PDA

View Full Version : Alan Moore



JeanneTGC
02-25-2007, 07:18 AM
He's been discussed elsewhere, but I can't find a thread on him here.

Alan Moore -- merely a graphic novel genius, or a writing genius, period?

For me, The Watchmen is not only THE best graphic novel I've ever read, but it's one of the best novels I've ever read, too.

But I didn't care for League (at all -- I preferred the movie version).

I liked the Batman/Joker Killing Joke very much.

So, others? Thoughts? Comments?

Vanatru
02-25-2007, 07:28 AM
The LEOG was awesome..................BUT............the movie was better.

He nicely incorporated many aspects of early literature into somethat might actually inspired the younger generations into doing a bit of research into the writings that inspired millions. I think he should be commended........I've no doubt that his story lines alone have done more to get people to look into early writings more-so than many english teachers.

Just me thoughts, boyo.

Bravo
02-25-2007, 08:36 AM
are you kidding about the league's movie being better?

no offense, but that sounds almost insane to me.

anyways, regarding the topic: i think he's one of the great writers of our generation.

from the books ive read this is how id break it down:

brilliant:

watchmen, killing joke, v for vendetta, miracleman, promethea (although i could never get into it, there's no denying the intelligence behind it)

great fun:

top ten, tom strong, whatever happened to the man of tommorrow

there's quite a few stories i didnt like from him particularly "supreme".

and well, some others that i really did forget about. :)

Vanatru
02-25-2007, 08:41 AM
are you kidding about the league's movie being better?

no offense, but that sounds almost insane to me.


I've heard that before........I'm starting to feel there's some basis for it. That aside, the books are like a vaccum....they suck. The movie is much better. :)



anyways, regarding the topic: i think he's one of the great writers of our generation.

from the books ive read this is how id break it down:

brilliant:

watchmen, killing joke, v for vendetta, miracleman, promethea (although i could never get into it, there's no denying the intelligence behind it)

great fun:

top ten, tom strong, whatever happened to the man of tommorrow

there's quite a few stories i didnt like from him particularly "supreme".

and well, some others that i really did forget about. :)

V was good.........I had the book but lost the damn thing so I was a quarter of the way into it. Still workign on get a boot leg of the movie.

JeanneTGC
02-25-2007, 11:02 AM
I just couldn't stand League the Graphic Novel. I was so disappointed, too, because I put the Watchmen on my top 10 novels list, and I really loved his take on the whole Batman/Joker mythology in Killing Joke.

But I hated what he did with the characters in the LXG graphic novel, just hated them. I tried to like them and I despised them all.

I enjoyed the movie -- it actually did with the characters what I'd expected from the graphic novel.

After LXG, I stayed away from V, both the movie and the graphic novel. Same with From Hell, but I'm more inclined to give both movie and novel a go.

I dread them ever making a movie of the Watchmen, though. Because they've already said they'd have to cut the cast and that means you know they'll lose something, probably many things, that made the Watchmen so incredible as it transfers to the big screen.

PeeDee
02-25-2007, 12:40 PM
I'm with Bravo. It boggles my mind that people preferred the LXG movie over the comics. The comics were very interesting things, if you followed his literary wandering (I prefer the first one over the second) but I thought the movie was shallow and just a slapdash action adventure.

Watchmen was brilliant.

My personal Alan Moore favorite is still his run on Swamp Thing, one of the best comic runs in history.

Stacia Kane
02-25-2007, 02:40 PM
I adored his run on Swamp Thing. It actually made me cry.

I haven't actually read all of LXG, and haven't seen the movie, so I can't comment on it.

But the graphic novel genius vs. genius thing I can.

It's just plain genius. LOVE him adore him want to have his babies.

PeeDee
02-25-2007, 06:55 PM
I agree, he's just a general genius. Although I have to admit, when I read his novel Voice of Fire, I don't think I understood at any point what I was reading. I enjoyed it, but in the same sense I enjoy songs like Louie Louie. I have no idea what I've got from it, in the end.

His spoken word CDs are bizarre.

He doesn't necessarily appeal to an audience, but he's damned creative and that kind of flakes off him like mental dandruff. When it comes to comics, he's a much stronger writer than quite a lot of people in the field.

Neil Gaiman is a brilliant writer whom I adore, and Sandman is a powerful epic that holds a special place in my heart...but I do believe Alan Moore is the strongest (if not always more accessible) author.

Bravo
02-25-2007, 08:35 PM
i cant believe i forgot swamp thing. i only read a few of the issues, but i absolutely loved it.

some of the words and thoughts were simply brilliant.

