LET'S TALK: Before Watchmen

[BobBretall]

Have you been liking them? Not liking them?

Which ones & why?

Discuss.

[ctowner1]

I'm trying them all, and so far going to issue 2 on 3 of 6 I've tried:

Like: Minutemen, Silk Spectre, Ozymandias

Didnt like enough: Nite Owl, Comedian, Rorschach

Minutemen is my favorite, if for no other reason that it has that beautiful Cooke art. But I'm also loving his examination of the interplay between the characters, and his capture of the period.

Silk Spectre has been decent. I'm liking the Amanda Conners art (I don't think I've ever read any of her stuff before), and I'm liking Cooke's treatment of the 60s and hippies.

Ozymandias was a pleasant surprise- not just for the terrific Jae Lee art, but also for the character focus on Adrien Veidt. The first issue laid out a lot of pieces, and I'm interested to see how Wein will bring them together.

Nite Owl struck me as just pedestrian. I should add at this point that I think the whole Before Watchmen thing is a bad idea. Its completely unnecessary and to some extent I feel guilty even buying these books because I thin DC unfairly screwed Moore (and Gibbons) and buying the books over Moore's express wishes is condoning DC's (bleep) behavior to some extent. Nevertheless, I'm a fan of good comics and DC has admitedly put together some great teams for this project, so in an unRorshachian moral compromise, I'm at least giving these books a chance. But given the moral hit AND the $3.99 price tag) they're on a short leash with me.

So back to Nite Owl, I didn't dislike it- but didnt see anything in it enough to go to issue 2.

Similarly, I wasn't bowled over by Comedian, either. Plus, I thought the book made him much more idealisitc than he should have been at that point in his career. Part of the essential core of his character is his rejection of morality and ethics given his view of the absurdity of existence (in fact, each of the central Watchmen characters offers a different view of morality and society, and ones duties in light of that view). I think Azzarello's suggestion that the Comedian found moral brotherhood in the Kennedy clan does the Kennedy's a disservice or imbues Eddie with an idealism that I think wasn't present in the source material.

I had problems with Rorschach, as well. The book seemed nothing more than an exercise in depicting senseless violence- the very feature that Moore and others have accused 90's writers as misaprehending as his core characteristic. Rather, Rorschach is about total lack of moral compromise in a morally gray world- even in the face of armageddon (to reference one of my favorite lines in the book). Rorschach deals with immorality by adopting an unflinching moral codes that, ironically, can be seen as utterly IMmoral. None of this character complexity is seen in the first issue, imho, so no #2 for me.

Next up for me, Dr. Manhattan in 2 weeks.

e
L nny

[BobBretall]

Lenny, it's interesting that you have much more detailed explanations for the stuff you don't like than the stuff you do.

I tend to do the same, when I like something, I just like it, I don't necessarily analyze WHY I like it beyond "the art was really good" or "I liked such-and-so story element".

As a result, my reviews are short for all the BW books.

I've liked them ALL so far (with the exception of the Crimson Corsair stuff at the back that I stopped reading after the 2nd installment).

Artists that I like on all, and I personally feel the characters are being played "fair" to the source material, meaning I see them as acting "in character".

Rorschach is about total lack of moral compromise in a morally fray world- even in the face of armageddon (to reference one of my favorite lines in the book). Rorschach deals with immorality by adopting an unflinching moral codes that, ironically, can be seen as utterly Immoral. None of this character complexity is seen in the first issue, imho, so no #2 for me.

I can't argue with you about this, though that's WAY deeper than I ever looked at the character.

I think when you get really into expecting things to be a certain way in order to be "right" (this applies to anything, and I've found myself in this same spot) it becomes a lot harder to enjoy a writer's story that does not meet your definition of what "right" should be.

There's not been anything that's stuck out as a sore point for me like this in any of the books.

[BobBretall]

Its completely unnecessary and to some extent I feel guilty even buying these books because I think DC unfairly screwed Moore (and Gibbons) and buying the books over Moore's express wishes is condoning DC's (bleep) behavior to some extent.

I don't want to devolve the thread into this old topic, but I think the comics media have really blown this out of all proportion.

And BTW, Gibbons has no problem with his name on the Watchmen movies & such, and he's happy to take the cash DC offered him. The above is purely a "Moore thing".

