1963! Annual

Status: Unpublished Comic Annual

Possible script from Moore in existence, not to appear largely due to ill-will among the creators.

Anon says: I think this might be another partially completed script, Moore might have gotten about half way into it. Actually, here's the answer online:

Rick Veitch: 1963 was Alan's reaction to how insane and awful superhero comics became in the early '90s. He told me he felt somehow responsible by letting the cat out of the bag with Watchmen and wanted to completely reverse course and get back to that 'state of grace' that superheroes existed in during the Silver Age. The point of the series was to be demonstrated in the 80 Page Annual when the sweet and simple 1963 characters battle the pumped and vicious Image superheroes (the basic concept was later lifted for Kingdom Come). 1963 failed because the Annual was never completed. Alan began the script, finishing the first 24 pages, but Jim Lee never started the art. Steve Bissette also pulled out while I was drawing Book 6 and since he was scheduled to handle the production on that issue everything then fell into my lap and it just wasn't possible at that late date to reboot the Annual. In the years following I've tried to organize a number of publishing deals, some of which were built around a new approach to finishing the project. But so far I've never been able to put all the pieces together.

UPDATE...

Re: [alanmoore] Re: Any Questions for Alan Moore?

At SPX in 2006 (I believe) Â I had talked to Veitch about them collecting the 1963 series and Annual. Â They were thinking about publishing through Topshelf Â (a natural choice) and possibly changing the Image characters into vagueÂ rip-offs. Â We joked about Â using Superior (Instead of Supreme, which he rather liked) and the Brutal Komodo, instead of Dragon. Â Â This would be aÂ phenomenalÂ book. Â Â IÂ immediatelyÂ went over to Chris Starros and told him about it. Â He grinned ear to ear, and said he hopes he can publish it, and that they bring it to him.

Â Â Â On a different note, Erik Larsen said he would still like Image to do it, and he even offered to draw the modern day parts to theÂ story.

One can only hope!

-Rob Messick

UPDATE...

----- Original Message -----

From: "Dave Hoskin" <davehoskin@...>

To: alanmoore@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 8:53:52 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern

Subject: Re: [alanmoore] Re: Any Questions for Alan Moore?

I seem to recall Rick Veitch talking about the possible conclusion of 1963 when there were mutterings that they might collect the series for the ten year anniversary. Apparently he and Alan felt that the original idea for the Annual was a bit too outdated (as commenting on the state of comics in 1993 would be old potatoes by 2003) and they were trying to think of a replacement. Veitch reports that Alan had all but given up on the idea and was making noises that perhaps Veitch should finish it himself, and then, after a brief pause to make a cup of tea or something, Alan returned saying "I've got it".

He may not remember what that conclusion was, but if he does and is willing to talk about it, I'd love to know what that idea was.

cheers,

dave

DC Comics Message Boards » WildStorm » Other ABC Topics

1963 meets ABC

Posted: Jul 18, 2003 5:00 PM

How do you people react to the thought of Moore, Veitch, and Bissette publishing the final issue of 1963 with the ABC heroes in the place of the 1993 Image heroes?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

hangmanjury

New to the boards. Question: What is 1963? Sorry that I barged into this little convo but you all have me quite curious as to what your talking about.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

xViolentMessiahx

It would be... odd. Strangely alluring, I suppose, but it really wouldn't fit in anywhere. Wouldn't be 1963, and it's hard to imagine it being fully ABC, either...

I'd like to see the final 1963 bit, though.. so.....

ntnon

Is 1963 collected in TPB form? If so, know where I can get it?. And is it the full run? (collected with the final issue you all speak of?).

Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

xViolentMessiahx

1963 was a six-issue mini-series Moore wrote for Image in the eraly 90s (93, actually). It was one of the very first superhero stories he did after his self-imposed exile from mainstream superheroes post-Watchemen/V for Vendetta/Miracleman.

It's a parody/homage of the Marvel comics from the Silver Age (hence the name). They even used the cheap pulp paper comics used to work with back then (my copies are already yellowed with "age").

In it you can already see his desire to return comics to a simpler, brighter style of storytelling, away from the (then trendy) grim and gritty style Moore himself helped start.

There was supposedly a one-shot special to come after the mini, which would star some of the Image heroes together with the ones Moore created for 1963. For several reasons, it never came to be and Moore moved on to other things.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

KOBE27

No, there is no TPB.

