Yeah, that's the one!

Irrelevant. Everything you are saying is irrelevant.

This is corporate owned comics.

Do you think the point of publishing Omnibus editions of Kirby and Ditko works is not exploiting the fanbase's awareness and adulation of Kirby and Ditko?

Most people can't name their own Governor, or tell you when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor. Most people don't know a lot of things...

People who do know enough to know who Alan Moore is read enough to probably know H. G. Wells, Jules Verne, Bram Stoker, Robert Louis Stevenson.

But again this is all irrelevant.

My point is, if you feel strongly that Watchmen prequels are wrong, wrong enough to not buy them, then most Marvel and DC comics are wrong aren't they? But is Alan Moore on solid ground for condemning the prequels given his works on Swamp Thing, LOEG and Terra Obscurra? I think that's a fair question. Anyone working on new comics created by Kirby, Joe Simon, Siegel and Shuster, or anyone who was ever screwed by the publishers is doing the same thing, you can't single out Alan Moore, it's either all or nothing, EVEN working on new Watchmen comics is nothing that wasn't done by Alan Moore reinventing Swamp Thing, using public domain characters in LOEG or Terra Obscurra.

If they're collections of just those artists' work, sure, that's what it is. If they're not just those artists' work — and most Thor or Spider-Man collections aren't — then it's recognition of the properties.



The people who created the staple Marvel and DC characters weren't hired to do so because of who they were. Alan Moore was given the platform to create Watchmen specifically because he was fan-favorite writer Alan Moore.



Alan Moore is on solid ground for condemning the Watchmen prequels, full stop. His Swamp Thing was WFH, the other two are classical intellectual theft, as he has already explained.



Except 1)that was WFH on a clearly corporate owned and controlled property; and 2)one of the co-creators served as the editor.



ONCE AGAIN. Classical Intellectual Theft, making reference only to the general memories of the characters and not to any specific story elements, with no intention of adding canonical continuity.




You are one hard-headed little bitch.

Can't you have a conversation with someone you disagree with, without being an ass?

According to Moore's philosophy, these are the same characters, existing in the same idea space. And, really, something is canon if people say it's canon. Wells isn't around to dispute it (but that's irrelevant to my point).



Ford was hardly any more moral than the Nazis he supported.



Try reading the rest. Hint: Creative worlds are getting mixed in all the situations. The BW creators aren't actually building a garage inside Moore's head. They're using their own ideas and merging them with Moore's creations -- the same thing that Moore does in LOEG.

I agree with Moore that DC is desperate with it's BEFORE WATCHMEN series, and very possibly kept WATCHMEN and V FOR VENDETTA continuously in print to keep the movie/merchandise rights, but complaining about adaptations, and the difference between when he does it and everyone else is pretty silly.

He has created a lot of new characters like in TOP 10, V FOR VENDETTA, and others.

But other times he's just like the comic writer's he criticizes. They all want to play with other peoples toys. John Byrne gets to write his favorite characters he grew up with like The Fantastic Four, Captain America, etc. Moore gets to write Captain Nemo, Alan Quatermain [sp?], Superman/Supreme, Peter and Wendy and others. And even when someone objects like in the case of Lost Girls he'll wait it out, and then have it publisehed in that region.

It's easier to wrtie a story using someone else's characters that already have a previously established history and motivations.

A lot of Moore's work is pretty much aimed at the same market Marvel and DC cater to, except it's extremely well written.

Miracleman was someone else's creation and he added adult themes to it.

Batman: The Killing Joke was someone else's creation and he added adult themes to it.

Watchmen was originally going to be the Charltan heroes with adult themes but a DC editor decided against it.

Lost Girls is someone elses characters with adult themes added to it.

His more original work is much better and less reliant on fanboy nostaligia which he categorizes as a mental illness. V FOR VENDETTA, and FROM HELL are the ones I'm thinking of.

Well, Alan Moore says he was wrong to work on all those corporate owned characters.

However, if it's simply a matter of readers not knowing who created Doc Strange, DareDevil, the Black Terror, etc, why even use them then? Why not create brand new characters? Probably because there's still a degree of recognition with these characters. When I was 10 and started reading comics I started finding out about all those obscure golden age characters.

Basically it's better to steal lesser known characters and ideas rather then well known ones in Moore's eyes. And as long as it's legal, it's okay. If not, just create a very thinly veiled version of that character like Supreme and his girlfriend Diana Dane. If they sue, you can just claim it's parody.

No one is saying LoEG is canon to any of the characters Moore lifted.



But he was American.



If they're taking the MLJ heroes, the Fawcett heroes, the Gold Key heroes, etc., and merging them with the Watchmen characters, then sure. But that's not what they're doing. They're taking ONE STORY and extrapolating it into however many other miniseries. They're taking ONE STORY and padding it out into many. Like how Bendis took the seven-page origin of Spider-Man and spread it into seven issues.

Not anymore!