Comic Vine News

51 Comments

BEFORE WATCHMEN Creators To Appear At C2E2 Comic Convention

Get ready to get a whole lot of BEFORE WATCHMEN news at C2E2 next month.

When you hold the rights to a comic book property like the WATCHMEN you know it's only a matter of time before you expand that universe, which is exactly what DC Comics currently has in the works. As you may have heard, DC Comics made the controversial decision to publish BEFORE WATCHMEN, a prequel to the popular WATCHMEN originally written by Alan Moore. The publisher gathered some of the most prominent creators (Lee Bermejo, Brian Azzarello, Amanda Conner) in the industry to elaborate on the backstories of WATCHMEN characters like the Nite Owl, Ozymandias, Doctor Manhattan and the rest.

“We’ve gathered some of the most talented writers and artists to expand on the stories of the most provocative comic book characters of all time,” said DC Entertainment Co-Publisher and panelist Dan DiDio. “The hard part is waiting all the way until June to share the craziness with fans. We just might have to get people talking early about the importance of the five truths.”

The group of books will be launching in June, but we will definitely be getting information on the new titles before then. Earlier today DC Comics announced that many of the BEFORE WATCHMEN creators would be appearing on the C2E2 BEFORE WATCHMEN panel on Saturday, April 14th from 2PM to 3PM.

Some of the creators that will appear at the show include Brian Azzarello, Lee Bermejo, Amanda Conner, Dan Didio, Adam Hughes, J. Michael Straczynski, Len Wein and more.

Are you looking forward to BEFORE WATCHMEN? Do you think that a prequel to Alan Moore's book is a good idea?

51 Comments
  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by Crimson Thunder

That Rorschach cover is quite interesting.

Posted by The Cyan Lantern

WILL BE THERE!!!

Posted by fables87

Not sure about the idea for this yet, but I have to say the cover art for some are good.

Posted by Arevish

Whoiooooa watchmen!

I think imma drunk. U say Imma right? God, I love america. Nope, i love usa, i like mexico and "MEH" canada, but i lvoe the USA <3

Edited by THEBlaqueBasterd
Posted by ka385385

Did Alan Moore agree it?

Posted by ReVamp

Ozymandias.

Posted by moywar700

Alan Moore hate is growing strong, I sense it.

Posted by frochez

The quote at the end is obviously intended for hyperfans to latch on to ang go 'Five truths? What five truths? What is this? Do you know anything? Do you? Someone, tell me what's going on! Have you heard anything? I think that...'

Posted by dementedtheclown

next do a sequel

Posted by AngeTheDude

@ka385385: NOPE.

Posted by Inverno

That Comedian cover is creeping me the hell out :P

Posted by Mr. Dead Pool

All I know is that they better not ruin Rorschach!!!!!!!!!

Posted by The Impersonator

Awesome!

Posted by Amegashita

Alan Moore will be quite upset. At the very least.

Posted by ka385385

@AngeTheDude:

That's not good for the one who creat the masterwork ,i still hope the company give more right to the writer.

Posted by ka385385

@Mr. Dead Pool:

Ya ,i hope there is another version of Rorschach and not dead.

Posted by KEROGA

darwyn cooke!!!! yes

Posted by Hector

Kinda excited...I hope they don't mess it up.

Posted by RedheadedAtrocitus

I was at practically all the DC Panels at Wonder Con and the biggest topic was of course this upcoming event. Of course not nearly so many of the creators were there that will be at C2E2 but nevertheless, by what I have read I am on board for Watchmen, even if there is still that lingering part of me that says that they just really shouldn't touch it anymore, that the 12 issue maxi-series is something that should just be enjoyed for its own merits without need of expansion. I must say though, had any creators other than the slate we were given gotten the chance to write it, I'd say hell to the no to this event. But come on...Azzarello, Bermejo, Cooke, Jones, Straczynski, Hughes, The Kuberts, Wein, Lee, Conner...its a veritable who's who among great writers/artists willing to put this out for us.

Posted by davidgrantlloyd

I am tempted but I don't think I'll succumb -- too much respect for Alan Moore.

