>After decades of everyone and their mother attempting to "deconstruct" the superhero genre with their big edgy rework none of them have been as good, clinical or meaningful as WatchmenHow did he do it? Nothing in the whole subgenre of "lets take the piss out of superheros" compares in the slightest with this story
>>156116103The only way such a premise works is for shock value or artistic merit.Watchmen was one of the first of its kind, granting it the novelty that shock value needs to work, and was done by an incredible artist.Almost no future copies could say the same for themselves.
>>156116103>moore thread in 2026Because he can write really well and has an excellent understanding of comic books and their history, done, fuck off.
>>156116103He did it by mistake when it turned out Rorschach and his evil objectivism was the one shining beacon of morality that shined through an otherwise bleak and awful book. The thing about Deconstructions is that the people deconstructing a narrative trope need to love it genuinely in order to accurately deconstruct it. See Venture Bros.
Alan Moore isn't the virtuoso that midwits say he is but he's still several orders of magnitude more clever and intelligent than most capeshit writers.It's not so much that Watchmen is the "best" deconstruction so much as it is a deconstruction at all. As in, he thought critically about the superhero genre and actually managed to approach it from a new and interesting angle. Other "deconstructions" are just more capeslop but with extra gore, swearing and melodrama.
>>156116103Just read some books. Good writers are rare and often publishers go for the cheapest one. You hear very often that the big books or IPs were denied by the big publishers. Publishers often go the safest route with the most drawing by the numbers checkmarks.Give me Dave Gibbons, one good artist and colorists and i can give you at least two Watchmen books as good as Moores one. But they wont do that because i am just an anon not a nepo.
>>156116492Alan Moore is the best re-mixer, clever and a good storyteller.His best feature is that he put some extra mile in it to make your almonds work, while the others just put some extra visual “scare jumps“ in it like gore.
>>156116103Watchmen doesn't really speak to me anymore after years of capeshit fatigue. It "deconstructs" the genre but still takes it so deadly serious and ultimately does little to meaningfully challenge or subvert the form. For all its juvenile self-indulgence I think The Boys' total irreverence for the genre allowed it to cut deeper with its satire.
>>156117969bing marshal law, it's fun
>>156116441>He did it by mistakeNope.
>>156118170don't even reply to shit like that, seriously. No point.
>>156116103Alan Moore literally came out in an interview recently and just admitted Watchmen was just about his critiquing of comic writers and editorial at the time. It wasn't about superheros, it was about how writers and editorial treated comics as a medium.
Moore recently said something to the effect of Watchmen not being about making superheroes "dark" or "grounded" but moreso an exercise in the form of the medium. If you re-read it focusing on all the breadcrumbs he leaves for the larger story he's telling, the interplay between text and art, even page lauouts, you can tell he's trying to push the capabilities of the medium forward, to create a more dense and enriching reading experience. And in addition to that you get a solid plot, stellar world building, an the foundational elements of a good story. The problem is no one really tried to outdo him on a craft level. Even the brainy indie comics, or artsy euro comics, they can all do great things, but they don't really engage with the form of comics itself, or expand on what the medium is capable of.There's a great moment in this Scott Walker documentary where Brian Eno is listening to Nightflights and was saying something like "this is where music was going, and it was supposed to keep going further out. Instead you still have bands today just copying Roxy Music." As in, he's dejected that he, Eno himself, is still a highwater mark for progressive music, when he should have been surpassed ten times over. I get the sense that Moore feels the same about his contributions to comics, like someone was supposed to one up him the way he one upped everyone who came before him, but it just never happened.
>>156117797I'm doing a bit of writing myself, and remixing is pretty hard to avoid. Everything's been done in some form or another. You read something 10 years ago? It'll come out of you in something you think is original 10 years later. The stuff that seems more original is either autobiographical or it's half-baked crap, but most things are traceable to something that exists.Many times I get an idea, find out someone already did and fully worked it out, so I feel forced to acknowledge it or incorporate it.
>>156117969I feel the opposite. It's one of the few I still enjoy. I don't hate The Boys, it has its moments, but it doesn't cut very deep. The superhero parts have always felt a tad superficial.>>156117979It's pretty funny, yeah.
