|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jun 2, 2017 17:52:41 GMT -5
Watchmen did no damage whatsoever to established properties. ...because it changed the names. If they'd called the characters Blue Beetle, Captain Atom, Nightshade, Peacemaker, The Question, and Thunderbolt, I absolutely think it would have. But you said..."They are comparable in terms of the damage they inflict upon established properties". Watchmen did no damage to existing characters. And by the time that Moore was done the characters in Watchmen were so far removed from the Charlton characters as to have virtually no connection. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,878
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 2, 2017 17:56:00 GMT -5
...because it changed the names. If they'd called the characters Blue Beetle, Captain Atom, Nightshade, Peacemaker, The Question, and Thunderbolt, I absolutely think it would have. But you said..."They are comparable in terms of the damage they inflict upon established properties". Watchmen did no damage to existing characters. And by the time that Moore was done the characters in Watchmen were so far removed from the Charlton characters as to have virtually no connection. Far be it from me to get into a bout of lawyering with...well...a lawyer, but I did note the difference being these characters were out of print and the names were changed. Beyond that, I think the attempt and execution were absolutely comparable -- let's take a bunch of existing characters and f*ck with them. If the very spirit of this thread is changes made with the intentional purpose of harming a property, yes, both qualify. There's a reason DC made Moore change the names. |
|
|
|
Post by Cheswick on Jun 2, 2017 19:18:26 GMT -5
One big difference I see between the two is that Watchmen was commenting on the treatment of female characters in superhero comics. That's why the Silk Spectre doesn't have any powers or actually do anything, and is just there to provide character motivation for the men in the comic. It's intentional commentary. I haven't read all - or much - of Identity Crisis, but what I have read seems like a dumpster fire. I don't really buy into that, because of Moore's own treatment of females in superhero comics before Watchmen and since. His treatment of Black Canary as basically a prop and motivation for Green Arrow and, of course, his treatment of Barbara Gordon being two examples from around that time. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jun 2, 2017 19:53:31 GMT -5
I never said that Moore had never used rape or attempted rape as a plot device, so I'm not sure why you're going there. Your statement again was "And give Alan Moore credit for figuring out how to fill twelve issues of a comic book with exciting moments without a major female character being raped, murdered or going insane for specious reasons." which I responded to by showing that, in fact, it did have a major female character being raped within its 12 issues. Not sure what you're not sure about. Here's the full quote, including the paragraphs that I assume were accidentally clipped off, with the relevant sentence in bold: So, very clearly, I am aware of the rape attempt in Watchmen. It's right there in the part of the full quote from which only the last paragraph was quoted. Apparently you interpret that scene differently than I do. I view it as a rape attempt interrupted by Hooded Justice. At this point, I'd rather just agree to disagree on the quality of Identity Crisis rather than keep having to go back to my past posts to fill in the passages that are accidentally left out when they are quoted. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,878
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 2, 2017 22:19:52 GMT -5
One big difference I see between the two is that Watchmen was commenting on the treatment of female characters in superhero comics. That's why the Silk Spectre doesn't have any powers or actually do anything, and is just there to provide character motivation for the men in the comic. It's intentional commentary. I haven't read all - or much - of Identity Crisis, but what I have read seems like a dumpster fire. I don't really buy into that, because of Moore's own treatment of females in superhero comics before Watchmen and since. His treatment of Black Canary as basically a prop and motivation for Green Arrow and, of course, his treatment of Barbara Gordon being two examples from around that time. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen as another example. |
|
bran
Full Member
Posts: 227 
|
Post by bran on Jun 3, 2017 4:12:17 GMT -5
Here George Martin talks about essentially the same thing in tv-shows production. They called/are calling it there Standards and Practices.
That's from his experience working on network television, shows are Doorways, Beauty and the Beast and non-network Game of Thrones.
It's pretty funny, starts ~ 35 min mark.
