| Author |
|
Jim Muir
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1370
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 8:13am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
<<Watchmen largely depends onthe fact that its characters are analogs, so that the reader brings hisexisting memories of an emotional investment in the original charactersspecifically>>
Does it? Really?
Yes, I know Rorschach is The Question, Nite Owl the Blue Beetle etc etc...
But my knowledge of the original Charlton characters was never more than an acknowledgment that they existed. Certainly had never read any. To me they were all brand new characters, and I loved Watchmen when it came out.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Tony Midyett
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 January 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 2834
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 8:30am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
No, the analog thing means nothing to one's enjoyment, or lack thereof, of Watchmen. The only reason that the characters ARE analogs, as far as I know, is that Moore wanted to use the Charlton guys, & DC didn't want him to kill off and/or permanently scar their Charlton characters, so we got doppelgangers . Besides, DC wanted to integrate their newly-purchased Charlton guys into the new post-Crisis unified Earth. The story in Watchmen wouldn't allow that.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Luke Styer
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1515
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 8:40am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Tony Midyett wrote:
| The only reason that the characters ARE analogs, as far as I know, is that Moore wanted to use the Charlton guys, & DC didn't want him to kill off and/or permanently scar their Charlton characters, so we got doppelgangers . |
|
|
No, that's the only reason the characters aren't the Charlton originals. Once Alan Moore knew he wasn't going to be allowed to use the Charlton characters, he certainly didn't have to use doppelgangers. He could have created wholly original characters, but chose not to.
I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and concluding he did so because he wanted to draw on the existing resonances rather than to conclude he just didn't have any original characters in him.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Flavio Sapha
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 12912
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 8:55am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
If Dave Gibbons draws so much as a stick figure, I am there.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Martino
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 736
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 8:59am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I loved Watchmen when it came out. But, to be honest, I never wanted to see more of them. I felt that the story that was told was inclusive and there was no reason to see past that. Prequels might be fun, but I am not missing anything now that the original didn't flash back to. I wasn't left with burning questions or a need to see the original capers of Nite-Owl and Rorshach.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Joel Tesch
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 May 2006
Posts: 2824
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 9:01am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
<<Watchmen largely depends onthe fact that its characters are analogs, so that the reader brings hisexisting memories of an emotional investment in the original charactersspecifically>>
Does it? Really?
Yes, I know Rorschach is The Question, Nite Owl the Blue Beetle etc etc...
But my knowledge of the original Charlton characters was never more than an acknowledgment that they existed. Certainly had never read any. To me they were all brand new characters, and I loved Watchmen when it came out I agree Jim. When I first read (and enjoyed) Watchmen, I had no familiarity at all with the Charlton characters.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Andrew Hess
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9842
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 9:45am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
It was only a matter of time.
My understanding, limited as it is, is that Paul Levitz has been putting the kibosh on any sort of Watchmen prequels/sequels all these years. Since he is no longer in management, the gate has been left open.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Andrew Hess
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9842
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 9:48am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Getting back to the question: I have no interest whatsoever.
The story in and of itself was pretty complete, giving us enough on each of the characters to make any sort of prequel uninteresting.
It's kind of like the original "Star Wars" movie: a complete story. However, with that example there was plenty of territory to explore, but the original creator behind that let us all down.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Keith Thomas
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 06 April 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 3082
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 10:01am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
No interest, the movie was more than enough of a revisit for me. Watchmen has come to me lately to symbolize everything I don't like about comics. Watchmen is almost a non-comic story told with psuedo-comic "heroes" and told in a comic book format, maybe that's why it gets so many kudos outside of the comic community.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brad Krawchuk
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 June 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 5819
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 10:11am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
I'm with Andrew. As much talk as there is about analogues and how important they are to the story, the truth is, they are not important. The characters, and the success of the story, is hinged on the fact that it is a complete tale, start to finish. We know as much about the characters, their world, their histories, their relationships, as we need to know in order for the story to work.
I like Watchmen. As a story in and of itself, I enjoy it. Would I read a sequel or prequels set in the same world? No. Even if it were Moore and Gibbons. This modern movement to see every moment of a character's life is getting old and really irritating.
When the Underworld prequel came out, never having seen any of them I asked a friend why he wanted to see it so bad. His response was that he'd finally see why the vampires and werewolves went to war with each-other. I asked, wasn't that covered in the original movie as part of the set-up?
He said yes. But now he'd get to SEE it. So basically, it's just another vampire vs. werewolf story in a series about vampires vs. werewolves, and you just want to see vampires and werewolves fight again. Instead of popping in the first movie again, you need them to make another one to show you more fighting. But this is how it STARTED. You already KNOW how it started. But I get to see it!
What could possibly entice you to see something you already know, which was just background information for a different story? It'd be like looking at a mural on a wall and needing to know how the bricks were made, and after being told they were fired in a kiln, demanding to see the specific kiln. Talk about missing the point of looking at a mural!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Adam Hutchinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 December 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4502
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 10:20am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| To me, almost everything DC puts out is a nod to the Watchmen. So they might as well get it over with and put out more Watchmen comics. |
|
|
That made me laugh Joe, thanks.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Juan Jose Colin Arciniega
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6413
|
| Posted: 22 July 2010 at 10:22am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
After the fiasco of reading some "America's Best Comics" written by others than Moore, i'm not interested.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Topic Closed)
