Soooo...
Nemesis_Zero
Old European Join Date: 2002-01-25 Member: 75Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
Old European Join Date: 2002-01-25 Member: 75Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">I just got done reading Watchmen.</div> I know there are some more comic buffs on these boards, so I'll turn to you for hints.
Today, I got my Watchman graphic novel from Amazon. Having read and enjoyed V for Vendetta, and being aware of the reverence many have towards the Watchmen, I expected to be blown away, to read the, bluntly, best serious comic in existence.
Having finished reading it a few hours ago, I've got to admit that I'm a little underwhelmed. Granted, it's very good on many occasions, the characters are up to Moore standards, the commentary towards the genre of superhero comics and its moral implications is chirugical, and the dialogue is as clever as I'd expect of the author, but this is a far spell from V, which said a lot of the same things much more eloquently, and doesn't hold a candle compared to, say, Sandman. Particularily the end was just sobering.
I get why Moore didn't want his characters to return to status quo, but there had to be a slightly smarter way of achieving that. For example one that did not consider of five people standing around more or less inanimately for several pages.
So, my question to you - did I miss something? Is there a layer of meaning I just skipped over?
Today, I got my Watchman graphic novel from Amazon. Having read and enjoyed V for Vendetta, and being aware of the reverence many have towards the Watchmen, I expected to be blown away, to read the, bluntly, best serious comic in existence.
Having finished reading it a few hours ago, I've got to admit that I'm a little underwhelmed. Granted, it's very good on many occasions, the characters are up to Moore standards, the commentary towards the genre of superhero comics and its moral implications is chirugical, and the dialogue is as clever as I'd expect of the author, but this is a far spell from V, which said a lot of the same things much more eloquently, and doesn't hold a candle compared to, say, Sandman. Particularily the end was just sobering.
I get why Moore didn't want his characters to return to status quo, but there had to be a slightly smarter way of achieving that. For example one that did not consider of five people standing around more or less inanimately for several pages.
So, my question to you - did I miss something? Is there a layer of meaning I just skipped over?
Comments
Yes, you missed out on...
1. Time you could have spent on Clash of Kings, you philistine. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
2. Time you could have spent on Steven Erikson's Gardens of the Moon.
3. Time you could have spent on Sandman (for your comic fix)
C'mon Nem, you know I'm the guy with the goods when it comes to fiction for you...
I finished Clash of Kings two months ago and the Sandman series around Christmas. I needed a new fix!
Garden of Moons is still on my list, but Watchmen inexplicably dropped in price by 50%, so I took the opportunity.
Have to fight Niteowl for that title, just dont pretend to be a miccie.
Don't post appropriately. Shoddy imitation <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I enjoyed Halo Jones. It's not as good as V, if you can really compare the two, but it's still a good read.
Who wrote Maus? I haven't heard of that.
It's the premier graphic documentary of the early 90's grunge slackerland. Always good for a laugh.
The other series I'd point to is <a href='http://www.megacitycomics.co.uk/acatalog/Preacher_Graphic_Novels.html' target='_blank'>Preacher</a>. I didn't get to read all of them but I liked what I saw.
You probably would enjoy stuff like Cerberus.
Seriously though, I have a lot of the stories you mention earmarked for later perusal. I know it's hellishly tempting to give people book advices, I do it myself way too often, but this thread was really set up because of Watchmen <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Erk, sorry for forgetting to put my own warning in <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> I was under the delusion that anyone reading this will have read Watchmen already. Yes, plot spoilers are present in this post (and in retrospect I hardly think my point was worth the inclusion of spoilers, but there you go...)
<edit> rereading this, I should point out I'm aware that you're not after a typical action-story here, but bear with my ramblings for a bit because they get to a point in the third paragraph <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I agree with you Nem0 that the end is sort of an anti-climax as far as super hero storys go...but then the story never really set out to be superhero comic, but rather is a comic *about* superheros, past their glorious media-filled days and toward the stepping stones of retirement. Well, that excuses the need for a action packed ending anyway. The real finale is, of course, really the unveiling of Ozymandias' "evil" plan and its execution (and the manner it's presented to you in the comic "Do it? I did it 35 minutes ago.")
I don't think the story of Watchmen could possibly be rounded up at the end with a big showdown or demonstration of strength/intelligence at the end, as that IMO is not what Moore was trying to acomplish. The end of Watchmen is just that...the end of the Watchmen. What really mattered is everything that came before it.
Also, Moore has a talent for writing scripts and stories that fit with the mood of the message. VFV was a message about life, about letting your soul soar and so its understandable that its story was heavily laden with eloquent passages and heartfelt drama. Watchmen is a much grittier, dirtier story. It's a story about has-beens and for most of the characters there is no hope for a brighter future somehow - they've had their bright future already, and now really they're forced to step down and put it all behind them which for a group of people who have spent their lives being heros of the world, must be a hard thing to do. Hence, IMO, Ozymandias final plan - perhaps a final achievement for humanity to appease his worrys that he is no longer the hero he was. The way he goes about doing it is on a paralell with negative traits shown by Rorschach and Dr.Manhatten, by coming to some greater ends through horrible means (Rorschach is screwed up enough to not really care about it, the Dr can't really comprehend it in an emotional way, and Ozymandias sees the pure cold logic of it, rather like Kurtz).
Sorry if I've swayed off course at all <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
PS
Alan Moore does tend to repeat himself in his stories, with the same themes and messages often popping up...I guess its a 'flavour' thing (which do you prefer?).