|
|
shiryu
Junior Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by shiryu on Jun 4, 2017 8:46:19 GMT -5
I think most Batman fans can be lumped into one of two groups: either you love The Untold Legend of The Batman, or you love DKR. Where would Batman: TAS fit between these two? I'm more of a Marvel person and I haven't read too many Batman stories, but probably the period leading to Knightfall is my favourite (blue cape, yellow oval so to speak). But if I'd have to point to my absolute favourite version of the character, it would be TAS and the rest of the Timm animated universe. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,878
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 4, 2017 9:04:18 GMT -5
I think most Batman fans can be lumped into one of two groups: either you love The Untold Legend of The Batman, or you love DKR. Where would Batman: TAS fit between these two? I'm more of a Marvel person and I haven't read too many Batman stories, but probably the period leading to Knightfall is my favourite (blue cape, yellow oval so to speak). But if I'd have to point to my absolute favourite version of the character, it would be TAS and the rest of the Timm animated universe. TAS is far closer to the Pre-Crisis Batman in character, even if he doesn't align well with Untold Legend of the Batman itself. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jun 4, 2017 14:05:57 GMT -5
I don't really buy into that, because of Moore's own treatment of females in superhero comics before Watchmen and since. His treatment of Black Canary as basically a prop and motivation for Green Arrow and, of course, his treatment of Barbara Gordon being two examples from around that time. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen as another example. Mina Murray is the leader of the League. I'd have to disagree that she's a prop merely because some of the other members respect or care for her. Could you elaborate? And yes, the treatment of Barbara Gordon in The Killing Joke is awful and WAY out-of character. I've never thought much of The Killing Joke. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 4, 2017 14:53:36 GMT -5
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen as another example. Mina Murray is the leader of the League. I'd have to disagree that she's a prop merely because some of the other members respect or care for her. Could you elaborate? And yes, the treatment of Barbara Gordon in The Killing Joke is awful and WAY out-of character. I've never thought much of The Killing Joke. Regarding the League, I believe shaxper may be referring to the way Janni (Nemo's daughter) was raped first thing upon her arrival in England. That was absolutely unnecessary to the plot. Like you, I never thought much of the killing joke, apart from the fact the art looked nice. What really angered me about it wasn't that Barbara was shot and crippled, though, even though I felt sad for her; it was the way Batman shared a laugh with the Joker at the end... as if despite their enmity there was some kind of grudging respect between them. If there ever was a time when it was appropriate to beat someone within an inch of their life, that was it! |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,878
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 4, 2017 19:33:14 GMT -5
Mina Murray is the leader of the League. I'd have to disagree that she's a prop merely because some of the other members respect or care for her. Could you elaborate? And yes, the treatment of Barbara Gordon in The Killing Joke is awful and WAY out-of character. I've never thought much of The Killing Joke. Regarding the League, I believe shaxper may be referring to the way Janni (Nemo's daughter) was raped first thing upon her arrival in England. That was absolutely unnecessary to the plot. Yup. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jun 5, 2017 20:24:05 GMT -5
Mina Murray is the leader of the League. I'd have to disagree that she's a prop merely because some of the other members respect or care for her. Could you elaborate? And yes, the treatment of Barbara Gordon in The Killing Joke is awful and WAY out-of character. I've never thought much of The Killing Joke. Regarding the League, I believe shaxper may be referring to the way Janni (Nemo's daughter) was raped first thing upon her arrival in England. That was absolutely unnecessary to the plot. Like you, I never thought much of the killing joke, apart from the fact the art looked nice. What really angered me about it wasn't that Barbara was shot and crippled, though, even though I felt sad for her; it was the way Batman shared a laugh with the Joker at the end... as if despite their enmity there was some kind of grudging respect between them. If there ever was a time when it was appropriate to beat someone within an inch of their life, that was it! I haven't read The Killing Joke, but apparently Grant Morrison's interpretation of that scene is that Batman kills the Joker immediately afterwards - which of course couldn't be even implied except in this disguised way. If that's the case the scene might make more sense. |
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on Jun 6, 2017 11:52:01 GMT -5
Maybe I was too hard on him, but he was not yet working at Marvel at the time and had even wrote Marvel to cancel his subscription to X-Men when it happened. Everything I've seen says that he was still regretting that she couldn't be brought back when he shared his idea. Anyway, it was a terrible idea and a terrible fanfiction story that I think everyone from Byrne to Lousie Simonsen should be ashamed of having had a part in writing. Byrne in particular shocks me. How can an artist have so little respect for his own work? He did hop right on board to do his part in FF didn't he. I never met JB but I can't help but think he relished sticking it to CC, even if it meant crapping on his own masterpiece. I'd like to think he's not that capricious, but who knows. According to John Byrne, Claremont rewrote some of FF #286 at Jim Shooter's request. GCD says pages 24-29 were scripted by Claremont and pages 24-26 were drawn by Jackson Guice. I think the whole mess was disingenuously credited to "You Know Who." |
|
|
|
Post by sunofdarkchild on Jun 6, 2017 15:42:38 GMT -5
He did hop right on board to do his part in FF didn't he. I never met JB but I can't help but think he relished sticking it to CC, even if it meant crapping on his own masterpiece. I'd like to think he's not that capricious, but who knows. According to John Byrne, Claremont rewrote some of FF #286 at Jim Shooter's request. GCD says pages 24-29 were scripted by Claremont and pages 24-26 were drawn by Jackson Guice. I think the whole mess was disingenuously credited to "You Know Who." I knew only Voldemort could be evil enough to do such a thing! |
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jun 6, 2017 21:17:07 GMT -5
Regarding the League, I believe shaxper may be referring to the way Janni (Nemo's daughter) was raped first thing upon her arrival in England. That was absolutely unnecessary to the plot. Like you, I never thought much of the killing joke, apart from the fact the art looked nice. What really angered me about it wasn't that Barbara was shot and crippled, though, even though I felt sad for her; it was the way Batman shared a laugh with the Joker at the end... as if despite their enmity there was some kind of grudging respect between them. If there ever was a time when it was appropriate to beat someone within an inch of their life, that was it! I haven't read The Killing Joke, but apparently Grant Morrison's interpretation of that scene is that Batman kills the Joker immediately afterwards - which of course couldn't be even implied except in this disguised way. If that's the case the scene might make more sense. It's been awhile since I've read The Killing Joke, but it didn't seem to me that Batman was laughing with the Joker. The art seemed to show Batman shaking or strangling the Joker. It's more like Batman is conveying, "You think what thi is funny?! Well, I'm going to take sadistic pleasure in hurting you back." |
|