(And like I said on my post, there is NO final issue. Just the six-issue mini).

------------------------------------------------------------------------

KOBE27

It's being reissued in August by King Hell Press

The Shameless '1963' Six-Pack!

King Hell Press

Written by Alan Moore; art by various

If you missed out on Alan Moore, Steve Bissette and Rick Veitch's unfinished retro-masterpiece when it was released ten years ago, weep no more, pilgrim! All six original issues of this spot-on faux-Silver Age series (featuring the talents of Dave Gibbons, Jim Valentino, Chester Brown, Don Simpson, and Melinda Gebbie) are available again in a single shrink-wrapped 1963 Six-Pack! Includes: Mystery Incorporated, No one Escapes The Fury!, Tales of the Uncanny, Tales from the Beyond, Horus Lord of Light, and The Tomorrow Syndicate, with theri sizzlin' stories, litltin' letters pages, pulse-pounding pin-ups, and completely kooky comic book ads that so lovingly aped the production and printing methods of theat era. 1963: A series so good it doesn't even need an ending!

Pack (x6)

see

http://www.alanmoorefansite.com/previews/next.html

previews in August

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eroom Nala

A few of the 1963 characters did later appear in an issue of Shadowhawk.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh, and to all newcomers -- 1963 might not have the ending it so badly deserves, but it does have a wonderful novella-size gathering of text, a bunch of hilarious "interviews" with all the creators, posted at the Alan Moore "table" at Comicon.com -- not to be missed, effendi!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

jbwimbleton

The 1963 heroes also appeared in Jim Valentino's autobio comic "A Touch of Silver" -- Roarin' Rick recently shared that he had discussed an ending to the 1963 series with the Affable One -- Rick's take on this discussion (I think) was shared on the boards over at Comicon.com, and reprinted or at least mentioned at the Alan Moore Fan Site... if only we could have the conclusions to 1963 and Supreme! I only... if only...

------------------------------------------------------------------------

jbwimbleton

That "Touch Of Silver" story also appeared in Big Bang comics, i forget the issue #, but I understand Alan is a big fan of Big Bang and was instrumental in forming 1963

------------------------------------------------------------------------

blackshirt

How Alan Moore killed a 1963 reprint for all time

12/29/2011

by Heidi MacDonald

Ruminating on the year past, cartoonist/educator Steve Bissette considers the story of how creator-owned comics can be sunk by just one stuck cog — in this case a rather large cog named Alan Moore. Just to bring everyone up to speed, 1963 was a very early Image project re-imagining the origins of Marvel, written by Moore and illustrated by Steve Bissette, John Totleben, and Rick Veitch, with additional art by Dave Gibbons, Don Simpson, and Jim Valentino and published in 1993. The final issue was to have been illustrated by Jim Lee, but Lee took time off in the middle, Moore decided not to finished it and…blah blah blah. Time passes. And, Bissette and Moore have a bit of a falling out, as chronicled in a series of interviews, here and there.

However, last year, a 1963 follow-up — Tales of the Uncanny – N-Man & Friends: A Naut Comics History Vol. 1 — was to be produced by Bissette and published by Image. Well, things didn’t work out, as Bissette posts. In addition, there was to be a reprint of 1963. After months of negotiations, Moore “pulled the plug” — meaning 1963 will never be reprinted ever again.

And ironically — given our rant earlier today about work for hire — Bissette has found the WFH has paid him far more than creator-owned comics over the year. In the spirit of equal time:

So, consider this:

In creator co-ownership, one partner can forever and willfully deep-six any future in any co-owned work—even completed, published work, that still has perceived or potential market value.

That, too, is part of creator ownership, and co-ownership, and creator rights, and must be taken into account in any discussion of the subject.

All of us who worked hard on 1963 back in 1992–93 earned whatever we would or will ever earn from that work back in 1993, and that was that.

We will never see a dime from any of that work again, while the quarterly royalties from the DC/Vertigo collected Swamp Thing editions (for which I wrote two book introductions in 2011, more on that in a moment) and John Constantine/Hellraiser arrive, for the most part, like clockwork.