In a sense, this event probably proves that, in terms of artistic integrity, DC may well be bankrupt ... On the other hand, from a business marketing point-of-view, they are being quite smart.

Posted by KidSupreme

I hope this turns out good :D

Posted by dondasch

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money. Currently re reading V for Vendetta, and I have to agree with Mr. Moore that the comics medium is the best avenue for his stories to be told. By him, and not by people like JMS, who can't finish what he starts, or manages to make it so mind numbingly boring you curse the day you ever laid eyes on what you're reading.

Posted by sethysquare

Seiously all the creators are amazing. Cant wait for this. This is so going to rock.

Posted by sethysquare

@dondasch said:

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money.

The purpose for everything selling in DC and marvel is to make money. LOL.

Posted by _Cain_

@dementedtheclown said:

next do a sequel

NO.

Posted by haydenclaireheroes

I wonder what they will say since WonderCon was only a week ago.

Posted by Nerx

Diggin comedian's rape face

Posted by MarcusVWario

@dementedtheclown: Did you read the original? Have the cast is gone (Rorschach, Dr. Manhattan, and the Comedian) and the only interesting one left is Ozymandias. What would the sequel be about?

Posted by MarcusVWario

@RedheadedAtrocitus: Am I the only one who has heard of very few of those writers? I only know Azzarello and thats because I read the first volume of 100 Bullets (which wasn't nearly as good as people claim). I feel like if they wanted to give it to the best and brightest then they would have asked: Waid, Johns, Azzarello (cuz I know a ton of people like him), Winick, and a few others.

Posted by dementedtheclown

@MarcusVWario said:

@dementedtheclown: Did you read the original? Have the cast is gone (Rorschach, Dr. Manhattan, and the Comedian) and the only interesting one left is Ozymandias. What would the sequel be about?

Dr.Manhattan comes back, Rorschachs journal gets published, crime increases, new heroes emerge.

Posted by Casshern

DAMN!

I was hoping they would just create their own Minute Men Characters and have a story about them, Before the events of the Original Watchmen...NOT a prequel telling of the characters.

All that talent and you couldn't make your own characters and a continuing side story that happens in the world of Watchmen but doesn't cross-over into any of the Original characters...Ok maybe Nite Owl's.

Posted by thephantomstranger

@sethysquare said:

@dondasch said:

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money.

The purpose for everything selling in DC and marvel is to make money. LOL.

Yet there are times when the writer comes to the editorial department and asks if he can run with a concept, change a character, make a new character, etc. This is the editorial team reversing that, the writers are starting with a constricting concept and working with that. A story can both make money and be born out of an author's genuine need to create...it just doesn't feel like that's the case here...

Posted by feargalr

I hope people at least give these books a shot, like there have been occasions, rare albeit, where sequels/prequels have been just as good as the original... although I doubt Ill check em out, but that's just cos I wasn't so crazy about the original Watchmen, I kinda think everyone telling me how amazing it was before I read it led to a big let down for me, plus that god awful movie spoiled the characters further... me thinks

Posted by sethysquare

@thephantomstranger said:

@sethysquare said:

@dondasch said:

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money.

The purpose for everything selling in DC and marvel is to make money. LOL.

Yet there are times when the writer comes to the editorial department and asks if he can run with a concept, change a character, make a new character, etc. This is the editorial team reversing that, the writers are starting with a constricting concept and working with that. A story can both make money and be born out of an author's genuine need to create...it just doesn't feel like that's the case here...

Look at all the DC and Marvel titles, tell me which one of the ongoing is when a writer comes to the editorial department and ask if he can run with a concept.

With the exception of Vertigo, almost all the DC and Marvel titles are editorially mandated. They decide which title they wanna produce, the look for a writer and ask him to pitch it, if they like it its on.

Even Grant Morrison was asked to go write Superman, he rejected it and opted for Action Comics instead.

Posted by jumpstart55

That picture of Ozymandias looks so cool.

This might be good.

Posted by Alton

@sethysquare said:

@dondasch said:

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money.