>>156117969I can understand when you think that about Watchmen. But saying The Boys subverts it more? Thats a bold thing to say. And hard to compare it. Watchmen criticises the society and humans, the boys criticise corporation and PR.
>>156118315>Brian Enohttps://youtu.be/AAXUCNHVRW4
>>156118315Yeah people get hung up on the deconstruction part or story but those only sing because of his understanding of the medium which also includes the physical means of production. The fact that so many conversations on this keep drifting into superficial genre critiques does a disservice to the fundamental aspects of why Watchmen endures while others fail. Though I get that it's fun to talk about edgy superheroes or how awesome Rorschach is. I think it would be more interesting to think about what a "successor" would be like in terms of craft rather than laser focusing on genre alone as is often the case.
>>156116103>How did he do it?Because he didn't
>>156120257He did, though.
>>156116103Because he's the best writer in comics by far and also because he's willing to address the right wing political aspects of superheroes that most other liberal hack superhero loving writers are unwilling to address.
>>156117755>Give me Dave Gibbons, one good artist and colorists and i can give you at least two Watchmen books as good as Moores one.Bold statement.
>>156121608I know. But sometimes you need to be bold. And we are on /co/, so i can do that very easily.
>>156118254How? There is t any obvious critic. Or does he mean like showing what you could with the medium?
>>156118193Sage advice but god its hard not to.
why do people hate deconstruction again?are people so fundamentally incurious that they do not want to look at the reasons why superheroes work or dont work?
>>156122843Most deconstruction are over used or use it for cheap gimmicks. Most are done by bad writers.
>>156118254You know how he made Rorschach as kinda an homage to Steve Ditko? Or how he talks about superhero comics be a fetish, and then a whole bunch of characters in Watchmen get off to people in costume? Like that.
>>156122743I (you)ed the wrong guy. lulHere's my reply in a convoluted way. I call that progressing the medium. >>156123451Bitch
>>156122843>that they do not want to look at the reasons why superheroes work or dont work?It's been done a bunch of times and people are bored of it now that's allDeconstructions need something both interesting and engaging to say, many fail at doing the latter nowadays
Watchmen’s been talked about to death people need to talk about Moore’s actual masterpiece.
>>156122843>why do people hate deconstruction again?First, to actually deconstruct something you have to engage with it deeply and have the skill to put it back together in a way that is incorrect but equally functional. This could be reasonably described as mastery and is almost entirely absent from most things labeled as a deconstruction. This brings me to the second point, which is that the word "deconstruction" itself has been so wantonly abused that it has ceased to have any implication more profound than "parody" or "satire" to most people, even earnest people. Nobody knows what the word means so it gets applied incorrectly even in good faith.
>>156123541Superheroes and the end of the world are more appealing to comic book readers in general than Jack the Ripper and psychogeography.
>>156122843Because the endgame of every succesful deconstruction is replacing the previous status quo.
>>156123632That shit has been the same since the CCA.
>>156116103I could fill a textbook with things to say about this comic. For now, I will say just this: it's cool.
>>156117969The Boys is more shallow than Watchmen. And I say this as someone who liked a lot more of The Boys than I thought I would.
>>156116103I think the attemps at "reconstruction" have failed too, including Moore's attempts. Watchmen was too good.
>>156118594All human creation is iterative. Your goal is not to make something that doesn't rip off of others, it's to make something that other people will want to rip off.
>>156116103I always thought that blood splatter looked more like strawberry jam...
>>156123541You mean V for Vendetta? Besides From Hell is good. But thats “just“ a horror thriller with little meat on the easteregg bone. I mean there is no deeper or artistic happening on the panels. It uses the 9 panel grid but the panels just follows the common thriller view angles.
It's more like decades of people who don't read anything other than DC events and elseworlds huffing their own farts and insisting watchmen is the greatest comic ever. Dredd, Miracleman and Marshal Law are obviously more interesting comics but that doesn't matter when you've already accepted the premise that Watchmen is an unassailable masterpiece.