If you had told the Bissette of 1990 that he’d never see a dime on any work done with Alan save the work-for-hire collaborative ventures we’d already put behind us by 1990, the Bissette of 1990 would have laughed and spit and ranted about the evils of work-for-hire.

Both Alan Moore and Steve Bissette qualify as…principled individuals who adhere strongly to their own belief systems. And Moore is undoubtedly one of the major literary figures of his time. He is also, to put it mildly, not always interested in the financial affairs of his past collaborators.

Bissette still hopes to publish Tales of the Uncanny sometime next year.

Comments

Christine Valada says: 12/29/2011 at 4:40 pm Well, technically, I think that Steve could possibly move forward on this project, subject only to a duty to pay Alan his 50% of earnings, but he could not give any EXCLUSIVE rights to anyone, which might piss off a publisher. This solution would, apparently, piss off Alan. If if a written agreement for the split gave Alan 51% or more control, then Steve is SOOL. Ugly, counterproductive, sad no matter how you look at it.
jimmy palmiotti says: 12/29/2011 at 4:46 pm I thank god my partners, past and presant, understand that if one is doing very well, the other might need a hand and let them run with a co-produced creation with each others blessing. The more I read this kind of stuff, the less I admire certain people in comics.
Matthew Southworth says: 12/29/2011 at 4:58 pm To say Alan Moore isn’t interested in the financial affairs of his past collaborators fails to take into account that he gave all the money from the Watchmen film to Dave Gibbons, and I believe he did the same with David Lloyd on V for Vendetta. Lately there seems to be a real effort to paint Moore as some sort of disgruntled nut–see Jason Aaron’s (and others’) misreading of his comments about DC’s talent pool–rather than someone who no longer wanted to work in an industry he deems exploitative. The guy put in years and years and years making great comics–to have grown dissatisfied and elect to move on doesn’t make him crazy or grumpy or a loose cannon. I’m not suggesting he hasn’t made decisions that cost his collaborators money–just sort of alarmed by the recent glee with which people seem determined to knock him (and Frank Miller, though that’s another matter), seemingly just because he decided to leave comics.
jaroslav hasek says: 12/29/2011 at 5:17 pm well geez, if you listen to bissette then pretty soon comic writers and artists are going to start ceding control and rights to their creations in exchange for such things as distribution, promotion, business negotiations, legal arbitration and other areas of service and expertise that require years of training and study to master. then comics will be truly ruined.
The Beat says: 12/29/2011 at 5:17 pm Matthew — I wrote “He is also, to put it mildly, not always interested in the financial affairs of his past collaborators.” Accent on the not always. I was thinking of him assigning the rights to his OTHER collaborators. So yeah, sometimes, he he a prince of a guy. Sometimes he is a lovable cranky! But I do agree with you about the kicking of Miller and Moore.
Stanley Lieber says: 12/29/2011 at 5:34 pm Bissette should recall that one of the key creator’s rights advocated by Dave Sim during their association (I’m pretty sure this point was mentioned during one or more of their lengthy public discussions of creator’s rights) was that contributors to a work should always have the right to publish the parts of the work they contributed to (dividing profits appropriately), even if the other contributors disagree. It’s not as if this exact problem hasn’t been considered and discussed. The stumbling block has always been that people don’t decide these questions up-front, before the collaboration begins.
eallengd says: 12/29/2011 at 6:05 pm I don’t know but maybe it’s just me but Alan Moore is just turning into a complete A-hole. The man is a genius who’s writing I’ve admired very much for the last 30 plus years, but get over it. I’ve been a freelance designer for almost 40 years and I don’t always agree with my clients for what ever reason. But at times they are right and other times I am. Let’s remember this is business, first and for most. Like my grandfather once told me, “Can’t we all just learn to get along”. Alan isn’t perfect and neither is DC.
Matthew Southworth says: 12/29/2011 at 6:55 pm Heidi–I probably didn’t communicate properly that I did see the “not ALWAYS” in your comment. I think you’re correct there and hope I didn’t sound like I was taking you to task; just wanted to point out a couple of big examples that went the other way. Re: the trashing of Moore and Miller–something Oedipal about it, methinks. @Eallengd–your comment is what I’m alluding to–what has Moore done that makes him an asshole? He’s simply washed his hands of the industry after what he regarded as business practices he found unacceptable. Is that misbehaving?
