanation for universe change.

Could be as simple as "Well, that's the character I was told to use..."

[Myskin]

And maybe..just maybe...it's a pissing contest to demonstrate that other creators can use character as interestingly as Alan Moore did.

No creator in their right mind would do it.

[AlexanderLuthor]

When you sign up to do work for DC or Marvel you know that ultimately the characters are their property and will very likely be used in ways you don't like in the future. That's just the way it is, unfortunately. I'm sure Moore wishes Image was around in 1985

[Crazy Diamond]

When you sign up to do work for DC or Marvel you know that ultimately the characters are their property and will very likely be used in ways you don't like in the future. That's just the way it is, unfortunately. I'm sure Moore wishes Image was around in 1985

Weren't there already creator-owned companies at that point? Who was publishing titles like Cerebus and Omaha the Cat-Dancer when they started? Or were works like that still for hire?

[AlexanderLuthor]

Weren't there already creator-owned companies at that point? Who was publishing titles like Cerebus and Omaha the Cat-Dancer when they started? Or were works like that still for hire?

There were, but they were so small w/o distributorships that it was hardly worth your while to go through them. Today Moore would have all kinds of outlets including just going digital

[Carabas]

When you sign up to do work for DC or Marvel you know that ultimately the characters are their property and will very likely be used in ways you don't like in the future. That's just the way it is, unfortunately. I'm sure Moore wishes Image was around in 1985

That's not how it went down.

The agreement for Watchmen was that the work was creator-owned, and that DC's rights to it would end when it went out of print (which in 100% of all similar agreements in the past was at most a year or so after the last issue shipped).

[AlexanderLuthor]

That's not how it went down.

The agreement for Watchmen was that the work was creator-owned, and that DC's rights to it would end when it went out of print (which in 100% of all similar agreements in the past was at most a year or so after the last issue shipped).

Well, if it was the least bit popular they were going to keep putting out new editions of the TPB so it was never going out of print - which is exactly what they have done. I don't think Mr. Moore is a fool, he wanted the story out to the biggest possible audience so he went through DC. That has some ramifications

[JackDaw]

Just from a commercial point of view DC's treatment of Alan Moore over the years has been less less than inspired.

The best way to optimise revenue from your creative talent is not to screw them into ground over one particular work. Eventually they walk away rather than do more work. And other talent looks on, and takes appropriate action.

The final breaking point between DC and Alan Moore...when he stopped working for DC completely was apparently not about money at all. Things had been patched up by a resourceful DC executive,and ABC comics were coming out...pretty good...everybody was gaining: DC, fans, and Alan Moore.

Then a load of old Alan Moore stuff was put out without crediting him as writer...which he felt violated the spirit of the new accord between DC and him. He didn't expect any money for use of his old work...but he did expect acknowledgement that he was the writer.

I really don't think DC covered themselves in glory, nor even did the right thing if they wanted to maximise shareholder return.

[Carabas]

Well, if it was the least bit popular they were going to keep putting out new editions of the TPB so it was never going out of print

Which had never been done before Watchmen came along. It was a very different time.
What Moore signed was a very standard contract fo that sort of thing, for that time, which had never been an issue until DC decided to not let Watchmen go out of print, ever.

[Mark Thrust]

When you sign up to do work for DC or Marvel you know that ultimately the characters are their property and will very likely be used in ways you don't like in the future. That's just the way it is, unfortunately. I'm sure Moore wishes Image was around in 1985

I was around in the 80s when the Watchmen deal was announced. It was seen as a big deal, a big benefit for creator rights, as the work was NOT work for hire, and the characters and stories would revert back to Moore and Gibbons after the TPB was out of print.
30 years later, and DC is still sniffing Moore's jockstrap.
What would be ironic, and hilarious, is that the use of these characters in the DCU leads to oversaturation and drop in sales of the original TPB, causing it to go out of print, and the story reverting back to the creators.
Now, THAT would be funny.

[Atlanta96]

I was around in the 80s when the Watchmen deal was announced. It was seen as a big deal, a big benefit for creator rights, as the work was NOT work for hire, and the characters and stories would revert back to Moore and Gibbons after the TPB was out of print.
30 years later, and DC is still sniffing Moore's jockstrap.
What would be ironic, and hilarious, is that the use of these characters in the DCU leads to oversaturation and drop in sales of the original TPB, causing it to go out of print, and the story reverting back to the creators.
Now, THAT would be funny.

I dont think oversaturation will be an issue. If anything use of the Watchmen characters in new stories is more likely to boost sales of the original series. I mean, the Joker has been overexposed for years and the Killing Joke is still a bestseller.