The purpose for everything selling in DC and marvel is to make money. LOL.

Har,Har.Yuck ,Yuck,Yuck. What an intellectual you are.Of course, commerce over quality didn't even occur to you.Especially, as so many have said here, they either haven't read the original or didn't like it or the movie.So who is DC marketing this to? Double LOL.

Posted by Alton

@sethysquare said:

Seiously all the creators are amazing. Cant wait for this. This is so going to rock.

How do people who are ripping off somebody else's intellectual property suddenly get to be called "creators"? Just Wondering.I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

Posted by sethysquare

@Alton said:

@sethysquare said:

@dondasch said:

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money.

The purpose for everything selling in DC and marvel is to make money. LOL.

Har,Har.Yuck ,Yuck,Yuck. What an intellectual you are.Of course, commerce over quality didn't even occur to you.Especially, as so many have said here, they either haven't read the original or didn't like it or the movie.So who is DC marketing this to? Double LOL.

What are you talking about?

No company would publish a quality book if it is not making them profit. Lots of great books have been cancelled because of low sales. Thats just a fact of life and its sad that you're just never going to get it.

Also, people who have watched the movie and read the original are going to buy the book, no matter how much they complain about it. Everyone knows its going to sell tons. Even for people who have never read the book before, its also going to interest them so I don't get what "who is DC marketing this to" sentiments.

First you claimed this book is "commerce over quality" which means you agree this is going to sell, then you followed up with "who is DC marketing this to" so I'm not sure what you're thinking except you don't think before you write your posts. Jokes on you.

Edited by sethysquare

@Alton said:

@sethysquare said:

Seiously all the creators are amazing. Cant wait for this. This is so going to rock.

How do people who are ripping off somebody else's intellectual property suddenly get to be called "creators"? Just Wondering.I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

Watchmen belongs to DC legally so is Batman. So I guess Scott Snyder and Greg Capullo are ripping somebody else's intellectual property and is not fit to be called "creators".

I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

And wow, that is probably the most childish thing I've heard. Good for you then.

Posted by dondasch

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

@sethysquare said:

@dondasch said:

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money.

The purpose for everything selling in DC and marvel is to make money. LOL.

Har,Har.Yuck ,Yuck,Yuck. What an intellectual you are.Of course, commerce over quality didn't even occur to you.Especially, as so many have said here, they either haven't read the original or didn't like it or the movie.So who is DC marketing this to? Double LOL.

Also, people who have watched the movie and read the original are going to buy the book, no matter how much they complain about it. Everyone knows its going to sell tons.

The above is not necessarily true. I have read, and loved the book. I have also seen, and regret having seen the movie, so just having those two elements does not translate to people buying the book.
Posted by thephantomstranger

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

@sethysquare said:

Seiously all the creators are amazing. Cant wait for this. This is so going to rock.

How do people who are ripping off somebody else's intellectual property suddenly get to be called "creators"? Just Wondering.I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

Watchmen belongs to DC legally so is Batman. So I guess Scott Snyder and Greg Capullo are ripping somebody else's intellectual property and is not fit to be called "creators".

Well they can totally be called writers/artists in relation to both this and Batman...but in my opinion when you bring the word Creator into works that the writer/artist didn't originally create then it becomes a little messy. Yes you can argue that they created part of the ongoing history of the character but I feel that the terminology would then need to be used with care and specific context...not something companies or governments are especially good at. I feel that calling them a writer or artist gives them enough credit and provides enough of a distinction.

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

And wow, that is probably the most childish thing I've heard. Good for you then.

This though? I agree 100% with this retort. We all of course know that you cannot beat 100%...

Posted by sethysquare

@dondasch said:

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

@sethysquare said:

@dondasch said:

Don't really see the purpose of this, other than, of course, to make money.

The purpose for everything selling in DC and marvel is to make money. LOL.

Har,Har.Yuck ,Yuck,Yuck. What an intellectual you are.Of course, commerce over quality didn't even occur to you.Especially, as so many have said here, they either haven't read the original or didn't like it or the movie.So who is DC marketing this to? Double LOL.

