Alan Moore

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.

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.

Bravo said:

are you kidding about the league's movie being better?

no offense, but that sounds almost insane to me.

Click to expand...

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.

Bravo said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

PeeDee said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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, after its corporate parent, Warner Bros., failed to retract statements about Moore's supposed endorsement of the film. Moore said that the script contained plot holes[ and that it ran contrary to the theme of his original work, which was to place two political extremes (fascism and anarchism) against one another. He argues his work had been recast as a story about "current American neo-conservatism vs. current American liberalism". As per his wishes, Moore's name does not appear in the film's closing credits. Co-creator and illustrator David Lloyd 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.

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.

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.

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.

Inkdaub said:

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.

Click to expand...

Exactly right, on both accounts.

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.

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 said:

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...

Click to expand...

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...