>>156118254>>156122743>>156123451It makes a lot of sense even after a few seconds of thinking>Rorschach is Ditko, but moreover he's the creator who strongly abides by his work and beliefs. Moore is fascinated by this sort of person and respects them even if he's different in his beliefs. >Dan is the fanboy writer, who have always been around in some degree from the start, but really boomed in the 70's and 80's. He has a deep attachment to the genre and knows a lot of it to the point of fetish. With the increasing use of sex in comic stories by then, I can see Moore using him to ponder if it's a kink these people have. >Edward Blake /The Comedian is the old industry vet who's sort of dubious and has some shady ties, like Vince Coletta who had mob ties. He represents the murky side of the comic business, the underhanded sabotage techniques, the mob connection with distribution, the exploitation and use of others for gain, and yet a lot of these people were important figures and legends. Come to think of it, with his thick mustache and grin, he isn't too far from a buff Stan Lee, is he?>Manhattan is questionable, but I can see him as perhaps a publishing house itself>Veidt/Ozymandias is the business driven editor for whom these characters and books are just tools and who's main interest in profit and making things move. He will get results even if it means creators lose jobs and the art suffers. As long as books prosper in sales, that's his chief concern. >Laurie is the girl in the boys club. Capable enough but due to her position a lot of what she is revolves around defining herself as The Woman. She quickly gets scooped up as a point of romance for various men as well, something not uncommon in the industry either. Inevitably having a woman around can be a disruptive element which is why the fanboy creative, Dan, gravitates towards her.
For all the contrarian beliefs 4chan holds im surprised no one here recognizes Watchmen is poorly written and easily the most overrated comic ever written. Alan more is a hack whose only appeal is to r/iamverysmart weirdos. He is an author with a terminal case of needing to touch grass that writes stories for people that need to touch grass.
>>156128345i don't even like moore but go back
>>156127288I like all of those comics, but Watchmen is easily the best of them.
>>156128433Ive been here at least a decade longer than you, and Moore is retarddit incarnate. Kys retard
>>156127685To me, Manhattan was representing the pretentious fuck with his head too far up his ass. Started as a nobody, reached fame and claim that went to his head, started being a toxic fuck to everyone around him, loses touch with his audience, then goes through a semi redemption art to literally "create something new" with his newfound inspiration.
>>156116103>How did he do it?it was new at the time and Gen X can never stop overhyping the media the consumed in their childhood
>>156127685Manhattan as the publishing house makes the most sense with this line
>>156129244Go back, newfag.
>>156129693>Gen X You mean nerds!
>>156128345Moore is the most hated writer on /co/, newfag.
>>156131291Oh yeah, Swamp Thing was a cool, interesting character before Moore fixed him
>>156125785Sometimes that's all that needs to be said
>>156127288It is. But none says that Marshal Law, Dredd or Miracle Man isnt good too. Dredd and Marshal Law arnt subtile. And Miracle Man doesnt has that much too discuss like Watchmen.
>>156131291Thats Bendis, Geoff Johns and Tom King.
>>156116103Watchmen was Moore taking the piss out of a very specific C-lister team he grew up reading, along with his takes on politics and philosophy and whatnot. Stuff like his Swamp Thing run were him adding his love of the occult in an occult character. The key is that he wanted to elevate these stories with new concepts, not just take them down, no matter what sensitive fanboys believe. The reason the Dark Age resulted in so much crap was that not only not everyone had the same baggage as him or Morrison and Gaiman, but also he wasn't the only person who started the deconstruction wave. Frank Miller and the Image Comics crowd did far more damage and were more influential than Moore ever was because for them the "deconstruction" began and ended with "what if batman KILLED PEOPLE and HAD LOTS OF SEX and FIRED BIG GUNS and USED DARKNESS POWERS".
>>156116412spbp
>>156131610Swamp Thing as a Man-turned-monster was a better angle than than the plant-entity. The writing for Moore's era was much better, but it left the character a shell, no one really cares about a walking salad. he justmends up some boring navel gazing thing talking about the Green and nature's balance and stupid shit
>>156132737I think the Dark Age happened because people aped the 80s storytelling but had a shallow understanding or talent.
Doomsday Clock was better. It predicted this stand off with Putin
>>156127685Interesting idea. That works because all characters are tropes/steroetypes/concepts and those can be found in many genres or applied to.What if Dr Manhattan is the artist? He has to follow the script of the writer?