PeeDee
02-25-2007, 08:45 PM
And then you get things like Promethea which just go way beyond comics, or even beyond what Alan Moore normally does. I'm loathe to use the word "transcendent," but if I were to use it, I'd be talking about Promethea.

Stacia Kane
02-25-2007, 09:36 PM
Promethea was amazing. We have the big posters, and are waiting until we have a home with a big enough bedroom to display them properly.

My husband was thinking about selling them on Ebay to patch a little financial gap we're dealing with, but I forbade him to.

wordmonkey
02-25-2007, 10:18 PM
I think comparing the LXG movie to the books is almost like comparing chalk and cheese. The books are all about these outcasts from society. They are a group of anti-heroes. Even worse is that they are employed by people who, while representing the sociatal norms, are also less than attractive. That makes for a less accessible book and obviously screams for a "Hollywood" make-over.

Which it got.

Watchmen is the same. All the heroes there are less than attractive. Even the method for "saving the world" is manipulative and ruthless in the extreme.

My point is that Hollywood, by the nature of their main product (popcorn entertainment) MUST change Moore's work. They recognize the creative aspect, but know that won't translate.

(OK, here I have to say that we could start a whole new debate about whether or not Moore's work needs to be dumbed down or not, but that's for a different thread.)

My take is that as his career progresses, Moore wants to push the limits, but I think almost as big an issue to him is that he creates works that he believes will be unfilmable. It's not secret that he hates the movie adaptions. I also think that while he's likely as not writing for himself more than anyone else, he also respects his audience and believes that no matterhow complex his plots, the reader will still get it. (Which brings us back to the dumbing down issue again.)

I think Gaiman is a different generation of writer. His influences are obviously linked to more pop-culture as well as the mythologies he pulls from, where as I think Moore is almost entirely originating as a creator in the written word. Did that make sense?

PeeDee
02-25-2007, 10:32 PM
That does make sense, sure.

I think "dumbing down" Alan Moore would work about as well as those lousy "easy reader's versions" of people like Herman Melville and Victor Hugo. In other words, you've gutted it and then handed the carcass to people and expected them to appreciate it.

Personally, I don't have a problem when Hollywood "adapts" or makes over something. When I dislike a comic book based movie, people (friends and family included) always assume it's because I'm familiar with the original comic and it wasn't like that.

The thing is, I thus far have been familiar with the original material for most of the comic book movies, but that doesn't hold me back. Batman Begins, for example, wandered way away from most of the comics and I enjoyed it immensely, because it was well acted, well written, and it took itself seriously.

That's all I need. I don't care if its entirely faithful.

With Alan Moore's work, I go back and forth. I respect that he had his name taken off the film credits and had his share of the money split between the other co-creators. I was less than thrilled about the huge media stink that was made about it (none of which came from Alan himself, who is a quiet and sweet man). Alan Moore snubs Hollywood, hates Constantine! garbage like that.

I did not like LXG, because it was shallow and it acted silly. I disliked it for the same reason that I disliked the new Star Wars movies. I expected it to be changed and adapted, but not turned into a "teen titans, but with really old characters from books" sort of movie.

Inversely, I enjoyed V for Vendetta very much, even though it was written by the Wachowski Brothers, who have a less than sterling reputation for being able to write (Matrix 1: Good. Matrix 2, 3: Not so much.) I thought it was well done, powerfully acted and written, and gave me brilliant and moving performances by Natalie Portman, and Stephen Fry (he made me happy; he broke my heart).

From Hell was less than perfect. It had good moments, the ending not among them.

I enjoyed Constantine, though it had none of the depths or character that the comics had. It wasn't bad. It wasn't great either.

The nice thing about movies is, if the movie is good then it helps the book. If the movie sucks, then the book is untouched and unaffected.

wordmonkey
02-25-2007, 11:11 PM
For my money, Moore comes off as too precious about his work. And that is only a problem for me in a very abstract way. I don't know how he can be like that and NOT have cracked under the pressure.

He clearly has his integrity and that is something to be admired.

But I have to say, in all honesty, if someone wanted to adapt MY comic into the next popcorn summer movie, I'd smile politely, cash the check, do the junkets and know that no matter what they do to my baby, more people will go by my book as a result and more people in the industry (both comic and movie) will be more open to making my ideas into further books and movies. All of which allows me to make sure my kids have a college education and my mortgage is covered for a few more months.

