io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 5:15 AM
Tue Nov 10
25 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/06/09
Combined with this and his fucking temper tantrums about the movies made based on his comics, I'm convinced I'd want nothing more than to punch him in the face if I ever met him. I love his writing but he seems to have one big fucking ego. Victim of douchebag publishers or not, he's got his head up his ass.
And yeah, I realize they change things with the movies based on his work. I'm just so tired of hearing him bitch about how he got screwed. He could have argued about rights and control with DC and Marvel. But he doesn't. Instead he takes his lumps despite the fact he's one of the most admired writers in the industry.
Good job, Moore. You could work for any number of publishers but you've had work published by DC and Marvel since the start of your career. They couldn't have fucked you over THAT badly if you've continued working for them for 20 years since then.
Again, I love this man as a writer but as a person I'd sooner spit on him than shake his hand.
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
"Alan Moore is a fucking asshole."
Yeah, I take it back.
09/06/09
Christ, what a dick.
09/06/09
But -- and not that I've read a ton of interviews with him, so I may be mistaken -- there's also this certain personality type I've encountered before. These people are very smart, think out the reasons for doing what they're doing, and aren't interested in spending their time explaining themselves to other people or worrying that other people will think they're weird or rude. (Heinlein has some pretty prominent characters like this, probably most notably Lazarus Long.)
And when you actually get to know these people, you figure out that they're not assholes or especially arrogant -- like, they may realize they're smart and be confident in their abilities, but they don't expect special treatment. They're just not ever interested in going along to get along. And because so much of what most of us do involves a lot of unconscious kowtowing to other people's often silly desires, when you run into someone who doesn't act that way, they come off like a piece of shit.
I don't know what Alan Moore is like in person, obviously, and everyone is an asshole sometimes. I think he's said some stupid things. (Like, how does he, of all people, who's made a career out of reshaping other people's stories, get off saying that Watchmen can never work as anything but a comic book?) But I also think he might just be more concerned with his own shit than with worrying unduly about other people's opinions and that that gets mistaken for arrogance.
09/06/09
You do realize that this is actually the textbook definition of what an asshole is, right? And that you pretty much just admitted how much of an asshole Moore is while trying to defend him?
09/06/09
On the other hand, if someone, for example, wants some of your time and energy but wants you to, gosh, please do it this way -- I know it doesn't make any sense, but that's just how we've always done it! -- and you say, no, I'm sorry, I'm opting out now because I've only been blessed with a finite existence on this plane -- well, I don't think that's being an asshole, despite what the person who wanted your time and energy might think.
It's a blurry line, obviously, but I don't think people should be considered dicks for not suffering fools. Because that puts too much leverage on the fools' side. The test, to me, is: How does this person conduct themself otherwise? And from what I've read of Alan Moore, he seems to have thought pretty long and hard about why he does what he does, and, as evidenced with things like his concern for the Anglos above, he thinks about other people when the issue is more concrete than his own reputation.
09/06/09
Having the Marvelman re-print royalties THAT ARE LEGALLY MOORE'S be sent instead to the Marvelman creator is exemplary.
09/06/09
I still stand by my belief that Alan Moore is like a kid who cries about his sand castle being kicked over. He works for DC and Marvel despite the fact they've treated him like crap in the past because that's where the money is. At the same time, he wants total control over his work and if it doesn't turn out well, he just pretends like he never had anything to do with it.
He wants it both ways and it makes him look like an ass. Speaking of which, I've made myself look enough like one. Sorry, guys.
09/06/09
None of that makes him NOT an asshole. All of that is just you trying to rationalize a reason for being an asshole into existence. "Not suffering fools" is a pretty broad thing, and every piece of shit person I've ever met in my life has been of the habit of "not suffering fools". The problem is that even if your reasons are well thought out, even if you think you have the most solid of all possible opinions, that doesn't in any way mitigate the way in which you treat people.
Why are you defending Moore anyways? Why are you inventing convoluted reasons why he's actually some sort of really great, saint-like figure. Why can't you just like his work, and also admit that he's kind of a pompous dick? There's no law against the two co-existing. You don't have to dislike his work just because he's not a great guy.
09/06/09
I hang out with writers, I'd like to assure everyone that these two characteristics are not mutually exclusive.
09/06/09
Number one: We seem to have different definitions of what an "asshole" is. I think there's a difference, if often a subtle one, between an asshole and a decent person who doesn't suffer fools. I have met the latter kind of person, and I'm sorry you never have -- they're pretty interesting!
Number two: Difference in definitions notwithstanding, we're not talking about a permanent condition. I mean, everyone is an asshole sometimes. But to me, a genuine asshole is someone who consistently behaves like an asshole; to me, Moore seems like he can sound like an asshole but that insofar as real, concrete issues of fairness are concerned, he's very reasonable and even generous. I think, if you're going to label someone an all-out asshole, that yes, their behavior in other aspects of their life is admissible.