Moore does not own Watchmen, DC does. They can do with them as they will and I don't blame them whatsoever for not putting them in a shrine forever untouched due to the whim of a primadonna creator. Moore has turned down royalty money for the movie & beyond, it's not like it was never offered.

[ctowner1]

Lenny, it's interesting that you have much more detailed explanations for the stuff you don't like than the stuff you do.

I tend to do the same, when I like something, I just like it, I don't necessarily analyze WHY I like it beyond "the art was really good" or "I liked such-and-so story element".

As a result, my reviews are short for all the BW books.

Probably true - easier to complain! lol.

I've liked them ALL so far (with the exception of the Crimson Corsair stuff at the back that I stopped reading after the 2nd installment).

Artists that I like on all, and I personally feel the characters are being played "fair" to the source material, meaning I see them as acting "in character".

Well, see my comments about Comedian - I think he was mischaracterized.

I think when you get really into expecting things to be a certain way in order to be "right" (this applies to anything, and I've found myself in this same spot) it becomes a lot harder to enjoy a writer's story that does not meet your definition of what "right" should be.

There's not been anything that's stuck out as a sore point for me like this in any of the books.

I can see that. But for $4 a book (plus the Moore component), I'm wanting it to stick out as good for me to go forward. If I see these in dollar bins, tho, I will probably pick up anything I don't own.

Also, I went in not expecting to like Silk Spectre, and was pleasantly surprised. I didn't even order Ozymandias until I heard you and others talk it up and I was please to agree with you.

e
L nny

[ctowner1]

Its completely unnecessary and to some extent I feel guilty even buying these books because I think DC unfairly screwed Moore (and Gibbons) and buying the books over Moore's express wishes is condoning DC's (bleep) behavior to some extent.

I don't want to devolve the thread into this old topic, but I think the comics media have really blown this out of all proportion.

And BTW, Gibbons has no problem with his name on the Watchmen movies & such, and he's happy to take the cash DC offered him. The above is purely a "Moore thing".

Moore does not own Watchmen, DC does. They can do with them as they will and I don't blame them whatsoever for not putting them in a shrine forever untouched due to the whim of a primadonna creator. Moore has turned down royalty money for the movie & beyond, it's not like it was never offered.

Understood. I agree that DC has legal ownership of the material and can do what it wants with it. But I also think, based on everything I've read (which could very well be mistaken/incomplete), that the understanding on both sides was that Moore would ultimately retain control to the characters and DC violated that understanding (if not the terms of the contract) by keeping the book in print. That makes buying this book distasteful to me to some extent (but not to enough of an extent that I'm not checking out the books).

I also don't think Moore's being a primadonna here. In his view, DC screwed him. He's expressing his moral outrage. Nothing wrong with that, IMHO.

e
L nny

[Gilgabob]

IN:
Ozymandias - Jae Lee is a fav of mine and killed it in the 1st issue
Minutemen - A nice balanced story with each member getting some ink
Silk Spectre - Amanda Conner
Dr. Manhattan - Hughes interiors - I'm there.

OUT:
Nite Owl - Indifferent
Rorschach - I never got this one. Skipped due to lack of interest.
Comedian - 2 issues was plenty for me

[BobBretall]

I've liked them ALL so far (with the exception of the Crimson Corsair stuff at the back that I stopped reading after the 2nd installment).

Artists that I like on all, and I personally feel the characters are being played "fair" to the source material, meaning I see them as acting "in character".

Well, see my comments about Comedian - I think he was mischaracterized.

I can understand your POV. I think Comedian, as the overt "bad guy" of Watchmen, was played up as having little to no redeeming characteristics. It's kind of hard to do a series about someone who is completely reprehensible, so I don't mind the additional insights added to his personality in BW.

I can see that. But for $4 a book (plus the Moore component), I'm wanting it to stick out as good for me to go forward. If I see these in dollar bins, tho, I will probably pick up anything I don't own.

You're liking them less than me & that's fine. I wouldn't rate any of these lower than a 4/5, so they're all worth my money.

I'm not sure if you only deem 5/5 books worthy of buying or if you rate the oles that aren't good enough as 3/5 or 2/5, but you have your reasons for bailing on them.

