Unfinished Awesome and 1963!

Unfinished Awesome and 1963 « previous next »

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5

Author Topic: Unfinished Awesome and 1963 (Read 551 times)

Joe

Full Member

Karma: 3

Posts: 246

I'm a llama!

Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« on: June 06, 2006, 11:34:27 AM »

Quote:

I doubt there's any chance of the Awesome line being finished now

Weren't those series continued or revamped by Mark Millar anyway?

I don't even want to think how he would ruin Alan Moore's ideas...

Moore had some interesting plans, like Big Brother hooking up with Suprema. You can see what he was doing with the unpublished issues of Supreme and Youngblood here:

http://www.platinumstudios.com/titles/awesome/issues/issues.html

They also have a main page of Alan Moore's Awesome universe:

http://www.platinumstudios.com/titles/awesome/awesome_intro.php

They tell you what the unpublished Youngblood and the second-to-last issue of Supreme would have been because Moore wrote those scripts, though the comics were never published. They don't have the last issue of Supreme because it hadn't been written by Moore yet.

However, I have synopses of the unfinished Supreme issues. These synopses used to be on be the Internet, but they don't seem to exist anymore. (The second-to-last issue, Supreme the Return 7, is really fleshed out when you read both synopses for that issue.)

From "'Lost' Supreme Issues Synopsis" by Steve Johnson

Supreme the Return 7 (Originally issue 63): The Clash of the Supremacies, Part One

Diana Dane, having visited the Supremacy, has realized the Supremacy works just like comic book continuity. So she has a wonderful idea: Omniman, the hero she writes about in the comics, will go to the Omnigarchy and meet all the old Omnimen.

The comic is published to great acclaim. Darius Dax buys a copy, and realizes that this is too close a coincidence. This has been written with inside info from Supreme! From that, he deduces the existence of the Supremacy, the counterpart to Daxia.

Dax goes back to Daxia, tells them there's a Supremacy, and they all decide to attack Earth to lure the Supremacy all into the open, where they can finish them once and for all.

Supreme the Return 8 (Originally issue 64): The Clash of the Supremacies, Part Two

"My 24th issue of Supreme," Moore said proudly, "would have been a huge battle with all the Supremes vs. all the Daxes, taking place on Earth but spilling over into the Supremacy and Daxia. A big, Kirbyesque war of the worlds; that might have been the one where we used Alex Ross' beautiful painted cover showing all the Supremes, including ones I hadn't invented yet when I saw it."

"And that would have been it," he says. But by then, it would be the middle of 1999, and doubtless [Moore would] have thought of something else ...

And in another world, he probably has."

« Last Edit: June 27, 2006, 06:38:08 PM by Joe » Report to moderator Logged

JohnnyWalker

Sr. Member

Karma: 2

Posts: 257

aka ThunderPeel2001

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2006, 04:25:17 PM »

I read the first Checker book of Supreme and it was REALLY good. I'd forgotten about that. What happened with Awesome comics? Surely with Moore writing for them they'd have been guaranteed to continue...?

I wish there was decent quality reprints of his Awesome stuff. The Checker reprint was such bad quality that I won't buy it, even though I really enjoyed it. Surely someone will do a high quality collection of his titles there (and maybe even pay an artist to finish off his final script??).

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

http://tinyurl.com/7rx4w

Joe

Full Member

Karma: 3

Posts: 246

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2006, 06:10:24 PM »

Alan Moore's run on Supreme is fantastic. I think it was one of his masterpieces. It is my favorate Superman story. It was Moore's big comeback after his Image work, some of which is very good, especially WildC.A.T.S and Spawn/WildC.A.T.s, but non of which is Watchmen good. He was doing From Hell at the time, but it was coming out very, very, very slowly. Then he did Supreme, and Supreme is Watchmen good.

I suggest you look at the Checkers graphic novels again. The first edition were of terrible quality. I'm pretty sure they did a recall, and the following editions are much better.

Well, it seems he never finished the final script, and Moore had a falling out with Liefeld.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2006, 06:33:19 PM »

Doesn't Moore own Supreme, though? Or if Checker do, then why not ask him to finish it off? Or did Liefield do the artwork? (I forget now )

« Last Edit: June 06, 2006, 06:33:37 PM by JohnnyWalker » Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2006, 07:37:29 PM »

Supreme is a Rob Liefield creation and was and is owned entirely by him. Although alan Moore changed everything about the book (as he did with Swamp Thing) he has no copyright stake in the character or the book at all. Pretty much work for hire. As Lifield's entire publishing setup is shoddy and unproffesional (and dare i say, useless) it's a good job Checker Books stepped in or I doubt Supreme would ever have been collected. Liefield can't get two consecutive comics out let alone a TPB. Shame the quality of the reprints is so poor though as Johhny notes. Aside from the poor printing they weren't complete, missing out some incredible back up strips including the great Kev O'Neill drawn Squeak the Supremouse story and Jim Mooney's wonderfull 'Suprema the Has-been Supreme', my favourite Supreme story. I'd recomend the original issues.

Quote: 'Surely with Moore writing for them they'd have been guaranteed to continue...?'

Well, unfortunatly being the best doesn't neccasarily mean being the best selling as seen with ABC, especially when the publisher is useless as I mentioned above.

I too would like to see all of the Awesome material completed (especially Glory) but only if Alan Moore is directly involved. I wouldn't want to see his final, unpublished strip illustrated and released without his approval. I remember hearing something about Liefield touting Supreme around trying to find a new artist to reillustrate the entire thing but i don't know how much truth there was in it.

I agree about the high quality of Supreme, although I don't think it's 'Watchmen good', for two reasons.

1: Watchmen trancends the superhero genre, Supreme doesn't. If you don't like or 'get' superhero comics (the vast majority of the population of the world) then I don't think you'll get much from Supreme. That isn't true of Watchmen whose themes are universal issues.

2: Apart from the inspired Rick Veitch flashback sections and one or two other exceptions (Sprouse and Starlin), the artwork on Supreme isn't up to scratch. Reading the Goorl the Living Galaxy story for example was frustrating because it was a wondefull story but it left me with the feeling that it should have been so much better if the artist was up to it. Some of the visual set-pieces like Goorl retreating into a backdrop of stars were rendered very badly. By contrast, the artwork on Watchmen perfectly captures Alan's vision, a few minor colouring errors aside.

I do think it's as good or better however than some of Moore's more legendary work, such as Miracleman for example (which, by the way, I have just reread Joe, as I said I was going to, and my reactions were mixed. I'll make a post about it when i've properly formulated my ideas and i've got the time). I often get the feeling that a lot of his later work gets short thrift compared to much of his revolutionary but now slightly dated 80's work (the aforementioned Miracleman and Swamp Thing). As far as i'm concerned for example, Promethea is a far more consistent and inspirational series than Swamp Thing.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2006, 06:21:25 PM »

Yeah, I know what you mean, CBM, about his older stuff being more revered than his later stuff. It seems odd to me because a lot of it is so brilliant. I just picked up the first issue of 1963, and although I don't get all of the references, I think that it's abolutely flawless. Right down to the 'Shamed of You English?' advert on the back.

It's something that could have easily become too silly, or too cynical, but it seems to me to be just the right balance between fondness and parody - and that's pretty hard to do!

Conversely I also picked up Captain Britain and found it less... enjoyable. Hell, I've still to pick up the third Swamp Thing volume (although I will, eventually!) after finding volume 2 not as gripping as the first one (although this was probably due to the fact that I didn't know the characters).

Has 1963 even been collected? Please tell me it was finished, at least!! I think this is one series worth picking up the single issues for - as a collected edition wouldn't have that genuine 'old comic book' feel to it.

CBM: I note what you're saying about Supreme being worth picking up in issue format, too. I think that sounds like a good solution, as I was less than impressed with Checker's treatment of it (although the Alex Ross cover was great!).

I wonder if Moore's earlier work is so revered simply because it was 'revolutionary' and people have nostalgic feelings about that? Now his work is less 'revolutionary' but it's still outstanding and perhaps more accomplished now?

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #6 on: June 07, 2006, 08:44:51 PM »

1963 wasn't completed, no

It was to be an initial 6 issue series of standalone titles (Mystery Incorporated, The Tomorrow Syndicate etc), with an interweaving subplot. That much was completed. All of the interweaving subplots were to come together in a book titled 1963 80 page Giant or something like that. This never happened for a number of reasons, not least of which Alan Moore's fallout with Steve Bissette. Given that the ownership of the characters has since been legally carved up, that there is no publisher and Moore continues to give Steve Bissette his famous silent treatment then the chances of it being finished are... well, in Britain we have a saying: 'You have two hopes. Bob Hope and no hope'.

It is unlikely to be collected for the same reasons. Not neccasarily a bad thing as you say. They would lose something in book format.

I've just mentioned this elsewhere but what the hey, I think that 1963 is probably Moore's best 'pure' superhero strip, meaning superheros without deconstruction (Miracleman, Watchmen), Twists or gimmicks (Top Ten, Promethea) or pretension. The quality and execution of the concepts is just unbelievable. Even more unbelievable is that Moore just tosses them away casually in a single 12 page strip. Any other writer could have made a career out of Hypernaut alone.

"I wonder if Moore's earlier work is so revered simply because it was 'revolutionary' and people have nostalgic feelings about that? Now his work is less 'revolutionary' but it's still outstanding and perhaps more accomplished now?"