Number three: I hardly think I'm inventing convoluted reasons or treating him like a great, saintlike figure. I've presented my thoughts clearly, repeatedly acknowledged the subject of discussion's own inescapable imperfection, and admitted that I'm just making a guess about him based on other people I've met. Please, Peeps, you might not agree with me, but don't engage in hyperbole.
09/06/09
I don't honestly understand what you're trying to say. You seem to be saying "Alan Moore isn't an asshole, he's fair. And even if he is an asshole, everyone's an asshole so it's okay". It's such a hairy mouthful of a statement that I have to imagine that you're making it because Alan Moore is a big hero of yours. Which is okay. But you should know what it sounds like... It's like if I were to say "your honour, I didn't rob the store so it's not theft. And when I robbed the store, everyone else was robbing it too, so it's okay."
And there's a little bit of conflating the ideas of "fairness" and "being a dick". Even IF there's some grand, universal justice that Alan Moore is pursuing by just venting his spleen at the world, he's still "being a dick". Those are two really separate processes. From everything I'VE read, every interview Alan Moore has ever done has been laced with anger, bitterness, bile, regret... He's just a really unpleasant person and these days I usually try to avoid reading anything he says. I could just care less. If Moore were smart, he'd just stop giving interviews and concentrate on his work. It's like trying to read anything Doris Lessing says these days. It's so horrible and bitter that I just can't stomach it.
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
He wants it both ways and it makes him look like an ass.
It's true. Plus, he's batshit insane, so... social graces are kinda beyond him.
09/06/09
1) I think when you're famous, if you don't make a concerted effort to say nice things nearly all the time but share your honest disgruntlement -- the same disgruntlement many nonfamous people feel about many things -- you can get a reputation for being an asshole.
2) I personally think it's rather admirable and sadly rare to be honest rather than just say nice things.
3) There's a big, qualitative difference between saying contentious things in interviews and being an asshole to people in real life. I don't know of a wealth of evidence that Alan Moore has been an asshole in real life. (To reiterate: Maybe there is!) I acknowledged that he must certainly be an asshole sometimes because that's true of everyone, and because I don't feel like entertaining arguments that consist of "This one time, he said this." Because you can always find one time that someone said or did something assholey.
4) But! Upon further, albeit brief, review, I'm not even seeing much evidence of assholery in Moore's interviews. I just looked these up randomly -- I like his work a lot but am hardly a superfan and am interested in the argument here, not mounting a defense of him personally -- and I'm hard-pressed to find anything that matches his reputation as a Total Bastard:
[www.avclub.com]
[latimesblogs.latimes.com]
[www.guardian.co.uk]
[www.salon.com]
[www.wired.com]
The closest one I could find is here, where his ire is more or less expended entirely on faceless Hollywood executives -- i.e., exactly the same sentiments expressed by io9 commenters and thousands of other people every day, except more eloquently put.
As for Moore's comment that started this whole thread, read in context with his other interviews, it seems really clear to me that it's not arrogance so much as dryness. I just read a few thousand words of the guy speaking, and none of it came off as particularly bitter or horrible or unstomachable. Maybe you could point me to something else?
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
Once again: There's no dichotomous choice between a) being honest or b) saying nice things. That's a total fallacy. A person can be honest and frank about everything without necessarily being bitter about them. But Alan Moore is famously mean. He doesn't simply disagree with things, but burns them down. He didn't dislike the Watchmen movie, but instead "spat venom all over it" (which I recall being his words). The only reason he's never really called to task is because his work is extremely good. If you want quotes, go look them up yourself. That's not my job. They're out there.
Now I don't think it's necessarily bad that some people are jerks. The world needs them, from an aesthetic point of view. Just like it needs conflict, or jealousy, or any number of human vices. It's not my position that Moore should change. But don't wallpaper him into something he's not. Alexander Pope was one of history's great geniuses, but was also unremittingly angry. Nothing wrong with that. It just is what it is.
09/07/09
Because I don't like walking around thinking things that are wrong! Which is why I did, actually, go look his quotes up myself. And then provided links! I mean, I know Alan Moore is "famously mean," but if that's the case then it seems like I should have found some evidence of it after six interviews. (And again, we'll have to do better than "says really cruel things about movies," because otherwise nearly every commenter on this site is famously mean.)
So I put it to you. Not because it's your job (that would be a weird job), but because I thought you either, (a) with your certainty about his famous meanness, might offer evidence to back up the assertion, or (b) would be concerned enough about your intellectual honesty to want to check out whether you were maintaining something untrue in the face of plenty of contradictory evidence.
But hey, if you'd rather just assert that you're right (it's impossible that Moore's meanness could have been grossly exaggerated by the news media as a hook, after all), that's, y'know, whatever. Just please don't try to put it back on me -- I did some research. Tsk.
09/07/09
He didn't like working with Marvel or DC but that doesn't mean he wasn't happy for the work and experiance.
