Hanzo the Razor wrote:
I can appreciate your perspective but just ultimately disagree.
I think the difference lies in our perceptions of the deal -- you see the "DC owns Watchmen as long as they want to keep publishing it" clause as some sort of contractual loophole while I see it as the deal Moore knowingly agreed to.
You see DC continuing to keep the Watchmen property as betraying the spirit of the original deal while I see the deal playing out in an a way Moore didn't expect due to unforeseen circumstances. I think Moore knew what he signed but it didn't play out the way he thought it would, so he's upset.
At the end of the day, this type of thing is the very reason written contracts were created -- people make deals, disagree later on the deal made, and then it becomes a "he said/she said" situation. At some point, someone said, "Let's write down our deal as a record of the terms we agreed upon, make a copy for each of us, and then sign our names to it as proof that both of us understood and agreed to what was written down."
Moore complains the "spirit" of the deal was betrayed... but it's a "spirit" that may just be his own interpretation. If you sign something and think, "Well, it actually says this but I know it really means that", you're in danger of the other person thinking, "Well it's actually this and it really means this as well."
What about the third party in the situation? Does Dave Gibbons feel he was swindled as well? He's maintained a working relationship with DC and even contributed to the Watchmen film.
Ya know what? I think you're BOTH right, since both Moore and the staff of DC were probably thinking about all of this stuff at the time the deal was made.
Gavin Higginbotham wrote:
Craig O. wrote:
Can I just say that this thread bores me to death. I don't give a shit about Alan Moore OR
I've zero interest in the Before Watchmen stuff. It was a finite story and they story was told. Everything we needed to know about the backstory was told in either flashbacks, dialogue or the backups. The whole thing is redundant from a story stand point.
I hate how DC and Marvel have treated people. I'd like to have the resolve to boycott their stuff but I can't. I've grown bored over the years so no longer read pretty much any of their "new" stuff. I cant stop myself picking up old collections though. And as much as I detest what Marvel have done to or not done for the Kirby Estate, damn if I'm not excited to go see Avengers.
I hear ya man. But Steve Bissette's Marvel boycott has persuaded me to not see the Avengers movie, unless it's a free preview screening.