I think that that's pretty much spot on. His 80's work was certainly more iconoclastic, groundbreaking (at the time) and perhaps ambitious than Supreme or ABC. What the '2nd period' superhero stuff (1963 onwards) lacks in terms of raw power and awe (very apparent in Miracleman) though it makes up for in its superior restraint. Moore is definatly a better writer now and he has refined his style to be less dramatic but perhaps more immaculately executed. Swamp Thing seems very raw now, looking at it. There are a lot things which only half come off, whereas pretty much everthing in ABC is pulled off flawlessly. Compare the two apocalypses in Swamp Thing and Promethea; it's easy to see which one is the more profound and meaningfull and which one gets its message across better (hint: it's Promethea).

Also, Moore is a far wiser writer now. His work is less flashy but tends to have a greater profundity. I maintain that much of Miracleman is sound and fury with no real, clear, discernible meaning. I got the feeling that Moore couldn't quite express what he wanted to say there. The themes of Top Ten say (which is tolerance), may be simpler but they are better expressed and probably have greater direct relevance to real life.

Nostalgia definatly plays a big part. Some people have views on Alan's work going back 20 or more years and are not that enclined to reexamine them now (that's an observation, not a criticism. I would be exactly the same. In fact, in ten years time I'm sure i will be). As a Johhny Come lately to Alan Moore (i'm 25. I discovered Alan Moore about 6 years ago and became obsessed. I have since obtained pretty much every major work he's done. I need only Brought to Light and the A1 Bojeffries strips) I find that I perhaps have a different perspective on his considerable body of work than those who have followed it since the 80s. I'm not saying i have a better perspective, just a different one.

One last quick note to mention that All of the Alex Ross illustrations in the Supreme TPB's, including the wonderfull cover to 'Story of the Year' are also found in 'Alan Moore's Awesome Universe handbook' for those who fancy picking up Supreme in the original issues.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2006, 12:52:48 PM »

Good points. I can't make a long post about this, but my Watchmen good, I don't mean as good or universal as the Watchmen, I mean a comic-book masterpiece, and in my opinion Moore has so many.

I like both of Moore's periods just as much. I reread Miracle Man about three years ago, and I liked it is much as I did in the 1980s.

An interesting way to look at it is Miracle Man is the best Captain Marvel story every told, and Supreme is the best Superman story ever told.

I bought 1963 when it came out, but I was in Grad school, so I was collecting but not reading Moore and Frank Miller comics. I never read it because I was hoping they would finish it. They almost did a few years ago, but that fell through. I guess they won't finish it, so I'll finally read it.

It seems to me that the quality of Moore's later work is just as good as his 80s work, except for his Image phase (excluding 1963), which is very good but not as good.

In my opinion, the only writing that Frank Miller has done that is as good as his 1980s work is 300. Sin City is great for the art, not the writing.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2006, 08:31:20 PM »

When I think of Moore’s retro comics three titles come to mind, 1963, Supreme, and Tom Strong. Of those three titles I think Supreme is the clear winner, finding the perfect balance of being retro with a modern slant (much like All Star Superman is doing right now).

I also went into reading it with very low expectations, considering his image output at the time. But was very surprised how good it was, the first 12 issues (The Story of the Year tpb) are great fun.

It’s also worth noting that the Checker TPB’s did not include the back up strips from issues 52A and 52B do to space limitations.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #9 on: June 09, 2006, 09:56:34 AM »

Argh, I can't believe they never finished 1963 off! I've heard Bissette's side of the story, but not Alan's, and Bissette comes off looking just like someone who was fed up and happened to do an interview at the same time. Of course, I've not actually read the interview, but it sounded like something that he and Moore could have sorted out...?

Of course, comments like Moore's (half-jokey) - "if it's worth re-acting to, it's worth over-reacting to" - don't make him sound very reasonable when he's angry.... *sigh* Why can't everyone just get along?

Quote:

It’s also worth noting that the Checker TPB’s did not include the back up strips from issues 52A and 52B do to space limitations.

As someone who works in print, I have absolutely no idea what that means. Space limitations where? I'm pretty sure that Supreme was bound with a process that doesn't have a 'space limitation'. The few extra pages probably wouldn't have even bumped up the price that much.

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #10 on: June 09, 2006, 11:15:22 AM »

That is not why the didn't finish the series. I forget the reason the last attempt failed, but Bissette was going to do a story with his characters, and Veitch and Moore were going to do a story with their characters, and Bissette's story had to be 1/3 the size of Moore and Veitch's story.

Of course the original version sounded the best. All the 1963 characters were going to meet the grim Image type characters of the early 1990s. The 1990s characters were going to be drawn the 1990s way, and the 1960 characters were going to be drawn the 1960s way. It was a brilliant idea.

Moore took that theme to Judgment Day.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #11 on: June 09, 2006, 02:26:17 PM »

You know, I wonder if the subject heading alone is another pointer as to why Moore's '90s work doesn't get the "respect" of his '80s work.

The '90s work never got done!

Reading this from Johnny -- "Please tell me it was finished, at least!! " --- just made me sad, as I knew it wouldn't be long before the crushing news. It still pains me.

As Joe says, the original idea sounded so wonderfully brilliant, with the 1963 characters meeting Spawn, Dragon, the Wildcats, Youngblood, Pitt, and whoever else. It would've been such a cool way to do it. I was hugely looking forward to it back in 1993 when the series first came out, and it was just so horrible to slowly realize it would never see the light of day.

Then Supreme didn't finish, Youngblood didn't finish, Glory barely even started ... ugh.

That was a frustrating time to be an Alan Moore fan. At least with ABC we got see Moore bring all these projects (or most of them) to a reasonable conclusion!

Still, it was all really exciting at the time, I remember. 1963 was so great at the time, because it was so fresh and unusual. I'm not sure anyone had really done that before -- to set a comic in 1963 and then have the writing and art style actually look like the comics were actually produced in the year they were set. Certainly to my teenage eyes it was just a revelation.

Then Supreme and, as Joe brought up, Judgment Day, took things one better and actually juxtaposed the retro-style work with modern '90s superhero style, eventually finding kind of a synthesis of the two -- a "new classicism," as the Onion called it, which is what ultimately came to characterize the ABC Books. It's a cool progression to see.

You know, thinking about it, even though Supreme and 1963 aren't spoken about with the same reverence as Miracleman and Watchmen, I think the influence of those latter '90s Moore works is still evident. Someone brought up All-Star Superman ... I really think the seeds of that comic (based on what I've seen of it) are in Supreme. A-S Superman and Moore's Supreme both go for the same " 'old' is the new 'new' " approach, introducing fresh concepts and ideas via old-school superhero devices (e.g., the superhero-gives-his-girlfriend-a-tour trope, used a lot in Supreme and I notice also utilized in the second issue of Morrison's Superman).

John Byrne's Generations owed a lot to Supreme and 1963 as well. Byrne says in his introduction to one of the collections that guiding aesthetic of that series was that if a story was set in a certain year, say 1949, then it would be written and drawn in a style that you'd see in a comic published in 1949. Byrne seems delighted by the novelty of this concept , but it's basically a retread of the Supreme/Judgment Day construction.

(In fact, the central gimmick of Generations, that the characters debut in 1938 and then age in real time for the next sixty years, happened in Supreme too: e.g., the Lana Lang analogue being an old woman when Supreme returns to his version of Smallville; the Awesome-verse's "Justice Society" being old, retired, and married).

The "old/new" dynamic was also a big component of Grant Morrison's reconstruction of the classic Justice League too. It's interesting: I think if you look at how DC decided to make its characters more "realistic" in the '80s by jettisoning all the Golden/Silver age baggage, it probably owes a lot to deconstructionist stories like Moore's "Miracleman."

And if you look at how DC handled its characters in the late '90s, and even today, with its more nostalgic and affectionate treatment of the characters' histories (in Generations, JLA, All-Star Superman), this too can be traced to Moore's nostalgic, classic-style superhero work in 1963 and Supreme.

That's my take, anyway. Any agreements, disagreements?

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #12 on: June 09, 2006, 03:22:22 PM »

I found some explanation in a book dedicated to Moore why they never finished the serie.

Jim Lee was responsible to coordinate the whole work of the different authors on what was supposed to be an "Annual-like" to close the serie.

In fact, he has never done it, Rob Liefeld left Image for another project, then Lee and as a consequence it had no more sense to do this comics after and the project failed, unfortunately.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #13 on: June 09, 2006, 07:03:36 PM »

Quote: "You know, I wonder if the subject heading alone is another pointer as to why Moore's '90s work doesn't get the "respect" of his '80s work. The '90s work never got done!"

Actually, that's a very good point!

I agree with most of your assesment pretty much Jason. Ever since I discovered Alan Moore it's been embarrasing to me just how slavishly the rest of the comics world has imitated him and continues to imitate him. It does tend to paint a pretty poor picture of the level of vision and talent displayed by the vast majority of comics creators.

I grew up reading all kinds of comics including American Superhero titles but for the last couple of years the only mainstream titles I have brought and read are ABC. Everything just seems like a bad pastiche of Alan Moore and indeed seems to have been so since Moore entered American comics in the 80s. When alan Moore does dark and violent(Miracleman) they do dark and violent. When Alan Moore does light and nostalgic (1963, Supreme) they do light and nostalgic. Although I didn't read it myself I hear DC have recently been pillaging 'Twilight' again with something called 'hypertime'. As Joe mentioned, Frank Miller completely burned out and hindsight shows that most of the once trendy Vertigo writers weren't that great after all.

Perhaps it wouldn't be as bad if any the imitators actually had a fraction of Moore's talent but every thing i see by them seems to totally miss the point.

I came late as I mentioned but I can imagine how frustrating it must have been for those titles to be left in the way they were. Glory and Youngblood even finished on cliffhangers right in the middle of a story!

