The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **e_galston** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:49 pm

cncoyle wrote:Alan Moore is one of the most respected authors, and deservedly so.

I think plenty of writers/creators deserve respect for past work, even if their current work doesn't catch as much attention. (like Chris Claremont, Kurt Busiek or John Byrne)

Maybe a front-page contributor (i.e. Punchy) should start a thread asking which writers/creators deserve continued respect.

or you could start a thread?? and then you could be a front page contributor..

by **Keb** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:55 pm

The script for Watchmen 1 was like 100 pages or so. Crazy!

Alan Moore's detail is crazy, but most artist love it because it tells them exactly what to put where and shit. I do have a lot of respect for the artists he works with. Gibbons did a great job on Watchmen and set an amazing visual tone for the story. His style was simple enough to keep it clean but detailed enough that everything is there and paced almost perfectly. His art isn't posed like a lot of artists who are considered great, and I respect his work as an artist. The other two I absolutely love who work with Moore are JH Williams and Kevin O'Neill. Eddie Campbell too. O'Neill and Campbell are apparently more thorough and detailed with their art than Moore's scripts.

by **rdrsfn82** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:06 pm

Punchy wrote:I love it when Chap trots out his 'Watchmen is a masterpiece but I don't like it' schtick, he's basically admitting he has bad taste.

His argument is that it's well crafted from a technical standpoint, but the story is dull and overrated.

I don't see how that means he has bad taste. I mean, I see how it means he's wrong as the book is great, but I don't see how it means he is admitting he has bad taste and isn't just a guy stating an opinion.

If anything, it means he can detach himself enough to admit something is well crafted, even if it's something he doesn't enjoy, meaning he is actually better at judging things than people that automatically think everything they like is great and well done and everything they dislike must have no value to anyone else. :smt102

by **e_galston** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:44 pm

rdrsfn82 wrote:
His argument is that it's well crafted from a technical standpoint, but the story is dull and overrated.

I don't see how that means he has bad taste. I mean, I see how it means he's wrong as the book is great, but I don't see how it means he is admitting he has bad taste and isn't just a guy stating an opinion.

If anything, it means he can detach himself enough to admit something is well crafted, even if it's something he doesn't enjoy, meaning he is actually better at judging things than people that automatically think everything they like is great and well done and everything they dislike must have no value to anyone else.

so he's better than most of the free world?

by **rdrsfn82** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 2:51 pm

by **chap22** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:08 pm

e_galston wrote:
so he's better than most of the free world?

yes. yes i am.

by **e_galston** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:15 pm

chap22 wrote:yes. yes i am.

you're welcome

by **chap22** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:20 pm

Punchy wrote:I love it when Chap trots out his 'Watchmen is a masterpiece but I don't like it' schtick, he's basically admitting he has bad taste.

i love it when you type anything, and basically admit you're an idiot.

it's like rdrs said, there are different aspects to a story, particularly in a medium such as comics where there are visual and written structures and themes and tricks and components. from a purely technical standpoint, Watchmen is a fantastically crafted comic book. but from the standpoint of pure story, i find it frankly unenjoyable. since whether or not a story entertains you is really a very large part of its worth, i therefore find it to be overrated.

but now, does that make it better than something like say, X-Cutioner's Song, where i love the story but admit it's a mishmash of crap technically? maybe, maybe not.

OK, yes. :-D

Watchmen's definitely better than X-Cutioner's Song. but i'd rank something like Kraven's Last Hunt, which is both technically superb and more enjoyable, ahead of it.

by **chap22** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:20 pm

e_galston wrote:
you're welcome

by **Spidey-Man** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:24 pm

LobsterJ wrote:
i don't know, when you look at the number of flat-out classics (as well as good to great stuff) he has written its not hard to understand why he is a respected and discussed figure in the medium.

i havent really read any classics.

by **Spidey-Man** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:25 pm

cncoyle wrote:No, but I'm sure you're going to tell me anyway.

ridiculously detailed. some things are superfluous and impossible to draw :lol:

by **Spidey-Man** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:27 pm

the ending of Watchmen doesn't work. the world's reactio n is not plausible.

and the psychic alien is pretty ridiculous

by **DMM** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:28 pm

chap22 wrote:

i love it when you type anything, and basically admit you're an idiot.

it's like rdrs said, there are different aspects to a story, particularly in a medium such as comics where there are visual and written structures and themes and tricks and components. from a purely technical standpoint, Watchmen is a fantastically crafted comic book. but from the standpoint of pure story, i find it frankly unenjoyable. since whether or not a story entertains you is really a very large part of its worth, i therefore find it to be overrated.

but now, does that make it better than something like say, X-Cutioner's Song, where i love the story but admit it's a mishmash of crap technically? maybe, maybe not.

OK, yes. :-D

Watchmen's definitely better than X-Cutioner's Song. but i'd rank something like Kraven's Last Hunt, which is both technically superb and more enjoyable, ahead of it.[/quote]
Not me. But really, you're comparing apples and oranges there.

by **chap22** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:33 pm

DMM wrote:Not me. But really, you're comparing apples and oranges there.

why? they're both mature stories dealing with people in costumes, told in serial comic book form. both have definite beginnings and endings, and build off their central characters' previous relationships with each other. their themes may be different, their plots may be different, but looking at them macro rather than micro, they're comparable.

by **Spidey-Man** » Fri Dec 02, 2011 3:35 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:I don't get the hate. Watchmen was a great movie.

The problem with the movie is they telegraphed the bad guy. It was so obvious.

The violence was too stylized.

I don’t think the superheroes should have basically had powers. A lot of that fighting was over the top

And the ending makes little sense. It was the weak point of the book. But using the USA sponsored and based Dr. Manhattan as a way to bring Russia and the US together makes even less sense than the book

If anything the world would blame us and team up to get us

Plus the bad guy had the worse acting. Terrible.

However, they handled Dr. Manhattan well.