[BobBretall]

That makes buying this book distasteful to me to some extent (but not to enough of an extent that I'm not checking out the books).

I don't feel the way you describe.

If I did, I certainly wouldn't buy any of the BW books.

[Trev]

That makes buying this book distasteful to me to some extent (but not to enough of an extent that I'm not checking out the books).

I don't feel the way you describe.

If I did, I certainly wouldn't buy any of the BW books.

Alan Moore can play his own political games, I don't need to be involved.

I'm only reading two -- Silk Spectre and Minutemen. That's because of the creative teams. I will probably check out Dr. Manhattan.

I looked at Rorschach, but did not buy it.

[ctowner1]

I can see that. But for $4 a book (plus the Moore component), I'm wanting it to stick out as good for me to go forward. If I see these in dollar bins, tho, I will probably pick up anything I don't own.

You're liking them less than me & that's fine. I wouldn't rate any of these lower than a 4/5, so they're all worth my money.

I'm not sure if you only deem 5/5 books worthy of buying or if you rate the oles that aren't good enough as 3/5 or 2/5, but you have your reasons for bailing on them.

I don't need a book to be 5/5 to buy it (in fact, I rarely consider a book 5/5). 4/5 is usually what it takes to get my $$. 3/5 if I like the character. 1-2/5 if it's something I have the past 40 yrs worth and want to maintain the run! lol (ah, who am I kidding, it's 0/5 in that case! ).

Here, 2 factors make me need at least a 4/5 - the fact that it's a $4 book and the fact that I feel some moral queasiness in buying it.

For me, only Minutemen (4-4.5), Silk Spectre (4), and Ozy (4) meet that level.

e
L nny

[Webhead]

I've look at each new title as they have come out but most of the characters from Watchmen do not interest me. So if I was to pick up an title of a character I do not care for it will take something special. For example I do not care for Batman and the last run I bought of Batman off the rack was "Hush"

That being said the only two characters from Watchmen that interested me was Rorschach and The Comedian. After reading Watchmen, The Comedian was a character that I felt was not fully developed, his powers were never really defined, he seemed to be strong and was a good fighter but their had to be more to him. So that is why I want to read more about him. Rorschach was just a really messed up character, his view of the world was just as messed up. My fascination with him is more like the same fascination people have with criminals and killers, I just want to know more about him to try to figure what makes him tick. So I bought both of these titles off the rack without previewing them at my LCS.

I was disappointed with The Comedian, it felt like a different character then from Watchmen. I cannot imagine someone like the Comedian, a person who raped his own teammate playing touch football with The President and his family. People in power do not socialize with this kind of person, they may use them but would never be seen with someone like Eddie Blake. So I'm passing on the rest of the series.

Rorschach #1 felt like I am reading a story about Rorschach, especially that last panel of him at the dinner felt like it came right off the pages Watchmen. So I will be going forward with it.

All the other titles did not grab me so I passed on them, hopefully Dr. Manhattan will be something special enough to make me want to buy it.

[HassanT]

I am on vacation, so I am responding solely on memory. So far, I have been really enjoying all the Before Watchmen minis, with the Darwn Cooke minis, Minutemen and Silk Spectre, my favorites.

While these characters are "super-heroes", they are different characters than what is published by most publishers. These are not the Justice League or Avengers. That is what make these books unique.

I am so amazed how great the art is in all these mini-series. Even if the stories were ok, I would still buy these books because of the art. I think Amanda Conner and Jae Lee are doing their best work of their careers.

As for the new book, Rorchshach, I thought it was great. I can't wait for the 2nd issue.

[GABE!]

I've really enjoyed all the Before Watchmen titles so far.

Minutemen
Silk Spectre
Ozy
Nite Owl
these all have been fantastic and I'm really impressed with how well the creators have been able to work these new stories in the Watchmen universe.

The Comedian didn't appeal to me at all. Which surprised me because Brian Azzerello is one of my all time favorite writers.

I haven't picked up Rorshach yet

[Gilgabob]

DC announces a new Before Watchman 2 issue mini series featuring Moloch.

I didn't consider the possibility that DC was going to add to the initial Before Watchman titles.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/08/25/ ... rdo-rizzo/