I actually picked up the Judgment Day mini a couple of months back and read it for the first time and it imediately struck me that Alan Moore had found a way to say what he originally planned to say with the 1963 Annual. And I think he did it with great aplomb. I wasn't expecting much. I thought it would be on the same level as the middling period Image work (Spawn etc) rather than Supreme level and i was very pleasantly suprised. However, as with all of the Awesome stuff, shame about the artwork.

As for which is 'best' out of 1963, Supreme and Tom Strong (and other bits and pieces of ABC) I agree again with Mr Powell. They are a progression. Despite their asthetic similarities they all have / had slightly different agendas. In fact, not only are those titles not as similar as they appear at first glance, just to confuse matters they are not as dissimilar to the 80s work as they seem to be at first glance. Check out the photo of a 50's Bat-Family in the batcave in 'Killing Joke', the similar photo in Watchmen, the way Moore worked all of the old Marvelman stuff into Miracleman, Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow etc.

There are many structural similarities too. For example, Moore manufacures an entire past, present and future of superhero continuity out of whole cloth in Watchmen, Miracleman, 1963, Awesome and ABC. The way he does this is identical in all of the titles. He takes the historical real world publishing history of superhero comics, its ups and downs and stylistic trends and transmorgifies it into his superhero fictions.

The division of his superhero work between the grim, 'realistic' work of the 80s and the lighter, nostalgic work of the 90s that we have all been talking about is a usefull but entirely artificial categorisation of his career. We should perhaps remember this. It's all the progression of one writer. That's why I get slightly irritated when I hear people say that Alan Moore isn't as 'good' as he used to be. He's been building towards this point from the beggining albeit not conciously. I think he expresses his ideas better now than he ever has done. He keeps getting better and better.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #14 on: June 10, 2006, 12:21:41 AM »

I agree with ChinaBoatMan when he says "It's all the progression of one writer".

I think why the word "genius" gets bandied around Alan Moore because he has continually hit a level of quality over so many years. Most writers would aspire for one of his "phases", but by continually progressing and re-inventing his stories he has transcended from being an "exceptional" writer into that one-of-a-kind in his chosen field. Its silly to define the man by Watchmen (like Speigelman and Maus) when he has really consolidated his worth by continually bringing out stuff thats as good or better and not rested on his laurels, or stuck with the successful formula and merely rehased it. I don't know many writers (or any artists) in which I would buy anything they put out knowing it will be good.

The awesome/image phase probably suffers due to it incomplete nature. I love the 1963 series which I feel shows his often overshadowed talent in doing comedy (as opposed to tragic grit).

What do you think of the recordings he has done (snakes and ladders, birth caul etc). I think they are some of his best work, would have loved to have seen them live (even more than seeing 1963 or big numbers finished!!).

- Pedro.

BTW how do you tell if the checker Supreme book you have is of inferior quality. Mine seems pretty scratchy, buts its not terrible and unreadable. I was annoyed it didn't have the Kev O'Neill story though.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2006, 07:03:42 PM »

I agree with all of you! What an interesting conversation! Especially with the revelations that his 90's work might well be more forgotten because it wasn't finished...!

It's also interesting to hear how his work as progressed. I came to Alan Moore even later than CBM (the first comic I ever bought - aside from 'The Killing Joke' when I was ten) was The League and Promethea TPBs. When I went back to his older stuff, I could see similarities and trends, and when I read his interviews about how 'The Watchmen' paved a way for the 'violent' 80s, it really made me see the need(?) for the transition into the 'nostalgic 90s'.

Thanks to this conversation, though, I can really see a thread leading from one thing to the next. Alan Moore is definitely an artist being an artist (always trying something new).

Anyway, I just wanted to add that I remember being taught about 'talent' in Psychology. Essentially it's a different beast than most people realise (and often people flatly refuse to believe the truth, simply because it's SO counter-intuitive). Basically it's this: No-one is born with more talent than anyone else. They simply are born with interests that make them spend more time doing things than other people. It takes ten years to become a 'master' at something (it actually takes that long for the brain to learn all it needs to know), and GENERALLY speaking, after ten years there's a 'drop off' and the person's work/output/whatever suffers.

In steps Alan Moore! HIS work hasn't suffered and he doesn't seem to have suffered ANY sort of 'post golden period' dip in quality. I don't think I can think of anyone else who could say the same.

Alan Moore seems to break these generalisations: He's managed to stay innovative, fresh and above all, talented, despite his apparent 'golden period' in the 80s. Actually, it seems like the 90s might have just been a continuation of his 'golden period' if things had actually been finished and collected! Whatever he's doing, it's working and the rest of the artistic world should be watching and trying to learn from him.

(I think it might have something to do with his lifestyle - being secluded and away from his press - not having 'massive highs' of praise followed by 'lows' as people await his next work. Also, his vigilance at always trying something new, rather than just repeating old things...)

It REALLY is amazing, and someone should do a study, really.

Quote:

I think Snakes and Ladders could quite possibly be the best thing he's ever done. Truly profound.

Quote:

The copy I read just looked very 'soft'. The contrast wasn't as striking as it should have been. The whole thing just looked like high-quality photocopies of the originals (which I think I read somewhere is what it was!). It was still readable, but it bugged me, especially when I don't know of a good reason why it looked like that.

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2006, 07:36:56 PM »

"Reinventing his stories" Yes. That's a great way of putting it. If you take all of Alan Moore's superhero work right back to Captain Britain then you can very much see a continuity of ideas or approaches. The preoccupations remain largely the same but they are approached from different angles, seen in different lights. There is an awfull lot of similarity between Supreme and Miracleman despite the obvious differences in tone. There are some things he has done over and over again from the begining. He isn't recycling ideas however. Rather he is exhausting them; exploring every last angle, mixing and matching the seperate elements: You can make a case that Miracleman and Supreme are almost the same book, the same ideas jumbled into a different order, modern tone with nostalgic content (Marvelman); modern content with nostalgic tone (Supreme); every permutation is explored; It's almost as if he's mixing and matching all the elements, trying to find the alchemical formula for the ultimate, one true platonic superhero comic. everyone else trails behind, feeding off of his scraps, bits and pieces here and there. They don't see what is at the heart of it all: A deep understanding of and an abiding love for the superhero genre mixed with a literary ability not seen elsewhere in comics; an awesome speculative imagination crossed with a refusal to portray a false reality. The worst reviews i've read of Alan Moore's work are those that accuse him of disdain for superhero comics and the people who read them. That is such a gross misunderstanding of his work that it is hard to comprehend how such a mistake could be made. The exact opposite is so obviously true.

"What do you think of the recordings he has done (snakes and ladders, birth caul etc). I think they are some of his best work, would have loved to have seen them live (even more than seeing 1963 or big numbers finished!!)."

Like you, I think they are some of his best work, especially Snakes and Ladders and The Birth Caul.

I read the Eddie Campbell adaptation of 'The Birth Caul' before I heard the recording. The Comic version was impressive enough but hearing the recording just blew me away. I get a lump in my throat every time I listen to 'Drowning in Gold' and 'dummy' may just be the single best piece he's done (although there is an awfull lot of competition for that and i'll have probably changed my mind tomorrow).

Aside from the wonderful words and music, Alan Moore has a very listenable, pleasing voice, like the wise old uncle you never had and his delivery is superb. The opening line of Angel Passage sends shivers down my spine: 'Out of eternity, into light, into one stinking moment...' Where do his talents end?

Yeah, seeing them live would have been incredible. I hope there are more to come in the future.

Okay. Apologies for another lengthy, incomprehensible post on this topic. Hope noones getting too bored of reading it.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #17 on: June 12, 2006, 09:52:00 AM »

Quote:

Okay. Apologies for another lengthy, incomprehensible post on this topic. Hope noones getting too bored of reading it.

It's still good! I'm enjoying it all!

I think it's hard to pin down exactly what makes Alan Moore's work so unique, but I think you did a damned good job! When Di Filippo took over Top 10, it REALLY made me appreciate what he's best at: Letting characters have their own voice. A lot of authors have vey similar characters all getting along together and talking the same. It can work, so long as the dialogue is snappy (think Tarantino - Pulp Fiction, Kevin Smith - Clerks, or even Brian Vaughan's - The Last Man) which is fine, if that's what you want to do. But Moore REALLY lets his characters have their own voice, no matter how small, they're more REAL.

Saying that, I'd also say that Moore is not great a doing long convoluted plots. He tends to keep things reasonably simple (I think). The best example I can think of him doing this is Watchmen. When you boil away its clever construction, the excellent well-round characters, what you've got left is

WATCHMEN SPOILERS BELOW

[spoiler]The story of a mad billionaire who tries to unite the world by killing lots of innocent people and trying to make them think that an alien did it.

How?

He kidnaps the 'best' artists, scientists, craftsmen, etc, the world has to offer (presumably English speaking ones). Inprisons them on a remote island and persuades them to work on a bizarre 'movie' together (where the effects have to be PRACTICAL instead of fake). Somehow gets them to develop teleportation technology(!) and also a fake alien(!).

He then kills everyone who worked on the project, (his plan only requires one person for it to work, apparently).

He teleports said alien into a busy capital city and kills loads of people....

The whole idea of 'uniting the world' against an off-Earth menace.[/spoiler]

Not necessarily a great plot in terms of having to suspend your disbelief.

« Last Edit: June 12, 2006, 10:04:12 AM by JohnnyWalker » Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #18 on: June 12, 2006, 12:43:53 PM »

(JW: If I recall correctly, the people on the island weren't the ones who developed the teleportation technology. For what that's worth!)

It's true, Moore generally keeps the plots pretty simple. I remember in his Comics Journal interview about Watchmen, he talks about how the original proposal to DC for the series was just the plot outline: a basic "skeleton" revolving around the murder of a superhero (the Comedian), and other heroes coming together to solve that mystery. And that was it.