Maybe once the house is paid for, the college funds are topped off, and maybe my retirement is paid up, I'll get all precious. Until then, I'll whore my books. ;)

PeeDee
02-25-2007, 11:15 PM
I can see where he comes from, movie-wise. But just in regards to his books, he's not all that precocious. The problem is that too many of the interviews I've read make him out to be crusty, grumpy, high-handed, and way too impressed with himself.

wordmonkey
02-26-2007, 12:02 AM
I can see where he comes from, movie-wise. But just in regards to his books, he's not all that precocious. The problem is that too many of the interviews I've read make him out to be crusty, grumpy, high-handed, and way too impressed with himself.

Well I think over here, he does come off as something very strange indeed. He doesn't seem to worship the almight dollar, and to most of America, that is something strange, mysterious and to be slightly feared. So that's the angle they take. "What's the deal with this crazy English guy?" and in the UK, there is the same kinda deal, but also they can add, "This crazy English guy sticking it to the dumb Americans!" They take their angle and work it for all it's worth.

It almost comes off as a passing fancy that unlike some authors who trash the movie adaption, he won't even take the money.

Like I said, I really don't understand his stance, but yu have to admire the guy for his work, his creativity and his integrity.

nighttimer
02-26-2007, 06:45 AM
Because he comes off as such a prickly bastard and absolutely jealous of anyone tampering with his work, Alan Moore well deserves his reputation as a mad genius.

Watchmen is an absolutely brilliant literary work. It elevates the comic book medium far beyond than anything before it or after it. To this day I can still read the book and find something I missed.

I don't hate League of Extraordinary Gentlemen as much as some others here have stated. However, the one scene between Mr. Hyde and the Invisible Man still stands as one of the most over-the-top moments I've ever read. Sorry, but the movie didn't move me.

"V" for Vendetta was great, but the film made waaaaay too many compromises for me and the ending was completely overdone. Where did the marchers get all those masks and cloaks anyway? A neo-fascist Wal-Mart?

The absence of his name from the credits of the film is explained in it's Wikipedia entry:

Moore explicitly disassociated himself from the film due to his lack of involvement in its writing or directing, as well as due to a continuing series of disputes over film adaptations of his work. He ended cooperation with his publisher, DC Comics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC_Comics), after its corporate parent, Warner Bros. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros.), failed to retract statements about Moore's supposed endorsement of the film. Moore said that the script contained plot holes[ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta_%28film%29#_note-comicbookresource) and that it ran contrary to the theme of his original work, which was to place two political extremes (fascism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism) and anarchism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism)) against one another. He argues his work had been recast as a story about "current American neo-conservatism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism) vs. current American liberalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_liberalism)". As per his wishes, Moore's name does not appear in the film's closing credits. Co-creator and illustrator David Lloyd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lloyd_%28comic_artist%29) supports the film adaptation, commenting that the script is very good and that Moore would only ever be truly happy with a complete book-to-screen adaptation.

In every interview I've read Moore assets how little he cares about the fawning of his fans or the truckloads of cash Hollywood is willing to shower upon him. He isn't the first author to sneer at the interpretations of his works. He just does it very loudly.

PeeDee
02-26-2007, 07:34 AM
The problems I have with articles and thoughts like that is the word sneer or prickly bastard, because they make Alan Moore seem like this hulking, unpleasant man, who writes and is disgusted with the world.

Mostly, he's a nice guy. A very nice guy. I mean, if you lived next door to him and knocked on his (incredibly artistic) front door and offered to serve him tea and biscuits, he would quite cheerfully accept, or quite cheerfully decline. Either way, he would be a friendly, cheerful, decent person. Because that's what he is.

Just want to emphasize that.

nighttimer
02-26-2007, 08:05 AM
Well, perhaps "prickly bastard" was a poor choice of words. But we're talking about a anarchist, a pagan and someone who absolutely revels in spitting on the very rewards most writers would slice off their big toes for a sniff of.

How about "curmudgeon?" Alan Moore may not be as scary as he looks http://http://www.comicon.com/thebeat/cs_alan_moore360x202.jpg, but I don't think he comes off as the most warm and cuddly guy in the world either.

Personally, I like his "sod it" attitude. His total disaffection with fame and fortune is refreshing in the Brittany Spears/Anna Nicole Smith world of faux celebrity we live in.

Didn't mean to offend any fans of Mr. Moore. I count myself among their ranks. ;)

Inkdaub
02-28-2007, 03:10 PM
I don't know how nice Moore is but I haven't really read anything to lead me to believe he isn't. Last I read he lives in a small town in the UK and doesn't really make appearances or anything like that. He impresses me as a man interested in the work while letting the rest fall by the wayside.