Also, people who have watched the movie and read the original are going to buy the book, no matter how much they complain about it. Everyone knows its going to sell tons.

The above is not necessarily true. I have read, and loved the book. I have also seen, and regret having seen the movie, so just having those two elements does not translate to people buying the book.

Perhaps I should have made it clear, I meant quite a lot of fans of the Watchmen are going to buy the book or read it. Its the same thing with new 52, people are complaining like crazy online, but sales were great.

I'm not saying everyone that liked the movie or read watchmen would buy this, but with the creative teams involved, I'm sure its going to get sell quite alot. But its no point arguing if its going to be a hit or not, we're just going to have to see the sales for it in July.

Posted by Alton

@sethysquare: I don't disagree with DC's right to make a profit providing they also respect creator rights (Moore's). The contract that Moore signed years ago was one of the milder examples of the quasi legal machinations that creators in good faith signed not aware of future ramifications.At least Moore gets royalties for the WATCHMEN reprints(I'm not sure about Before Watchmen) which he has claimed he has given to Gibbons and others.That being said I don't think this has the wider audience pull that DC seems to think it has(recent movie not withstanding) and the saturation bombing approach on top Of DCnU's September launch is going to work against them.The economy is still in meltdown mode and discretionary income at an all time low.Once the speculators gobble up the number ones and alternate covers and the hardcore Iconic fans run back to their Supes/Bats/ JL titles I can see some sales dropping before the end of some of these mini's and the possible cancellation of portions of this so called epic.This is completely separate from whether these books are any good or not.I find it sad that you find concern for fair play to Moore and others and blatant exploitation of this property"childish",that "commerce over quality" is the way things should be.That to me means not that I agree it will sell but whether what's being sold is junk.Who is DC marketing this to? Obviously people who don't care about fairplay,creator/worker rights and live in a bubble of their own making.I would just as loudly defend your creator rights if you faced the same situation with anything you wrote or drew.

Posted by Alton

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

@sethysquare said:

Seiously all the creators are amazing. Cant wait for this. This is so going to rock.

How do people who are ripping off somebody else's intellectual property suddenly get to be called "creators"? Just Wondering.I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

Watchmen belongs to DC legally so is Batman. So I guess Scott Snyder and Greg Capullo are ripping somebody else's intellectual property and is not fit to be called "creators".

I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

And wow, that is probably the most childish thing I've heard. Good for you then.

The difference to the ownership of Batman is completely different from the issues surrounding Watchmen. Go argue with Moore himself.Then again maybe if we really dug into the history of work for hire rules during the Bob Kane era and beyond maybe we would find out differently.Be that as it may Snyder and Capullo are doing work on a property that is generally thought of as DC's.The work that others are doing on Before Watchmen is from a property that is maintained by DC through deliberate legal trickery.Again all writer/artists involved with Before Watchmen are off my list.The fact that you find this childish I find to be on your part infantile.

Posted by sethysquare

@thephantomstranger said:

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

@sethysquare said:

Seiously all the creators are amazing. Cant wait for this. This is so going to rock.

How do people who are ripping off somebody else's intellectual property suddenly get to be called "creators"? Just Wondering.I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

Watchmen belongs to DC legally so is Batman. So I guess Scott Snyder and Greg Capullo are ripping somebody else's intellectual property and is not fit to be called "creators".

Well they can totally be called writers/artists in relation to both this and Batman...but in my opinion when you bring the word Creator into works that the writer/artist didn't originally create then it becomes a little messy. Yes you can argue that they created part of the ongoing history of the character but I feel that the terminology would then need to be used with care and specific context...not something companies or governments are especially good at. I feel that calling them a writer or artist gives them enough credit and provides enough of a distinction.

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

I will never support any of the writers or artists involved with Before Watchmen.again.

And wow, that is probably the most childish thing I've heard. Good for you then.

This though? I agree 100% with this retort. We all of course know that you cannot beat 100%...

Well, I'm not the only one calling them creators, lots of websites, conventions and what not calls them like from the creators of All Star Superman, Grant Morrison, from the creators of All Star B&R Jim Lee and so on.