Then in the story's telling things just evolved into the labyrinthine structure that we know the finished work to be.

There's also that quote from, I think, Dez Skinn (is that his name?) in the George Khoury book about Miracleman, where he says that Moore isn't really good with coming up with original stories -- it's more that he's a great story-*teller.*

JW, I agree with you about character voice. I remember back fifteen years ago, Don Thompson of CBG said that he could name only three comic book writers who were able to let each character have a unique voice: Alan Moore, Dave Sim, and Neil Gaiman. He said they were the only three comics writers he knew of where you could take one of their comics and knock all the tails off of the word balloons, and you'd still know which character was speaking which dialogue.

(Speaking for myself, the first time I really appreciated this quality myself was in reading the Swamp Thing issues where he meets up with Phantom Stranger, Deadman, Etrigan and Spectre. Particularly issue 50 where all those characters are gathered together to fight the Big Giant Evil. The dialogue among all those characters (Swamp Thing himself included) was so interesting to read, and it's the first time I really consciously appreciated how distinct each of these characters were.

JW, what you wrote about the psychological realities of talent is really fascinating. To make sure I understand properly, are you describing a 20 year cycle, before a decline in quality occurs? (i.e., ten years of "apprenticeship", ten years of being at the top of your game, and then the drop-off in quality?)

"The worst reviews i've read of Alan Moore's work are those that accuse him of disdain for superhero comics and the people who read them. That is such a gross misunderstanding of his work that it is hard to comprehend how such a mistake could be made. The exact opposite is so obviously true."

Sing out the truth, brother! Check out the Marvel Man/Miracleman thread right now on www.byrnerobotics.com for a look at John Byrne's most recent assertion that Moore is a bad writer who just likes to destroy superheroes. It's unfathomable.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #19 on: June 12, 2006, 05:31:52 PM »

Quote from: Jason Powell on June 12, 2006, 12:43:53 PM

(JW: If I recall correctly, the people on the island weren't the ones who developed the teleportation technology. For what that's worth!)

I wouldn't mind going through all this with someone... So, who was it?

Quote:

My bad, I've just looked at what I wrote and it does look like a 20 year cycle. The ten years I was refering to was the ten years it takes to learn everything. I'm not sure how long the average 'really great' period lasts (it's been a while, can't remember), but I'll try to dig up some documentation for you (it'll be on any university's website that does Psychology).

The example given was that with chess, most people think it is a game of intellect, when that is far from the truth: A chess master thinks exactly the same number of moves ahead as a novice player. The only difference is that a chess master has played the game so many times that their brain recognizes 'patterns' in play. For example, a chess master will look at a board and think, "hmmm, I've been here before, I remember when I moved my King I lost the game, I guess I'll try something else". That's the same sort of trial and error with everything from drawing to writing to anything.

Edit: Argh, I can't find any links at the moment... I'm sure they're there, but I can't find the documents I wanted to show you. I will find them though!

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #20 on: June 12, 2006, 06:48:36 PM »

But disdain-for-the-heroes comics are the sort of comics I like!

I tried to do a search for Pat Mills + Marshal Law on the

John Byrne website, but, alas, I am not a member. He must really love work like that!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #21 on: June 12, 2006, 07:04:26 PM »

Regarding Alan Moore never having suffered a slump: There was the mid 90's post 1963, pre Supreme stuff which wasn't of his usual standard and was something of a wrong turn (as he has said himself). But i think that generally the point stands, yes.

Quote:

I agree totally with that but would add that Moore is also a brilliant conceptualist. He comes up with great IDEAS rather than great stories. When writing comics there is a need to put those ideas into stories wherein he relies on his excellent storytelling to obscure the cracks in his rather basic plotting. I don't think his plotting is bad so much as extremely simplistic. This is fine though as most of his stuff isn't ABOUT the story. The story is a tool to make whatever point he wishes to make. With non comics work however, such as his performance pieces there is no requirement to couch those messages in the context of a story, thus allowing him to more directly say what he wishes to say. Perhaps that is why those pieces are so powerfull?

Another good example of his simplistic plotting is The american Gothic storyline in Swamp Thing. The plot is threadbare. Constanine meets the Swamp Thing, promises him knowledge, sends him on an extremely contrived and convulted tour of America, encountering various horrors. The main story involving the Brujeria is barely advanced during this stage. The pacing is painfully slow. Then, suddenly Swamp Thing has his meeting with the Paliment of Trees, gets all of his answers and encounters the Brujeria. Just like that!

As far as John Byrne goes, well, Alan Moore's rise coincided with his drop in popularity. Not that i'm suggesting proffesional jealousy of course. Maybe John Byrne could come up with some brilliant comics to show the way... or maybe he could just bitch.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #22 on: June 12, 2006, 07:44:35 PM »

Quote:

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #23 on: June 13, 2006, 08:25:05 AM »

Quote from: JohnnyWalker on June 12, 2006, 05:31:52 PM

Quote from: Jason Powell on June 12, 2006, 12:43:53 PM

(JW: If I recall correctly, the people on the island weren't the ones who developed the teleportation technology. For what that's worth!)

I wouldn't mind going through all this with someone... So, who was it?

The Institute for Extraspatial Studies, which was located there on that oh-so-fateful street corner where the news vendor, Bernard, had his newstand. In issue 7, the sequence where Dan and Laurie are fumbling around on the couch while the television makes unintentional double-entendres, a representative of the Institute talks about how they're looking at finding their way into another dimension.

And then in issue 11, of course, the giant alien materializes on the street corner where the Institute is located.

Anyway ... sorry for the thread drift. It's still a pretty unbelievable plot!

Johnny, I do still want to hear more about the talent-cycle you were discussing. It sounds really interesting!

"I agree totally with that but would add that Moore is also a brilliant conceptualist. He comes up with great IDEAS rather than great stories. When writing comics there is a need to put those ideas into stories wherein he relies on his excellent storytelling to obscure the cracks in his rather basic plotting. I don't think his plotting is bad so much as extremely simplistic. "

Well said, CBM!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #24 on: June 13, 2006, 10:45:07 AM »

Thanks for the explanation, Jason, I suppose I should re-read it!

I'll try and dig out some notes about becoming an 'expert' at something when I get more time (if I still had my university notes...!).

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

http://tinyurl.com/7rx4w

Joe

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #25 on: June 14, 2006, 04:23:15 PM »

Quote:

I just started reading it. I read the first two issues, the marvelous Mystery Incorporated and the ferocious Fury, and I disagree with you that these are straight forward. In my opinion, Moore is parodying the Stan Lee style, over doing it even, being more Lee than Lee, playing it for laughs and nostalgia. Without my knowledge of the Stan Lee's style, Sahib--as an adult, I would find these two issues boring instead of fun, funny, and nostalgic, and I would think Moore is a poor writer who was writing for kids. Moore isn't even writing in his own style.

I am enjoying the comics, but that is because I am aware of Stan Lee's style.

And the best parts, in my opinion, is where Moore parodies the letter pages. I was laughing out loud.

The last Giant issue was going to be a deconstruction of how the 1991 lost the magic of the older comics.

However, I didn't get to the Hypernaut yet.

I think the best example of Moore's "pure" superhero strip that is not based on deconstruction, twists, or gimmicks would have to be Tom Strong. And his second best would be WildCATS because I think that is the only other time he was writing straight forward Superheroes was during the Image period after 1963 and before Supreme.

I'm not sure if Swamp Thing would be considered a pure Superhero strip. If it is, I would have to say it is my favorate, but I haven't read it in over 20 years.

And in my opinion, Moore's best nostalgic series is Supreme.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #26 on: June 14, 2006, 04:49:19 PM »

I agree, Joe. I think it's clear that 1963 is a affectionate spoof of Stan Lee's comics, even though the story (of at least the first issue, the only one I've read!) is indeed very straight forward.

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #27 on: June 14, 2006, 06:55:58 PM »

Quote:

I disagree with you that these are straight forward. In my opinion, Moore is parodying the Stan Lee style, over doing it even, being more Lee than Lee, playing it for laughs and nostalgia. Without my knowledge of the Stan Lee's style, Sahib--as an adult, I would find these two issues boring instead of fun, funny, and nostalgic, and I would think Moore is a poor writer who was writing for kids. Moore isn't even writing in his own style.

That's exactly what I meant when I said it was a 'pure' superhero strip. Yes, 1963 is a pastiche of 1960's Marvel (here's the list: Mystery Incorporated = Fantastic Four, The Fury = Spiderman, Sky Solo Lady from L.A.S.E.R = Nick Fury Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D, N-Man = The Hulk, U.S.A = Captain America, Johhny Beyond = Doctor Strange, Horus = Thor, The Tomorrow Syndicate = The Avengers, Hypernaut is perhaps the nearest to a completely original alan Moore creation although I suppose he takes the 'technological hero' place of Iron Man. He has many aspects of the Green Lantern archetype too) but 1960's Marvel IS 'pure superheros'. What I meant was is that the intent in 1963 is to create superhero stories that are purely entertainment for entertainment's sake rather than making some kind of political, philosophical, whatever point. The stories are delivered straight as pure nostalgia. There is no clever juxtaposition with modern styles or whatever. That WAS to come in the conclusion but the conclusion never happened. So what we actually have is a series of 6 hugely entertaining one off superhero stories enjoyable for the stories alone, some of which I think are amongst his most interesting ideas-wise. I wasn't thinking of the pastiche element as being a 'twist' or whatever.

I have to disagree that the stories lack sophistication unless you are familiar with the comics being pastiched. I'm sure that once you've read the entire series you will change your mind on that. I don't want to spoil the stories to come by giving specific examples but I'm sure you will find that the N-Man, Hypernaught and Horus stories in particular have sophisticated ideas in them. For me that is one of the points where the pastiche falls down: The stories are far too clever to have really been published in the 1960's!