Take Sandman's finale in The Kindly Ones. Surrounded by lots of bloodshed and 'action', the central passage consists of a brother and a sister sitting on a stone pillar and talking. Yet, when Death says "You've been making them for ages. You just didn't let yourself know that was what you were doing." I, at least, had an epiphanic moment. In those two sentences, Gaiman managed to shift my perception of every story told between 'A Death in the Family' and then. That one word bubble changed the plot from the tale of a man struggling with his environment to one of a man struggling with himself. It made Sandman the bluntly put best piece of storytelling I know.
Watchmen's finale, on the other hand, shines merely in a formalistic sense. Moore is to be applauded for the inversal of the generic cliché of the superhero showdown you allude to: The heroes don't stop the plot, they are part of it. The world isn't saved by a return to the status quo, but by a radical departure from it. The 'villain' does not despair, the heroes do. The main characters move on afterwards, they don't return to be called up come next issue. This works on all levels and Moore is to be congratulated for it, but while Gaiman manages to put this complete inversion of his significantly more complex work into two panels, Moore 'talks it to death' in one and a half issue. I don't begrudge him for telling a story that is not completely resolved - he makes it clear that this is part of his intention - but I can fault him for the way he concludes it.
Oh, yeah. Maus is really good. I got to read it in school actually.
YES.
We're reading <i>Maus</i> in Language Arts right now, I can wholeheartedly second any reccomendation for it. Generally I dislike Holocaust stories (I didn't quite like <i>Night</i>, but Maus is just fantastic. The story is told well, and the whole allegory thing(Cats-Nazis, Pigs-Poles, Mice-Jews, etc.) works well. We were looking at some of his rough drafts in class, and its amazing how much thought goes into each panel.(Note: Not saying that other artists don't think about their illustrations.) If you've never read it, you should.
I''m not just talking to Nem here. This is quality literature.
Personally, I think Watchmen really is near the top of comics that I've read. There's a lot more that makes it great than the plot, of course. The character development, the interweaving plots, the backstories, the supplementary materials (e.g. "Under the Hood", the pirate comic), the interleaving of the scenes in space and time (i.e. the clocks tell you a lot; if you look in the background of one scene you frequently see part of another) all contribute to give the work as a whole a substance and density simply not found in other comics.
If you don't have money to buy everything, check out the local library. Depending on where you live, you might be amazed at what they have.
Other things to add to your list:
Metrolpol (not Metropolitan, although I hear that's good too) for the art (Ted McKeever).. Plastic Forks by him too, if you can find it.
Why I Hate Saturn by Kyle Baker
Doom Patrol when Grant Morrison wrote it (issues #19 - 50something I think)
Ed The Happy Clown by Chester Brown
as many issues of Eightball by Dan Clowes as you can lay hands on
any thing by Chris Ware (Jimmy Corrigan, the Smartest Kid on Earth).
and so on and on and on and on <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
...Hence, IMO, Ozymandias final plan - perhaps a final achievement for humanity to appease his worrys that he is no longer the hero he was. The way he goes about doing it is on a paralell with negative traits shown by Rorschach and Dr.Manhatten, by coming to some greater ends through horrible means (Rorschach is screwed up enough to not really care about it, the Dr can't really comprehend it in an emotional way, and Ozymandias sees the pure cold logic of it, rather like Kurtz).
Sorry if I've swayed off course at all <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
PS
Alan Moore does tend to repeat himself in his stories, with the same themes and messages often popping up...I guess its a 'flavour' thing (which do you prefer?). <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
(More spoilers coming.)
I dunno. Rorschach seemed the most human at the end - whereas the others just accepted it, Rorschach couldn't. That's why he was killed, right? Also, Ozymandias clearly has doubts, which is why he asks Dr.Manhatten for reassurance.
I think I recognise the author for Maus. Has he done anything about the Twin Towers? ("In The Shadow Of the Twin Towers"? I don't have my collection to hand). Good stuff.
He published a magazine in NYC in the eighties called RAW, which contained the work of many cool "underground" artists, many of which or none of which you may have heard of: Spain Rodriguez, Gary Panter (designed the sets of Pee Wee's Fun House), Kaz (Underworld, in an art weekly near you), Chris Ware, many many more. If you ever read The New Yorker (and what video game enthusiast doesn't), you'll have seen strips and covers by him over theyears.
Anyway.
Some years back he did this thing called Maus that several people have mentioned. He won a Pulitzer Prize for it. That doesn't happen much for comics (not sure if it has at any other time). That kind of got people attention and made it ok for everyone to read it and assign it to English classes and the like. Which is ok, because it really is rather good.
Recently I read much of Sin City, and very recently I've been absorbed by Sandman. Now, being very, very new to comic books, I find I simply don't like superhero stuff. I tried Watchmen, but it was rather dull, and the story just didn't pull me. Sandman, however, has totally absorbed me. I spent the better part of the day reading it, and the same happened with Sin City. Great dialogue, awesome characters, wonderful story, and a very distinct and awesome art style.
Does anyone have any awesome comics in a style like Sin City and Sandman to suggest me? Like, not really superheroes, but alot of style and story. I may check out this Maus thing.
EDIT: Just saying something because I love it. The Sandman cover with the tooth-eyed nightmare's half-face on it is one of the few pieces of art to really creep me out. It's so realistic and dark. It's just...eugh.