I have read accounts of his wanting to be disassociated with adaptations of his writing. But the reasoning didn't seem to be malice but rather an acknowledgment that the adaptation was not his work...it was only based on it.

My favorite Moore work is V but Watchmen is a close second. I enjoyed From Hell and LXG and am looking into his Swamp Thing run. There is plenty of Moore's work I haven't read but whay I have read I have liked quite a bit.

PeeDee
03-01-2007, 02:40 AM
I don't know how nice Moore is but I haven't really read anything to lead me to believe he isn't. Last I read he lives in a small town in the UK and doesn't really make appearances or anything like that. He impresses me as a man interested in the work while letting the rest fall by the wayside.

I have read accounts of his wanting to be disassociated with adaptations of his writing. But the reasoning didn't seem to be malice but rather an acknowledgment that the adaptation was not his work...it was only based on it.

Exactly right, on both accounts.

clara bow
03-01-2007, 04:50 AM
I think he's a genius writer, but his personality--wow! Whether you love him or hate him, I recommend The Mindscape of Alan Moore (learn more here http://www.shadowsnake.com/projects_completed_films.html). I saw it at Comic Con and it was pretty cool.

PeeDee
03-01-2007, 04:54 AM
I go around pestering people and interviewing them for BBT, but...Alan I don't think I could do. I just dont' think I'd be smart enough to do anything but sit there and go "dur?" every few minutes.

JeanneTGC
03-01-2007, 09:00 AM
I go around pestering people and interviewing them for BBT, but...Alan I don't think I could do. I just dont' think I'd be smart enough to do anything but sit there and go "dur?" every few minutes.
That's why you bring a tape recorder and lots of blank cassettes. ;)

Oh, and if you do get the chance to interview him and don't take it? Better to not let the rest of us know...

PeeDee
03-01-2007, 09:56 AM
That's why you bring a tape recorder and lots of blank cassettes. ;)

Oh, and if you do get the chance to interview him and don't take it? Better to not let the rest of us know...

I'd do it in a shot, I'd just be terrified. Even though he's a very nice person and would be very patient with doddering little me... :)

Inkdaub
03-01-2007, 02:04 PM
I'd be intimidated by Moore. No doubt.

Celia Cyanide
03-02-2007, 01:55 AM
I have a question for anyone who has read this.

*not really a spoiler, but don't bother to read this if you haven't read it*

That joke that The Joker tells Batman at the end of The Killing Joke...what do you think it means?

"See, there were these two guys in a lunatic asylum…and one night…one night they decide they don’t like living in an asylum any more. They decide they’re going to escape! So like they get up on to the roof, and there, just across the narrow gap, they see the rooftops of the town, stretching away in moon light…stretching away to freedom.
Now the first guy he jumps right across with no problem. But his friend, his friend daren’t make the leap. Y’see he’s afraid of falling… So then the first guy has an idea. He says “Hey! I have my flash light with me. I will shine it across the gap between the buildings. You can walk across the beam and join me.” B-But the second guy just shakes his head. He suh-says …he says “What you think I am crazy? You would turn it off when I was half way across”.

There seems to be some disagreement about which lunatic represents Batman, and which lunatic represents the Joker. I say the first lunatic is the Joker. He's crazy, and everyone knows it. It's obvious. The second one is Batman, because he does the sane thing, refusing to walk the beam, or fighting on the side of the law, but he does it for reasons that are crazy.

Also, has anyone read "The Brat Pack" by Rick Veitch? He worked on Swamp Thing with Alan Moore.

PeeDee
03-02-2007, 09:35 AM
I didn't think the joke represented Batman and Joker at all, except inside Joker's head. I thought it showed the weird angles that Joker's mind works at.

It shows that he doesn't think what you think is funny...but he doesn't think the opposite and typically cruel thing is funny either, like a villain might. Rather, he goes off on a third tangent that's down the middle of both things, and that's what he finds funny.

What he finds funny are things you wouldn't consider in terms of "funny" or "not funny" because it wouldn't occur to you. Y'see what I mean?

It was good Joker writing. Too many people just make him cackle madly. The new cartoon The Batman (which, in places, I quite like) makes the Joker an agile and formidable physical opponent, which is a waste of time. Batman can take Joker down with one punch. The point of the Joker is not combat, but mind games.

Batman thinks in black and white terms. Joker doesn't think in color, he just bizarrely thinks in magenta(also illustrating my point above).