Quote:

And the best parts, in my opinion, is where Moore parodies the letter pages. I was laughing out loud.

I do agree with you there. There's excellent letters to come later on by youngsters like Neil Gaiman and Melinda Gebbie.

Quote:

Well, there are pastiche elements in Tom Strong too, discounting it from your definition of 'straight'. I would agree though that it's probably the Affable Ones best ongoing pure superhero strip, going by my definition ie. entertainment for entertainments sake. But I don't think that the stories are of the consistant level of quality as those in 1963. That's purely a personal judgement though of course.

Quote:

And in my opinion, Moore's best nostalgic series is Supreme.

Not sure that I have a favourite purely in terms of the nostalgic style (or indeed a favourite Alan Moore superhero series full stop). As we've discussed earlier in the thread, virtually ALL of Alan Moore's superhero work has strong elements of nostalgia. I can say though that my favourite individual Alan Moore superhero story is 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow' which I can't read without getting choked up (sad as that sounds!)

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #28 on: June 14, 2006, 07:59:18 PM »

If you haven't read the 1963 interviews, do so at :

http://www.comicon.com/moore/interview_affable.htm

They continue the pastiche of the Stan Lee universe.

Very funny.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #29 on: June 14, 2006, 09:03:38 PM »

Are there any spoilers? Is it OK to read while I'm reading the series, or should I wait until I'm done?

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #30 on: June 15, 2006, 06:33:35 AM »

There are no spoilers, but it is probably better to read after you have read the series. The artists and Al answer as characters of a "60s sweatshop" and some personalities reflect the series they are writing. They don't give anything away, rather continue the Stan Lee take-off.

It is also better if you read the interviews in order, i.e. go down the list of links to each person.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #32 on: June 17, 2006, 07:19:41 AM »

It's funny, I saw those interviews and I couldn't figure out what the hell was going on!!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #33 on: June 17, 2006, 07:25:01 PM »

Quote:

I have to disagree that the stories lack sophistication unless you are familiar with the comics being pastiched. I'm sure that once you've read the entire series you will change your mind on that.

******Spoilers************

I have to disagree that the stories lack sophistication unless you are familiar with the comics being pastiched. I'm sure that once you've read the entire series you will change your mind on that.

You are right. I've got up to book four, and I agree that the Hypernaut really is a brilliant idea, so was Johnny Beyond. And I can see what you mean by calling them straight Superhero comics because Affalble Al doesn't do a lot of Stan Lee spoofing in the actual stories, Sahib. Although with all the spoofing surrounding these stories, I don't know if I agree.

And I loved the way J.F.K told U.S.A. that his father saw U.S.A. with the Gang-Busters back in the 1920s. Of course Joe Kennedy was probably an enemy of the Gang Busters.

I think of all the other comics writers Grant Morrison equals Moore in coming up with these brilliant ideas, but I don't think Morrision is as good a writer as Moore. Moore is far more structured.

Only Moore can turn comic-book alliteration into an art form. He's taking what Stan Lee did and making it art. He is out Stan-Leeing Stan Lee.

1963 is a fantastic underrated series. It is a crime it was never finished.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2006, 11:51:42 AM »

I'd be interested in hearing what you think when you've read the entire series Joe.

One of my favourite things about 1963 is some of the brilliant names. I defy anyone to come up with a better name for a racecar driving zombie than the Hot Rod Rot God! That's absolute class. And USA: Ultimate Special Agent seems so obvious and yet... I never would have thought of it.

I think that Horus Lord of Light would make a great children's cartoon series.

Hypernaut would make a great series full stop, in any medium (and what a brilliant visual design, apparantly by Moore himself)

Johhny Beyond is a great concept, hilariously executed.

The only issue that really falls a little short for me is The Fury, which I thought was a little too close to Spider-man, especially the look (interestingly, in Steve Bissette's lengthy piece in 'Portrait of an Extraordinary Gentleman' he talks about Moore's own character design for the Fury, which sounds far better than Bissette's and more in keeping with the approach to the rest of the characters, which are equivalents rather than direct imitations.) I also found the story to be a little uninteresting, a rather forced attempt at incorporating an equivalent 'Marvel Monster'.

Quote:

1963 is a fantastic underrated series. It is a crime it was never finished.

Agreed, although as you noted above, Moore eventually found a way to say what he was going to say with 1963 in Judgement Day.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #35 on: June 19, 2006, 07:04:34 PM »

ChinaBoatMan wrote "Hypernaut would make a great series full stop, in any medium (and what a brilliant visual design, apparantly by Moore himself) " and "

(Bissette) talks about Moore's own character design for the Fury, which sounds far better than Bissette's".

Are you taking this from the 1963 "interviews", as your quote is pretty funny in relation to them. That tyrant Affable Al!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #36 on: June 20, 2006, 11:07:59 AM »

As unbelievable as it sounds, the 1963 interviews were perhaps not entirely spoof!

I was going on what Steve Bissette says in his long piece in 'Portrait of an Extraordinary Gentleman'. After rereading the 1963 interviews I was astonished to find that he says the same thing there!

All of the things Bissette says about the 1963 character designs in the Sweatshop interviews (The Affable One's suggestion that N-Man 'should look good coming through a wall', The Fury should have a devil's tail and a football helmet and that Our Pal Al entirely designed the look of the Hypernaut) are ALL repeated in the 'Portrait' piece. As that was a serious tribute to Alan Moore and his work, I assume Bissette isn't joking there. He certainly didn't sound as if he was.

Or maybe he was scared that Our Pal would take N-Man off of him again unless he 'credited' Al.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #37 on: June 20, 2006, 12:23:21 PM »

Weren't they making fun of Stan Lee? That is how he used to take credit for the characters Kirby and others designed.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #38 on: June 20, 2006, 06:46:37 PM »

"Or maybe he was scared that Our Pal would take N-Man off of him again unless he 'credited' Al. "

Or never talk to him again.

I took it to be a spoof of Stan Lee. But there is probably some element of truth in it, a light-hearted look at how the series come about wherein Moore probably did create the characters. It was then just begging to become a Stan Lee parody.

I will now have to reread the Bissette interview in PofEG to see its context.

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #39 on: June 20, 2006, 06:51:20 PM »

The 1963 interviews were of course somewhat grotesquely and very humourously parodying Stan Lee with the character of Affable Al as they did in 1963 itself.

However, some of the information seemingly had a basis in truth (minus all of the tyrant Al stuff). Bissette talks about the things mentioned above in a more serious way in his lengthy 'Portrait of an Extraordinary Gentleman' article. According to what he writes there, Moore's influence on the visual design of various 1963 characters is pretty much as I note above. The article is interesting as Bissette also talks about some of the elements of Swamp Thing that derived from his and John Totleben's ideas (the hallucinogenic tubers and menstrual werewolf for example were ideas of the artists as was famously, that John Constantine should look like Sting)

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #40 on: June 27, 2006, 05:17:17 PM »

Hi, I see this thread has morphed from unfinished Awesome to unfinished 1963. I loved both Supreme and 1963 very much! I want to point out that there was a thread in the Comiccon.com forums oh, over a year ago, maybe two, wherein Rick Veitch posted some about 1963.

In the course of a couple of postings, Rick mentioned that he had a phone conversation (or two) with Alan about how they never were able to finish that story, and that Alan was talking about how they never would now that he was retiring from comics... but then, by the end of the phone conversation he had come up with scenario that gave an entirely new ending to the series! Rick noted that it took the story in a completely new direction and yet was still organically tied to what had gone before, and that it was... of course... brilliant!

I believe Rick ended the thread by saying that there was some hope that the conclusion might be possible. If Alan decided he wanted to unretire and pursue the project, Rick was pretty sure that Bissette would be amenable (despite past arguments) and that the series could be redone to remove any Image characters. Rick's own publishing company might publish it, and it would certainly go well with his books, "The One" and "Bratpack."

I am sorry that I did not copy the specific posts or at least the urls, but it's in Comicon.com somewhere. I have been always on the lookout for any sign that the conclusion might be in the works, especially since Alan STILL hasn't retired from comics. I've never seen anything else. I'm sure Rick knows better than to badger Alan, and plus he's been pretty busy himself, with excellent work for "Aquaman" and "The Question" and now "I Can't Get No."

Report to moderator Logged

JohnnyWalker

Sr. Member

Karma: 2

Posts: 257

aka ThunderPeel2001

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #41 on: June 27, 2006, 06:31:58 PM »

That's great to hear, Mr. Thursday! Thanks for posting that!

Fingers crossed that it might happen!!!

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

http://tinyurl.com/7rx4w

ChinaBoatMan

Jr. Member

Karma: 4

Posts: 55

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #42 on: June 27, 2006, 06:47:35 PM »

Quote:

I have mixed feelings about that. On the one hand i'd love to see 1963 finished, on the other hand I think Alan Moore has finished with superheros and I don't think it would achieve anything for him to return to them. There are so many things he could do next that returning to 1963 now would seem like a big step backwards. Personally, i'd like to see him focus on new projects (especially Jerusalem!)

Also, I think it's not so much a question of whether Bissette would be willing to work on it as much as it would be a question of if he and Moore could still work together. It would be pretty difficult if Moore won't talk to him.

Report to moderator Logged

Hal Gracie

Newbie

Karma: 0

Posts: 8

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome

« Reply #43 on: June 28, 2006, 06:48:26 AM »

Quote:

Is that still the case? I always hoped that Bissette's article in the Portrait book may have lead to a reconciliation.

