DC announces "Before Watchmen" prequels

[mtiru]

Like Wolverine's "Origin," I will choose to ignore the continuity of these new comics and enjoy the original Watchmen, which remains a masterpiece.

[cawshis]

Prequels always weird me out. Especially ones 25 years later. The characters of Watchmen are so connected to the 80s, I don't get how a writer could even tackle writing a story for them that resonates with a '10s audience...that actually takes place BEFORE a fictional 80s universe.

That doesn't mean it can't be done, of course. I'm just dubious.

I do, however, look forward to the LUDICROUS costume redesign of Silk Spectre's outfit that makes no sense in the continuity of the eventual Watchmen timeline. That's going to be awesome.

[forager23]

I take Moore to be saying that this is an attempt to mar the aesthetic unity of Watchmen in order to make a quick buck--and the reason you'd select Watchmen rather than, say, Brother Power the Geek to make a quick buck is because DC really does derive a significant part of its reputation from Moore's and Gibbons's reworking of Charlton characters.

That doesn't really make sense to me--why would you choose to devalue something so closely associated with your reputation to make a quick buck? Nominally, at least, DC should be invested in preserving the high-class status of the work.

Just about everything DC does devalues part of its legacy in order to make a quick buck. The only thing surprising about this is that they waited so long!

[E.T.Smith]

My interpretation: DC's only value to WB now is as a generator of characters/concepts/stories that can be advanced to more lucrative media, especially movies. Publishing comics is just a side effect of that.. Watchmen was advanced into a financially successful movie. WB would like to continue to exploit this success, but the story is uniquely resistant to traditional expansion. So WB told DC "find a way to expand the Watchmen story," a prequel gets announced, and DC editorial prays that they won't be folded into the video game division within a year.

EDIT: having finally gotten around to reading the original announcement, my biggest disappointment is the utterly pedestrian writers they've attached to the various mini-series. There's not a single name there I think will have anything interesting to say about the characters.

[James]

Darwyn Cooke is at least competent.

[TheBauhausCure]

While I don't think these will be any good, I'll probably still wind up buying them...and who knows? I mean, look at the most recent X-men movie. They used a completely different backstory, and it still came out pretty good!

Anyone know the release date?

[Leftahead]

Am I the only person who think that this exists pretty much solely as a test balloon for another movie?

This whole endeavor reeks of Hollywood cynicism.

But, dammit, Darwyn Cooke.

[gaylord500]

So it's an expanded movie based on the first ten minutes of the actual movie?

[E.T.Smith]

Am I the only person who think that this exists pretty much solely as a test balloon for another movie?

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I said a bit above. So no, you're not the only one.

But, dammit, Darwyn Cooke.

Darwyn Cooke is at least competent.

I think the bar for a Watchman story is set a bit higher than "nice drawings, good pacing." Watchman is distinctly an Alan Moore story (with significant input from Gibbons) pursuing themes of a distinctly Moorsian style, with characters who are made distinctly for that story and how its told (heck, the whole reason Watchmen used expys for the Charlton characters was because editorial back then realized it wouldn't leave them in a state usable outside it). Either Cooke et al tries to write in imitation of Moore, which I don't see going well, or writes the characters in their own style, which would be both pointless and discordant with the original.

[BaronHelix]

I think the bar for a Watchman story is set a bit higher than "nice drawings, good pacing." Watchman is distinctly an Alan Moore story (with significant input from Gibbons) pursuing themes of a distinctly Moorsian style, with characters who are made distinctly for that story and how its told (heck, the whole reason Watchmen used expys for the Charlton characters was because editorial back then realized it wouldn't leave them in a state usable outside it). Either Cooke et al tries to write in imitation of Moore, which I don't see going well, or writes the characters in their own style, which would be both pointless and discordant with the original.

I am not certain that a project needs to be more of the same to fit. In fact,we would likely just call that derivative. The current take on Animal Man is not the same as Grant Morrisons, but it builds on it in a way that is still intriguing and has a voice.

That said, prequels are trickery, and I do not have high hopes.