John Roberson says: 12/29/2011 at 7:01 pm Sad. But keep in mind, Steve’s still doing the TALES OF THE UNCANNY one-shot, possibly as POD(a method I’ve been using for over a year which I rather like because, well, I’m cheap and not into risk, and the final product is no different than if I’d printed a bunch I was sitting on), next year. I understand that will probably be it. But rather depressing. I love Moore and Bissette both, but it’s not Moore I side with here. At all. “Why can’t people just be nice?”–Garth Ennis.
John Roberson says: 12/29/2011 at 7:02 pm PS–By the way, no one’s considered here that this doesn’t just screw Steve. Rick Veitch in some ways even more. And John Totleben. And to a lesser degree, Jim Valentino, Don Simpson, and I’m sure I’m forgetting someone but others too. That’s just kind of…I won’t say.
James Collinge says: 12/29/2011 at 7:16 pm I can understand Moore wanting to retain some level of control over his work, but putting his own wishes in front of the interests of Bissette, Totleben, Veitch, Gibbons, Simpson and Valentino’s own strikes me the wrong way. Obviously, the only people who know what was actually said and why negotiations broke down were the creators themselves; but surely he could have let 1963 go back to print without his name attached? Or credited as ‘Alan Smithee’, perhaps?
John Roberson says: 12/29/2011 at 7:19 pm The odd part of this is that, as mentioned above, Moore usually IS a mensch when it comes to his collaborators, so what’s the deal with this? At first I just thought it was a Him and Steve thing till I realized Rick and he have seemingly remained close a while. I just hope Moore and O’Neill never fall out. Oy. That would suck.
AndyG says: 12/29/2011 at 9:59 pm I think I’d put it out anyway. Let Moore sue. Make sure the venue is the American courts. Bring the whole collaborators’ rights issue to the forefront. The publicity alone would be worth it.
John Roberson says: 12/29/2011 at 11:44 pm When you think what Moore scripts demand of an artist, how much work, how much love went into such projects…it makes Alan look like he just considers them an extension of his hands, and when he’s done with it everyone else has to be too. I hate to say this but Kevin O’Neill should watch his back. Depressing as hell, and ironic that he’s now making DC look ethical and decent. They do pay royalties on time. As Steve says, “like clockwork.”
R. Maheras says: 12/29/2011 at 11:55 pm Too bad — It was a nice series. The good news, for collectors at least, is that “1963″ was published at a time when print runs were pretty large compared to today, and thus copies will probably always be available in dollar boxes at conventions, or on eBay. The bad news is that there won’t be any new revenue streams for the original creators from pricey reprint volumes. I think the whole situation is a great example as to why, when it comes to creator-owned stuff, it is in the best interests of the creator to work alone.
Eva Hopkins says: 12/30/2011 at 2:28 am @ Jimmy P.: Indeed. One would hope & wish that if you work with someone on a project, paperwork or not, that they’d have that level of decency & fairness. I have seen not one, but repeated examples in the industry of that not being the case. It’s unfortunate & removes not only great stories from circulation, but sometimes creators too. If stonewalled by a prior partner sometimes creators turn to other work to pay the bills & drop right out of comics work overall. @R. Maheras – not always, about working alone, but I get your point. Bottom line: if you’re working on a creator-owned project & not working solo, make sure you have all your ducks in a row IN ADVANCE, before production begins. Think you don’t need paperwork, ’cause you are working with a friend? If you want to *remain friends* (as well as protecting whatever creative interest you have in the work at hand), get agreements in writing ahead of time. Have all the crazy “what if” discussions you never think you’d need to have about production cost, rights (including reprint rights), sharing of credit, how you as a team make money during production, rate of work production/realistic assessment of how long each partner’s end of things will take, what if it’s a huge failure, what if it’s a huge success. *Then* go create together & have a blast.
Chris Hero says: 12/30/2011 at 4:42 am I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume no one read any of the links The Beat put in the article. I’m reasonably certain people are jumping to conclusions here. Trying to pick a side between Moore and Bisette is a mug’s game. There’s a long history and their mutual dislike of one another is nothing new. Both are fine people, but that’s the thing…they’re people. Conflict is natural. Conflict in a working relationship 30 years old is very difficult to move past.
Steve says: 12/30/2011 at 12:10 pm Bummer. I would have liked to read it.