(As a side note, does anyone know the exact revelations by Bissette that caused the rupture in the first place? The interview excerpt in the Comics Journal website isn't controversial)

« Last Edit: June 28, 2006, 10:26:22 AM by Hal Gracie » Report to moderator Logged

JohnnyWalker

Sr. Member

Karma: 2

Posts: 257

aka ThunderPeel2001

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #44 on: June 28, 2006, 09:42:51 AM »

Bissette has a lengthy post on a forum somewhere explaining what happened, or at least his side of what happened. I can't remember where it was, but if you search you may find it. It'd be interesting to read it again.

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

http://tinyurl.com/7rx4w

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

« previous next »

Jump to:

4ColorCommunity | Powered by YaBB SE

News: Welcome to the Brand New All Improved 4ColorCommunity

4ColorCommunity

Creator Specific Forums

Alan Moore (Moderator: 4ColorHeroes)

Unfinished Awesome and 1963 « previous next »

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Author Topic: Unfinished Awesome and 1963 (Read 548 times)

Hal Gracie

Newbie

Karma: 0

Posts: 8

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #45 on: June 28, 2006, 10:30:19 AM »

Cheers. haven't read it all yet, but appear to have found it here...

http://www.tcj.com/messboard/ubb/Forum2/HTML/004557-2.html

Report to moderator Logged

ChinaBoatMan

Jr. Member

Karma: 4

Posts: 55

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #46 on: June 28, 2006, 11:57:57 AM »

From the above piece:

Quote:

That this continues after that clear account in my TCJ interview years ago (prompted by the endless questions about "where is FROM HELL THE COMPLEAT SCRIPTS?") was apparently among the catalysts in Alan's decision to exile me forever is a heartbreaker

While not wanting to do anything as ridiculous as taking sides in a dispute between two people I have never met and which has nothing to do with me, I can understand Alan's problems here: It is a typically English tait not to air one's dirty laundry in public, which is what it seems Moore felt that Bissette did (and in fact still seems intent on doing given the link above and the Portrait of an Extraordinary Gentlemen book).

Cultural differences I suppose. British stiff upper lip versus the American desire to 'have it out' (I've fallen foul on this cultural difference myself and know what i'm talking about)

Quote:

Is that still the case? I always hoped that Bissette's article in the Portrait book may have lead to a reconciliation.

I've never heard of anything suggesting a reconcilliation. As far as I know the situation remains the same.

As much as i'd like to see 1963 completed (although I have mixed feelings as I said above) I can't see it happening. Its time has passed. I wouldn't like to see a compromise conclusion which I suspect is the best we could get. I've no doubt that Moore could come up with something brilliant, as suggested but it wouldn' be the original vision.

Sorry for continuing to sound like a kill joy!

Report to moderator Logged

Mr. Thursday

Newbie

Karma: 0

Posts: 19

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #47 on: June 28, 2006, 03:22:18 PM »

Hey everybody, I do not necessarily agree with ChinaBoatMan that it would be "a step backwards" for Moore to return to the superheroes of "1963." I seem to remember some people saying that same thing about the ABC line, too, back when it started -- but I think we all agree they were wrong!

I don't think that "superheroes" are any "less worthy" than other comics or non-comics work. It just depends on the artist. I find "Supreme" just as valid as "From Hell," and I find them both just as valid as "The Birth Caul" or "Voice From the Fire." I do not think the time of "1963" has passed, and furthermore, it seems that Rick and Alan didn't think so either... if my memory about the posting about the phone call is correct! In that case, his flow of ideas (according to Rick) showed that Alan's own creativity seemed re-engaged by the project. If you can't trust that, what can ya trust?

That's why I got so hopeful about this whole idea -- Alan seemed intrigued, his own creativity was engaged, it seems financially workable -- as opposed to "Supreme," which I think has no chance at all of ever being finished.

And heck, not do super-heroes again? In a way, it's kind of like saying, "Alan Moore shouldn't pursue Lost Girls, because he's already done that Revised Victorian Characters schtick with League of Extraordinary Gemtlemen." He has done superheroes before, and luckily been able to finish or complete most of his stories. Imagine taking the last chapter away from any completed Moore work -- Swamp Thing or Promethea. Miracleman or Watchmen -- what a loss! I bet no one would mind if Alan decided to go back and do one more "Swamp Thing" story. In fact, Neil Gaiman (who has "moved on" to the NY Times bestseller list, and movies, and all that) is determined to go back and finish his "Miracleman" run from almost twenty years ago. I doubt it will be a step backwards in his case, and it wouldn't be for Alan.

As you all can see, I think "1963" a work of art, and deserves completion. It's mostly a silly hoot of a work of art, but still art nonetheless. Unlike ChinaBoatMan, I have no doubt that Alan could "achieve" a great deal -- he almost always does. Would it be the "original vision?" Well, that's a good question. It would be "different" than the original plot-line, but that doesn't mean that it would be "compromised" -- that's only Alan's call. As an unfinished work later finished by the same author, it could still be said to present his authentic vision.

I do anticipate "Jerusalem" or any new Moore project, but I don't think we have to worry about his focus. I hope he will return his attentions to "1963" sometime, but I know he won't do it unless he wants to -- only, I guess, if it works artistically and creatively, as well as financially.

Finally, I have always liked the way Alan has respected his "contract" with his readership, trying to finish works even when outside problems have arisen with certain projects. He finished his ABC commitments -- including the last issues of Promethea and Tom Strong as well as 49'ers and Dark Dossier -- even though he was outraged at DC about "V for Vendetta." I kind of figure that he would like to finish "1963" for his readers, too, if he could. So I keep hoping...

As for whether Bissette would join... heck, I don't know! His article in the tribute book seemed to leave the door open.

Report to moderator Logged

ChinaBoatMan

Jr. Member

Karma: 4

Posts: 55

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #48 on: June 28, 2006, 07:58:58 PM »

Hi Mr Thursday.

This is nothing personal at all, we're all posting here because we're admirers of Alan Moore's work and it's all just debate etc but I disagree with practically everything you said. Also, i think that perhaps you have misunderstood some of the things I said (no fault of yours; I should have been clearer) To address a few of the points:

Quote:

I don't think that "superheroes" are any "less worthy" than other comics or non-comics work.

Neither do I. My point wasn't that these works have no value or less value (my many long rambles earlier in this thread demonstrate that I don't think that) rather that the superhero genre (and it is a genre) is one that Alan Moore has already dedicated a disproportiantly high amount of his creativity to. I think it is a waste of talent to spend an entire career doing one thing. I have no prejudice against superheros; I would say the same thing about a writer spending their entire life just writing horror or an artist working in just one style for his / her entire life or a musician who makes the same record over and over. I think people should stretch themselves (especially when they have the talent of Alan Moore) creatively. Alan Moore could write good superhero comics in his sleep, and given the amount of them he was writing at the height of ABC that must have been what he was actually doing! There are so many things he hasn't done and superheros are something he's done loads of times so yeah, never do superheros again. Why is that an outrageous idea?

I also have to say that I don't think that Alan Moore returned to superheros in the 90s because he wanted to (at least not initially) but rather that he needed to. To put it bluntly he probably needed the money after the collapse of Mad Love. According to Bissette's post, linked above Moore and Campbell were initially getting a rate of 100 dollars a page for From Hell between them. They'd have made more money working in McDonalds. I don't doubt that all of the other reasons Moore has expressed for returning to the 'mainstream' are true as well (saving comics from their grim and gritty era, finding work for the artists etc) but I think that they were perhaps concerns that came about once he'd made the desicion rather than his motivation for coming back to them in the first place.

You will also remember that when ABC first started the suggestion was that Alan Moore would write them for a short period of time before other writers took over. It was never meant to be forever. Moore has many ambitions beyond superheros. That doesn't mean he's didainful of them (as many bad reviews have suggested) and neither am I. He just has other interests as well.

I would also point out that I have often heard Alan Moore himself, reffering in interviews to his 'serious' and 'non-serious work' with the implication that say, Big Numbers is somehow seperate from 1963 (note that I myself don't necasarily agree with this). In fact he says in the 'extraordinary works' book that when he was approached about doing 1963 he wasn't sure initially because he considered From Hell, Lost Girls etc to be 'more important work'.

Quote:

In a way, it's kind of like saying, "Alan Moore shouldn't pursue Lost Girls, because he's already done that Revised Victorian Characters schtick with League of Extraordinary Gentlemen."

I don't really see that analogy. Even ignoring the fact that he started Lost Girls long before he ever had the idea for the League and that Lost Girls was never an 'unfinished' work from his point of view, since he and Melinda never actually stopped working on it, there is far more to Lost girls than the 'schtick' of revised Victorian characters. That is the only (superficial) similarity between the two works. Beyond that they are very different books with very different concerns and are most certainly different 'genres'. What Moore is doing / done there is new ground for him, namely erotica (or pornography, if he insists)

Quote:

I bet no one would mind if Alan decided to go back and do one more "Swamp Thing" story.

Well, i can't speak for others but my opinion on that would be exactly the same as my opinion on finishing 1963 (actually, I think going back to Swamp Thing would be a far worse idea as it would mean returning to work for hire which would be unquestionably a step backwards.) Purely on a personal level I would much rather see any of the 90s stuff finished.

Quote:

In fact, Neil Gaiman (who has "moved on" to the NY Times bestseller list, and movies, and all that) is determined to go back and finish his "Miracleman" run from almost twenty years ago.

Hmm. Well if he's so determined why doesn't he get on with it then?! Come on Neil, we're all still waiting!

Quote:

Would it be the "original vision?" Well, that's a good question. It would be "different" than the original plot-line, but that doesn't mean that it would be "compromised" -- that's only Alan's call. As an unfinished work later finished by the same author, it could still be said to present his authentic vision.