But I guess to each his own.

Posted by sethysquare

@Alton said:

@sethysquare: I don't disagree with DC's right to make a profit providing they also respect creator rights (Moore's). The contract that Moore signed years ago was one of the milder examples of the quasi legal machinations that creators in good faith signed not aware of future ramifications.At least Moore gets royalties for the WATCHMEN reprints(I'm not sure about Before Watchmen) which he has claimed he has given to Gibbons and others.That being said I don't think this has the wider audience pull that DC seems to think it has(recent movie not withstanding) and the saturation bombing approach on top Of DCnU's September launch is going to work against them.The economy is still in meltdown mode and discretionary income at an all time low.Once the speculators gobble up the number ones and alternate covers and the hardcore Iconic fans run back to their Supes/Bats/ JL titles I can see some sales dropping before the end of some of these mini's and the possible cancellation of portions of this so called epic.This is completely separate from whether these books are any good or not.I find it sad that you find concern for fair play to Moore and others and blatant exploitation of this property"childish",that "commerce over quality" is the way things should be.That to me means not that I agree it will sell but whether what's being sold is junk.Who is DC marketing this to? Obviously people who don't care about fairplay,creator/worker rights and live in a bubble of their own making.I would just as loudly defend your creator rights if you faced the same situation with anything you wrote or drew.

Like I said, I'm wont be arguing whether its a commercial success or not, we'll just have to see.

What I called "childish" was the fact that you chose to not support any of the works of the writers and artist of before watchmen when Len Wein and John Higgins played a part in the original Watchmen and the fact that lots of the artist and writers are talented people and they're just trying to make a living. It is after all DC's property legally and I just think to find faults to boycott the artist and writers sounds a little juvenile.

Also I did not say that "commerce over quality" is the way things should be, I did however mention that everything being sold in DC and Marvel or any profit making organisation depends on its marketability, so anything that cant be sold, no matter how good it is, will not be sold. Books like X-23, Secret Six, OMAC and lotsa other great books are cancelled because its not bringing in the buck but thats just how things work.

Posted by Alton

@sethysquare said:

@Alton said:

@sethysquare: I don't disagree with DC's right to make a profit providing they also respect creator rights (Moore's). The contract that Moore signed years ago was one of the milder examples of the quasi legal machinations that creators in good faith signed not aware of future ramifications.At least Moore gets royalties for the WATCHMEN reprints(I'm not sure about Before Watchmen) which he has claimed he has given to Gibbons and others.That being said I don't think this has the wider audience pull that DC seems to think it has(recent movie not withstanding) and the saturation bombing approach on top Of DCnU's September launch is going to work against them.The economy is still in meltdown mode and discretionary income at an all time low.Once the speculators gobble up the number ones and alternate covers and the hardcore Iconic fans run back to their Supes/Bats/ JL titles I can see some sales dropping before the end of some of these mini's and the possible cancellation of portions of this so called epic.This is completely separate from whether these books are any good or not.I find it sad that you find concern for fair play to Moore and others and blatant exploitation of this property"childish",that "commerce over quality" is the way things should be.That to me means not that I agree it will sell but whether what's being sold is junk.Who is DC marketing this to? Obviously people who don't care about fairplay,creator/worker rights and live in a bubble of their own making.I would just as loudly defend your creator rights if you faced the same situation with anything you wrote or drew.

Like I said, I'm wont be arguing whether its a commercial success or not, we'll just have to see.

What I called "childish" was the fact that you chose to not support any of the works of the writers and artist of before watchmen when Len Wein and John Higgins played a part in the original Watchmen and the fact that lots of the artist and writers are talented people and they're just trying to make a living. It is after all DC's property legally and I just think to find faults to boycott the artist and writers sounds a little juvenile.

Also I did not say that "commerce over quality" is the way things should be, I did however mention that everything being sold in DC and Marvel or any profit making organisation depends on its marketability, so anything that cant be sold, no matter how good it is, will not be sold. Books like X-23, Secret Six, OMAC and lotsa other great books are cancelled because its not bringing in the buck but thats just how things work.