I've always wanted to ask Alan Moore about it, because I know that when he wrote joke, he recognized that people would draw it as representing "Batman" and "Joker," and I bet he steered clear of it.

(but I hardly know for sure; maybe all I'm doing is spelling out how I'd write Joker)

Excelsior
03-05-2007, 01:37 PM
I don't think either person was meant to be Joker or Bats... it was just about two lunatics who were trapped together in a nightmarish predicament... just like J & B.

And this is the first place... ever... that I've heard anyone say that they prefer the League movie over the graphic novel.

PeeDee
03-05-2007, 07:32 PM
I don't think either person was meant to be Joker or Bats... it was just about two lunatics who were trapped together in a nightmarish predicament... just like J & B.

And this is the first place... ever... that I've heard anyone say that they prefer the League movie over the graphic novel.

Tell me about it.

I don't need the movie adaptations to be exactly like the comic books they come from. I'm happy when they do their own thing.

But...I at least expect it to be decently written. Or at least fun to watch. LXG got boring so quickly from any standpoint. Blech.

JeanneTGC
03-09-2007, 10:08 AM
I don't think either person was meant to be Joker or Bats... it was just about two lunatics who were trapped together in a nightmarish predicament... just like J & B.

And this is the first place... ever... that I've heard anyone say that they prefer the League movie over the graphic novel.
So sue me. I liked the movie better. It does happen.

I dread Watchmen, the Movie, I truly do.

BTW, I took the Killing Joke ending, since BOTH Joker and Bats were laughing, to absolutely be representing them and their relationship. My take was that Batman was the one with the flashlight, offering the help, and Joker was the one saying no.

Batman IS the other side of Joker -- and they're both nuts. Bats just channels his nuts into the good side of the spectrum and Joker doesn't.

Spiny Norman
03-22-2007, 11:32 PM
We all have seen this shot of Rorshach that was snuck into the 300 trailer, right? As Zack Snyder is directing both?

http://www.aintitcool.com/images2007/rorshach_badge.jpg

From the very beginning of the story. Here's the full article from aintitcoolnews.com - try and spot when it shows up in the trailer:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31814

As far as Moore goes, I really like how he's trying to keep his work in its own medium and isn't trying to pump it up into something that it isn't. I especially like his whole "artist as shaman" thing he espouses, whether I believe it or not.

I'd like to see him write and contribute to a movie script. Hollywood wouldn't dare touch it, but with all the indy films popping up, well...

Also, LOEG was my favorite Moore story. I'm a sucker for the Victorian Era. And he claims that the next chapter will be "not just the greatest comic book ever written, nor the greatest WRITING ever written, but the greatest thing EVER. Period. In the history of time."

I love it.

wordmonkey
03-23-2007, 06:09 PM
Also, LOEG was my favorite Moore story. I'm a sucker for the Victorian Era. And he claims that the next chapter will be "not just the greatest comic book ever written, nor the greatest WRITING ever written, but the greatest thing EVER. Period. In the history of time."

That can't be the case. I'm doing thhe next greatest thing EVER!

Hey, Spiny? Shouldn't you have a sig in your messages that reads...

"DINSDALE!?" ;)

I don't think Moore COULD write a movie script. He works in so much depth, backstory (that you actually see) and hos plots are generally pretty heavy (you know the whole book-within-the-book will have to be cut, and the back story for the team of heroes will be seriously pruned in the movie.

I think you could make an argument that if all the could be cut out, it didn't need to be there. But DAMN! It's really great stuff! I love the part where Rorschach offers the murderer a way out. No spoilers here, but the folks behind a horror movie franchise stole that idea. And disn't do it anywhere nearly as well.

engmajor2005
03-23-2007, 08:07 PM
Alan Moore is a genius: period. I don't agree with the anarchistic overtones in his works, especially V for Vendetta and to a degree The Watchmen, but I know damned good writing when I read it.

But (pleasedon'tshootmepleasedon'tshootme) Neil Gaiman is a greater genius.

Excelsior
03-24-2007, 01:38 PM
So sue me. I liked the movie better. It does happen.

I dread Watchmen, the Movie, I truly do.

To each their own. I'm on board about the Watchmen movie, though. I'm desperately hopeful, though resolutely pessimistic.

JeanneTGC
03-25-2007, 07:30 AM
To each their own. I'm on board about the Watchmen movie, though. I'm desperately hopeful, though resolutely pessimistic.
You have described my "Watchmen: The Movie" anticipation to a T. May hope win out over pessimism (but I'll probably bet with pessimism).