The problem here is that Alan Moore has said what he was going to say in 1963 many times since, most obviously in the excellent, underrated Judgement Day. It would be redundant to make the same point again. Thus in order to keep the work relevant he would have to not only rework the plot but change the emphasis too. He would have to come up with a new theme. This would most definatly be a change in the author's original vision, at least to my eyes. This is what I mean when i say 'its time has passed'. In many ways you could say the same thing about Big Numbers. Things have changed since it was first being published, not least the concerns of the author.

Quote:

I don't think that was Alan Moore's motivation at all. He has said on many occasions that he considers it his responsibility to 'give the readers what they need, not what they want'. He doesn't answer fan mail and doesn't go to conventions. Not much of a contract. I have to say that he had been talking about his intention to end the ABC line long before the V for Vendetta film issue came up. His walkout was dramatic but the truth is that there was very little that he had left to complete there anyway. He was honouring legally binding contracts by wrapping things up, not 'doing it for the readers'. Similarly his motivation for continuing the line when DC brought up Wildstorm was loyalty to his collaborators, not his fans. Plus, purely as my own conjecture, he himself must have been getting sick and tired of not getting to finish anything. I know I would.

Quote:

That I do agree with (finally!!)

I love 1963 too. It's one of my favourite Alan Moore superhero comics (more than more lauded works like say Miracleman) and were it to be finished I would be as interested as anybody to see it. I just don't think it's a priority work. New stuff must come first. But were he to find the time and an interesting way to do it then great.

Sorry to keep sounding so negative. It's not my intention to sound derisory about anything or anyone. I love all of alan Moore's work (okay, nearly all. There are one or two things that i have outright not liked but I won't go into that (*Cough Miracleman Book 2 cough*)) and I will follow whatever he chooses to do. Hell, i'd buy Barbie comics if he was writing them.

Okay, i'm knackered. I think i'll sleep now (got to stop making such epic posts!!)

Report to moderator Logged

JohnnyWalker

Sr. Member

Karma: 2

Posts: 257

aka ThunderPeel2001

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #49 on: June 29, 2006, 06:17:22 PM »

Hi CBM! I hope you don't take these comments too harshly. I too, come on a 'bit strong' at the start of messages sometimes, so please read to the end!

Quote:

There are so many things he hasn't done and superheros are something he's done loads of times so yeah, never do superheros again. Why is that an outrageous idea?

Quite simply, because you're lumping 'super-heroes' into one 'catch-all' genre. Alan very rarely repeats himself, and Mr. T makes some very valid points that all of Alan's work, regardless of 'genre', has equal artistic merit, in its own way.

Quote:

Moore has many ambitions beyond superheros. That doesn't mean he's didainful of them (as many bad reviews have suggested) and neither am I. He just has other interests as well.

I know what you're saying, and I guess it could be argued that Moore has done most of his best work outside of the constrictions of the 'super-hero' genre (whatever that is), and I too am eager to see where he takes us next (because we both know; it'll be somewhere new) but at the same time, writing one final story to finish off 1963 a) wouldn't *necessarily* take that much of his time away from other projects and b) it could be very rewarding to us readers (and the build-up has already been done).

As Mr T pointed out: Can you imagine his other completed works *without* their last chapters? It's a frightening thought!

Quote:

In fact he says in the 'extraordinary works' book that when he was approached about doing 1963 he wasn't sure initially because he considered From Hell, Lost Girls etc to be 'more important work'.

I guess what you're saying is that he might not be interested anyway, and you could be right!

Quote:

there is far more to Lost girls than the 'schtick' of revised Victorian characters.

You've hit the nail squarely on the head here, CBM! This is precisely why it's glib to say that Moore shouldn't do 'superheroes' anymore. There's ALWAYS more to Moore's work than just re-treading the same old thing, even if it's the same genre.

Quote:

A very valid point, IMHO. You're absolutely right. But, at the same time, if what Mr. T says is correct, it seems like Alan actually came up a clever NEW way of finishing it. And while I appreciate what you're saying about the dangers of an artist's "vision" changing, I would still rather take the gamble that if Moore chose to do it, it would be rather good.

In fact, thinking on it now, isn't this what happened with 'V for Vendetta'? Moore's original plans were changed when he came to finish off the series a few years later. It didn't turn out too bad!

Which actually makes me realise: This is ALL of a moot point because if Moore wanted to go back to 1963, it'd be because he thought he could do something new and interesting with it. I don't think he'd ever go back just for the sake of finishing something off, and while that might sound bad for the fans, it's actually a good thing because it means we'd never get a mediocre ending just 'tacked on'.

So that's that, if you ask me.

Quote:

I see what you mean, CBM. I guess you're right, but saying that, I've met the man, only a few months ago, and he happily and graciously signed my copy of The 49ers. I also saw him sign copies of 'V for Vendetta' (the very edition that threw him into a 'black rage', if memory serves), just as happily. I saw him again a few months later at the Tate Britain and, despite chronic back pain, he decided to keep standing to make sure that the people 'at the back' got their money's worth in coming to see him talk.

He's definitely a very gracious and giving person, and while I know you didn't actually say it, and while you may very well be right in saying that he doesn't ever feel he owes his fans anything while writing, he certainly doesn't view us with any sort of contempt, either. As such, it's quite possible he feels *some* sort of 'duty' to his readership, even if, and quite rightly too, he doesn't let it guide what his next project should be.

I just wanted to make that clear

I have to add that I've never been so completely bowled over someone's graciousness in my life, and this was after an hour of signing copies 'V for Vendetta' and whatnot! I was even feeling pretty annoyed about his decision to 'never work for DC again... (again!)' and he completely won me over and made me feel I was being unreasonable.

Quote:

Sorry to keep sounding so negative. It's not my intention to sound derisory about anything or anyone. I love all of alan Moore's work ... and I will follow whatever he chooses to do. Hell, i'd buy Barbie comics if he was writing them.

Ditto!!!

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

http://tinyurl.com/7rx4w

ChinaBoatMan

Jr. Member

Karma: 4

Posts: 55

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #50 on: June 29, 2006, 10:32:20 PM »

Hey Johnny, no problem! I don't take people disagreeing with me personally! (although you were right to be cautious. That does often seem to be the way on the Internet unfortunatly) It's all just debate right?

To continue in the quote and respond manner of the last few posts:

Quote:

I think for the most part it is a genre. There are a few exceptions (notably, certain works by the author in question, such as Watchmen which definetely trancends genre) but I don't think 1963 is one of them. It is by intent pure superhero genre with nothing else thrown in. 'It does exactly what it says on the tin' as they say on a well known commercial here in britain (being based in London i'm sure you know it). I agree that Alan Moore's superhero stuff is all different and that he rarely repeats himself, which I discussed somewhere in the vast expanse of text above that is this thread.

Whether the work all has equal artistic merit, I really don't know. Would you say that about Maxwell the Magic Cat? What about his gag Santa Claus strips in that early Marvel special? Does his jokey Sinister Ducks record have equal artistic merit with Snakes and Ladders or The Birth Caul? As I said above, Moore himself often makes a distinction between his 'serious work' and his 'non serious work'. What I personally think about this i'm not really sure. Undecided really.

Quote:

I know what you're saying, and I guess it could be argued that Moore has done most of his best work outside of the constrictions of the 'super-hero' genre

Although you were kind of half agreeing with me here, i'm not sure I agree with that quote myself (go figure)! Watchmen is definatly amongst his best work, as is Promethea and parts of Tomorrow Stories. Then there's 'The Overview' in Top Ten which definatly qualifies as does some of the prose in book 3 of Miracleman. These are obviously all superhero comics to some degree. That said, I do agree with Moore's own comments (Very roughly paraphrasing from memory here - apologies) that 'You can do something socially relevant in a comic like Swamp Thing but you could probably do it just as well or better without the swamp creature' and 'even when you're doing good superheros it's still a little simplistic, it has to be said'. The second one is from 'The Extraordinary Works' I think.

I suppose that is at the crux of what I was saying.

Quote:

As Mr T pointed out: Can you imagine his other completed works *without* their last chapters? It's a frightening thought!

It is, but then that's exactly what we have in the case of Big Numbers. A major medium changing masterwork that unfortunatly doesn't exist, save for 2 chapters, in this parrallel. Maybe Luther Arkwright could track down a copy of the completed graphic novel? Hey! Here's an idea: Seeing as how a finished Big Numbers is only a fiction in our world, maybe it exists in the world of the League? Maybe there could be a League story where Mina settles down for a nice long read of Big Numbers, which could be shown page by page using the book within a book device Moore's so fond of!? Hmm... Someone get Alan Moore on the phone...

Quote:

I take your point here. Perhaps I missed the point Mr T was making (sorry about that!)

However, I should point out that I'm not saying that he shouldn't do superheros anymore. I'm saying that that was his announced intention and that I want to see him pursue whatever creative avenues he wants to pursue. None of them seem to be superheros as it stands. Nor do they currently seem likely to be in the future. Therefore i'm happy for him never to do superheros again. I don't see it as a problem. It doesn't upset me in any way. If he changes his mind and suddenly decides that superheros are the best vehicle for whatever he wants to next, that's fine with me. I've enjoyed all of the superhero work he has done in the past exceptionally and i'm sure he'd go somewhere new again, as you say. Like i said, i'll eagerly follow his work wherever it goes (unless he becomes a Jehovas Witness or somesuch. That may be a little much)

Quote:

In fact, thinking on it now, isn't this what happened with 'V for Vendetta'? Moore's original plans were changed when he came to finish off the series a few years later. It didn't turn out too bad!

I've never heard that before. Do you remember the source of that imformation? (Not that I don't believe you, i'd just like to hear Moore talking about how his plans changed)

To be honest, i'm not sure he wasn't making V up as he went along in the early stages.