It's funny you should bring up Len Wein's name.Did you see the CBR TV WonderCon Interview with Wein? He admits he had little to do with Watchmen as editor prefering to let Moore and Gibbons take the lead creatively.He was not part of the creative team itself for the most part..Moore in a recent interview seemed puzzled that Wein got involved with this.Here Wein is participating in a project that is being done without Moore's OK.When Moore took on Swamp Thing it stood head and shoulders over the C-List pulp character that Wein and Wrightson created.Moore enhanced ,with Wein's approval, Swamp Thing.Wein is simply exploiting Watchmen without Moore's approval.So much for ethics and solidarity among "creators".

Posted by sethysquare

@Alton: Why should anyone seek Moore's approval. It does not belong to him legally. Also you seem to forget Dave Gibbons is the other co creator and he has give the OK to proceed. So Why isn't Moore respecting Dave's wishes? You're making this seem like Alan Moore is the sole creator for this book when he is not. Also, if Moore is unhappy he can pursue it legally. No one forced him to take on this project. DC offered them a job, he took it. Once the trade goes outta print, they will get the rights back. But nobody expected this book to be so popular and would continue to go on print for 20 years with the last few years being highest sold graphic novel.

You making it sound like this is a creator owned project, it hardly is. At least the contract he signed with DC says that it is a work for hire and with a special clause that rights will be given to him once the book goes outta print. Sadly it didn't.

The contract Neil Gaiman signed with DC is a creator owned project and published under vertigo.

Secondly, Alan Moore stole other people's work like Lost Girls and League of Extraordinary Gentlements also. Which he admitted he STOLE their ideas, creation whatever without their approval. Take it up with him.

Posted by Alton

@sethysquare said:

@Alton: Why should anyone seek Moore's approval. It does not belong to him legally. Also you seem to forget Dave Gibbons is the other co creator and he has give the OK to proceed. So Why isn't Moore respecting Dave's wishes? You're making this seem like Alan Moore is the sole creator for this book when he is not. Also, if Moore is unhappy he can pursue it legally. No one forced him to take on this project. DC offered them a job, he took it. Once the trade goes outta print, they will get the rights back. But nobody expected this book to be so popular and would continue to go on print for 20 years with the last few years being highest sold graphic novel.

You making it sound like this is a creator owned project, it hardly is. At least the contract he signed with DC says that it is a work for hire and with a special clause that rights will be given to him once the book goes outta print. Sadly it didn't.

The contract Neil Gaiman signed with DC is a creator owned project and published under vertigo.

Secondly, Alan Moore stole other people's work like Lost Girls and League of Extraordinary Gentlements also. Which he admitted he STOLE their ideas, creation whatever without their approval. Take it up with him.

It seems to me that neither of us has a real handle on who own's what here,but I believe the rights are Moore's and Gibbon's and what DC has is a contract to exercise control over continued republication of Watchmen until it goes out of print. Which is an open ended clause that DC came up with to keep indefinite control over this property.It will probably never revert back to Moore or Gibbons.DC is not the owner, but is only the publisher.The real story behind the use of other property by Moore for books like League is the property used was public domain, and if there had been an objection to using Stoker,Haggard,Verne,and Wells characters Moore would have made it right.This issue is constantly brought up by people like yourself, and you guys always get it wrong on purpose to tear down Moore.Take a look at the other fight Gaiman just concluded in court with Image and Spawn.This crap still goes on.DC's ownership or non ownership on this matter not withstanding the writer/artist teams assigned to Before Watchmen have no right to trash without permission of both Moore and Gibbons anything to do with Watchmen.If others who were around at the time of Watchmen such as Len Wein and Gibbons choose to do so then I have no respect for them at all. If the rest of the editorial/writer/artist teams assigned to this want to pimp and ho themselves, so be it.You rationalise buying this crap any way you want,I will not be buying Before or anything else by any of the creative teams involved.This is my final say on this because you only read about 25% of what anybody says here and then go of on a tangent.I wish I could leave a smile button here.

  • 51 results
  • 1
  • 2