Matthew Southworth says: 12/30/2011 at 1:47 pm I did read the links but actually found it difficult to follow what the disagreement was beyond Bissette wants to reissue stuff and Moore doesn’t want him to. Found that page nearly impossible to follow, to be honest.
Jeff P. says: 12/30/2011 at 1:47 pm “And Moore is undoubtedly one of the major literary figures of his time.” This seems a pretty bold statement to me. In comics and narrative literature, maybe, but not in ‘literature’ literature.
Earth-2 Chad says: 12/30/2011 at 2:54 pm I bought 1963 off the racks way back when, and I enjoyed it, but the “lost” work from Steve Bissette that I really miss is Tyrant. Unfortunately, I’m guessing that the current market is no better set up to fund the completion of that book than it was after the speculator boom went bust. That said, I’ll be buying Tales From the Uncanny when it finally gets released.
Chris Hero says: 12/30/2011 at 5:23 pm @Matthew Not you. You seem concerned with putting stuff in context. A lot of others are reacting quickly without even trying. People like that always need a hero and a villain.
Pedro Bouça says: 12/30/2011 at 8:51 pm I was able to track down the back issues without much trouble. Early Image print runs were HUGE! And to say it will “never” be reprinted is an exaggeration. After he dies (in a very distant future, I hope), his heirs may not have the same opinion about reprints. And it will be available for everyone whenever it goes into public domain (which will be on an even more distant future…).
Matthew Southworth says: 12/31/2011 at 2:31 am @Chris–thanks for that. I didn’t mean to imply that I felt insulted by your comment, only felt impelled to mention that I found the article tough to decipher. More than that, though, I agree with your point about the hero and villain thing. I’m a little exhausted with that schism, which I rarely see in reality–but I see it all the time in comic books. . .
F! says: 12/31/2011 at 1:02 pm Well, given the tale told in Bisette’s CBR interview, the culprit in all this would seem to be Jim Lee. And let me say I am shocked—SHOCKED—that he’d fail to produce a book he’d committed to drawing.
Brian Douglas Ahern says: 01/02/2012 at 8:39 pm 1963 was nothing short of a glorious series. It is a shame there will be no reprints or trade paperback editions, as I often scour bargain bins for these issues. I will not part with my copies, but like to give the set as a gift whenever possible.
Vinnie Bartilucci says: 04/25/2012 at 10:36 am This story seems out of phase with how Alan has handled similar things in the past. When presented with a project with which he does not wish to ally himself, such as the various movies, he signs away his portion of the rights, tells the money-holders to give his share to the artists, and washes his proverbial hands. I might guess that since this is a reprint of his work, something they couldn’t feasibly remove his name from, that was not an option. Money doesn’t seem to worry him as much as being treated fairly, or that the company does things fairly. Is there any chance he was attempting to apply pressure on actions taking place elsewhere in Imageland? Some act he found fault with, and wanted changed? Come to think of it, have there been any reprints of his ABC stuff since the re-falling out with DC? But that wasn’t creator-owned stuff, was it?

The thing that really mystifies me about 1963 is not so much that it was never finished, but rather that it ever got started in the first place. One of the myths that Image likes to put forward about itself is that it was started by a group of innocent artists who were struggling against the oppresive corporate structure of Marvel Comics, which desperately sought to steal their intellectual property. While this certainly has a kernel of truth to it, the fact of the matter is that Image was founded by a group of cocky, arrogant artists who wanted more royalties for characters they arguably had no right to in the first place. For McFarlane and especially Liefeld, the train of thought was that the art was more important than the story and that style over substance would sell itself. And why not? The artificially inflated numbers owing to the speculation market seemed to bear this out. Similarly, Image titles like Spawn and Youngblood were some of the worst offenders of the grit-for-grit's-sake mentality that Moore hates so much. What was the logical conclusion of the showdown between the 1963 characters and the modern Image characters? Was Moore (who has never had any problem naming names when it comes to grinding axes) going to systematically dismantle the Image Universe? Did these guys not understand what they were setting themselves up for? Perhaps it was a positive advent for Image, then, that the petty squabbles that have turned the company into the distant third place in sales that it is today saved it from an almost certain savaging at the hands of one of comics' most talented aesthetic terrorists. What I wouldn't give to see Moore's script notes for that annual...