Quote:

We're in agreement there.

Quote:

I know you met him at that event Johhny because I remember seeing that picture of the two of you that you posted on the Moore Mailing list a while back! (I'd love to get one of those gold jackets he was wearing)

Again, I agree with you entirely here. I didn't mean to suggest that Moore was disdainful or unnapreciative of his audience, merely that I don't think they have any influence on his work, beyond the obvious level of his desire to communicate his ideas to them. Actually, I think he has showed his audience a lot of respect since the very beginning of his career, never writing down to them, even when working on traditionally juvenile material (which something like 2000AD would be percieved asby the public at large). And of course, many are the stories of his graciousness and courteousness. I don't doubt them.

However, we're in agreement, it seems, that it would be a bad thing for any artist to have their audience influence what they do. If he wants to finish 1963, great. If he doesn't, well that's great as well.

Quote:

That's because you were Johhny!

Quote:

So that's that, if you ask me.

Yup, I think so.

Phew, another marathon! Well, all this typing's offsetting the risk of arthritis I suppose. Keep the lengthy posts coming people! I love it really!

Report to moderator Logged

Mr. Thursday

Newbie

Karma: 0

Posts: 19

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #51 on: June 30, 2006, 04:03:08 PM »

Hey, some great points from both of you, JohnnyW and CBM. I have been trying to search comicon.com for the original Veitch postings about 1963 to no avail!!!

CBM, some of your statements are right on target, and if we disagree too very much on particulars, well, I figure it's just enthusiastic parsing of random Alan Moore quotes that we've both remembered through the years! I do agree that Judgment Day was excellent, and worked with many of the same themes as 1963, but as JohhnyW has said, if Moore's dives back in to 1963 it will probably be because he has hit upon something new and wonderful to share.

If anyone out there hasn't read Judgment Day, they are missing a real treat, and a work also examines some of the same comic-related "issues" as 1963. The tone is different... more sad, I think. There's some wonderful guest-star art -- Gil Kane, Jim Starlin -- and some truly awful Liefeld art. I half-remember another quote from Alan, trying to be something of a gentleman, but sort of aghast at how many of his script's details Liefled left out of each panel.

Of course, CBM, not all Alan's work has equal merit, but to me personally, some of his mainstream comics are as important as his more-typically-regarded-"serious" work. We probably all know how this goes: "Supreme" came along at just the right time in my life to knock me down and then stand me right up again.

I agree too that Alan doesn't kowtow to his fans -- or his publishers, natch! -- but I have always had a sense (again, from random quotes) that he appreciates his audience, and respects them. That he has an appropriate gratitude... as JohnnyW mentioned in regards to his personal contact with The Affable One.

Johhny, I forgot about that -- I am really envious that you met him!

BTW, CBM, it's true about "V for Vendetta" -- there was a different direction and ending in mind originally, changed after an interrruption that lasted a long time (years?).

Well, that's two MORE cents. I appreciate having a place to go on and on about Alan Moore -- as I said in another post, it's summer vacation and I have a lot of pent-up Moore musings to share!

Report to moderator Logged

JohnnyWalker

Sr. Member

Karma: 2

Posts: 257

aka ThunderPeel2001

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #52 on: June 30, 2006, 05:04:05 PM »

Quote:

Yep, I know you didn't! Sorry about that. My response was more for my own reminder than anything! I did understand what you meant, but I had to remind myself how incredibly nice he was in real life, and that he probably wouldn't leave a series hanging if he had a choice, perhaps partially because he wanted the audience to have the 'full ride', so to speak.

Quote:

Yep, absolutey!

Quote:

Well, that's two MORE cents. I appreciate having a place to go on and on about Alan Moore -- as I said in another post, it's summer vacation and I have a lot of pent-up Moore musings to share!

Bring it on! It's good to be able to talk about Moore's work in such detail!!

Report to moderator Logged

The Complete ABC Comics Release List - Updated reguarly!

http://tinyurl.com/7rx4w

ChinaBoatMan

Jr. Member

Karma: 4

Posts: 55

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #53 on: June 30, 2006, 08:32:52 PM »

Quote:

LOL! I suppose so!

Quote:

My thoughts exactly. Shame about the non-flashback art on the Awesome stuff generally.

Quote:

Yes, i'm sure we are all familiar with that experiance. I completely understand what you mean.

Quote:

Well, that's two MORE cents. I appreciate having a place to go on and on about Alan Moore -- as I said in another post, it's summer vacation and I have a lot of pent-up Moore musings to share

AND

Quote:

Bring it on! It's good to be able to talk about Moore's work in such detail!!

Agreed! Keep it up gents!

Report to moderator Logged

Joe

Full Member

Karma: 3

Posts: 246

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #54 on: July 01, 2006, 01:37:03 AM »

I don't know why they didn't include the Judgment Day Sourcebook in the graphic novel. It is short but great, told in rhymes:

http://www.4colorheroes.com/judgment.html

Report to moderator Logged

Pedro

Full Member

Karma: 2

Posts: 129

Splashing Beetroot.

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #55 on: July 02, 2006, 07:41:31 PM »

Hello all,

Just a quick question regarding 1963. In the "Extraordinary works of Alan Moore" the bibliography mentions that the first issue had a variant cover. Has anyone seen this?

- Pedro.

Report to moderator Logged

Revviop.

Joe

Full Member

Karma: 3

Posts: 246

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #56 on: July 03, 2006, 03:07:53 PM »

I saw it a few weeks ago. I think it was on eBay. I think it was put out special by a different company. I don't remember what it looked like.

« Last Edit: July 03, 2006, 03:08:50 PM by Joe » Report to moderator Logged

Phil

Newbie

Karma: 1

Posts: 31

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #57 on: July 03, 2006, 04:35:33 PM »

I found it on ebay few weaks ago.

And thanks all for the (long) posts, very interesting !

For me, Moore will never finish 1963 simply because it is a very "contextual" comic (1963 / 1993); (re)publishing it in 2006 (...) would be meaningless from an artistic point of view, even if most appreciated by fans.

Report to moderator Logged

ChinaBoatMan

Jr. Member

Karma: 4

Posts: 55

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #58 on: July 03, 2006, 06:57:49 PM »

Quote:

And thanks all for the (long) posts, very interesting !

So how come you so perfectly said in one sentence what I made all of those long posts attempting to say, Phil?

gggr!

Report to moderator Logged

Pedro

Full Member

Karma: 2

Posts: 129

Splashing Beetroot.

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #59 on: July 03, 2006, 07:50:42 PM »

Thanks for that Phil (and Joe). I have never been sure it actually existed.

- Pedro.

Report to moderator Logged

Revviop.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

« previous next »

Jump to:

4ColorCommunity | Powered by YaBB SE

July 06, 2006, 12:50:49 AM

News: Welcome to the Brand New All Improved 4ColorCommunity

4ColorCommunity

Creator Specific Forums

Alan Moore (Moderator: 4ColorHeroes)

Unfinished Awesome and 1963 « previous next »

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]

Author Topic: Unfinished Awesome and 1963 (Read 546 times)

Phil

Newbie

Karma: 1

Posts: 31

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #60 on: July 04, 2006, 03:13:51 AM »

Quote from: ChinaBoatMan on July 03, 2006, 06:57:49 PM

Quote:

And thanks all for the (long) posts, very interesting !

So how come you so perfectly said in one sentence what I made all of those long posts attempting to say, Phil?

gggr!

Simply because my limited english vocabulary prevent me from making long posts !

Report to moderator Logged

Joe

Full Member

Karma: 3

Posts: 246

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #61 on: July 04, 2006, 04:55:25 PM »

I just finished the series, and it is fantastic. I'd love to see it finished, though I doubt it would happen. Who cares if the type of characters Moore were parodying are no long the norm in comics? He could still parody 1993 and call it 1993. It's a retro comic anyway.

Report to moderator Logged

ChinaBoatMan

Jr. Member

Karma: 4

Posts: 55

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #62 on: July 05, 2006, 09:52:35 AM »

Glad you enjoyed it Joe. What did you think the best strips were? Personally I think it's between Hypernaut, Horus and Johhny Beyond.

The idea of calling any conclusion 1993 is a really good one. Perhaps the 63 and 93 characters could end up teaming up against the 'retro-modern' characters of 2003?

Report to moderator Logged

Joe

Full Member

Karma: 3

Posts: 246

I'm a llama!

Re:Unfinished Awesome and 1963

« Reply #63 on: July 05, 2006, 03:52:06 PM »

I agree with you on the best ones, but I would add The Tomorrow Syndicate.

I always figured that would be the best way to do it, 1993 and then a present story. But I would be happy with anything, and Moore seemed to have a new idea when he and Veitch almost finished the series last time.

Do you think this series had a major impact on comics, or were the 1993-type characters going to die out anyway, or did Supreme and the ABC line have a greater impact on comics, Sahib?

« Last Edit: July 05, 2006, 03:58:55 PM by Joe » Report to moderator Logged

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]

« previous next »

Jump to:

4ColorCommunity | Powered by YaBB SE

1 Comment

Terrens

Mar 25

I was getting overwhelmed with constant calls and threats from debt collectors, despite having disputed the debt and knowing I didn’t owe them. It felt like nothing I did would stop them from harassing me day in and day out. That’s when I decided to reach out to a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act attorney at Consumer Attorneys. They were incredible—they took over the communication with the debt collectors and forced them to stop all harassment. They even got the debt removed from my record. Honestly, I don’t know what I would’ve done without their help. If you’re dealing with abusive debt collection practices, I highly recommend getting legal help. Consumer Attorneys can defend your rights and bring you peace…