He wants to give his share to Angelo and I think that's admirable because he created the character after all and it's one of the all time classics of the UK comics industry. And it's not like he bemoans his relationship with Marvel and DC constantly. It's just "I didn't have a good time working with them, so I'd rather just leave it at that"
09/07/09
Now that I've mellowed the hell out, I'd probably want his autograph on his work. I just sort of see the interviews with him and he seems very bitchy.
09/06/09
Full of interesting ideas and disturbing images, it made me realize that the X-Men movies and WATCHMEN were't even coming close to the public reaction to a superhero, and to how someone with superpowers would actually affect our world.
It also led me to think about how the inhabitants of the New World felt when the first European explorers showed up on their shores with ships and guns and diseases. Surely it must be something like how people would react to Miracleman, who was a living god for all intents and purposes.
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
Gaiman's stuff afterwards--vignettes that extrapolate from a few lines of Moore's last issue-- are fascinating and of course well-written, but stories in a Utopia can be a tad dull (I hope that ain't a spoiler for you). The Gaiman stories were done with a wide variety of different artists and styles. He was leading up to something when Eclipse folded. Perhaps now we'll find out what.
09/06/09
Also, Moore is an excellent author/creator but godDAMN are statements like this "I mean, they're probably are enough books out there with my name on them to keep the comics industry afloat for a little bit longer" ever indicative of how far his head is up his own ass.
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/11/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
There aren't that many names in comics that can straight-up guarantee the number of readers -- including plenty who wouldn't usually bother picking up a comic -- Moore's would. Marvel would fall over itself to work with him again, and smile and nod at every rude thing he said about them.
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
09/06/09
07/25/09
When I read Miracleman long ago, I started to question how Superman relates to the citizens of Metropolis as anything except as crippled, fragile, animals; how vampires related to humans as anything except cattle; even how Doctor Who relates to his companions as anything except playthings. For that matter, how the ultra wealthy view the middle and lower economic classes. It changed my perception of much of the genre media I read and watch, and it is a theme I've since seen repeated many times in media ranging from the series TRUE BLOOD to books like BLINDSIGHT.
When a comic book changes your entire perception of the world: that's a good comic book.
And that's why I read Alan Moore.
07/25/09
As for going forward, any new stories are most welcome (although I admit I might be slightly more enthusiastic about the comic - at least until more information is released - if it were a Vertigo imprint).
07/25/09
07/25/09
The property is hot BECAUSE of the Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman runs. That's the main reason why this has been such a big deal for years, and that's the main reason Marvel went after it.
They may not be reprinting those runs right away, but I have no doubt it's in the pipeline.
As it turns out McFarlane never owned any of the rights to Moore's run. The rights were not a part of it when he bought out Eclipse. He thought they were, but as it turns out, all he owns are trademarks for the Miracleman logo from the 80's. Thus, Marvel used the original Marvelman logo from the Silver Age in their panel yesterday.
The only hurdle to cross is getting in contact with all the creators involved. Gaiman has been championing Marvelman going to Marvel for years now, so he won't be a problem. Mark Buckingham, either, as he was actually at the panel. Marvel just needs to talk to Alan Moore, Gary Leach, Chuck Austen, and whatever other creators were involved in the 80's to get their ok's..
Beyond that, I really don't see why McFarlane would be a problem. He could sue, which would delay it, but as it's been thrown out already once in court, I don't think it'd make a difference.
Alan Moore and Neil Gaiman's runs on the book ARE coming to Marvel, folks. Might take a year or two to materialize, but it'll happen.
In the meantime, we'll get the Silver Age stuff reprinted, and probably new stories..
Imagine new Marvelman stories by Millar/Hitch, or Paul Cornell and Alan Davis.. there's tons of potential.
07/25/09
07/25/09
07/25/09
07/25/09
For those that don't know the history of the character, hit up wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvelman
Moore's work is really great. I tend to prefer his earlier less flowery work to his more recent stuff and this is really great. Gaiman's work on it is also pretty good. I'm worried that if he does return it won't hold up since I haven't liked anything Gaiman's done since Sandman ended (actually the Brief Lives story arc was the last one I really liked).
How long before the movie is announced? The Wachowskis clearly like the comic as some scenes of Agent Smith in the last Matrix film are pretty direct "homages" to Kid Miracleman's first fight against Miracleman. (Calling the character Marvelman will take some getting used to. I guess I know how people in the UK felt!)
07/25/09
YEAH!
Bad News: It will be at Marvel.
Fudge!.
I suppose Marvel could not screw this up. Or... Marvelman could end up as yet another Ultimate Hero.
I
07/25/09
Considering Neil Gaiman's recent superhero work: 1602 and The Eternals, I don't really think that new Marvelman comics by Gaiman would be anything to cheer about.
07/25/09
All Gaiman would be doing, probably, is finishing his story from the Eclipse days. Not new ones.
07/27/09
07/25/09
Miracleman was one of the best comics ever.