Alan Moore books. What did you like? What didn't you like?

[Mr 9.8]

It's unfortunate that the majority of you have probably not read much (or any) of the early stuff he did for 2000AD.

 

Next to Watchmen, The Ballad of Halo Jones is the best thing he's written, in my opinion.

 

I'm going to put it in bold caps because I really think it needs more attention:

THE BALLAD OF HALO JONES

 

There we go. Any fan of Moore should pick it up, you won't regret it.

I'm happy to say I've read pretty much all of Moore's 2000Ad works except that one. I'm always meaning to pick up the trade, but always get something else.

[Ken Aldred]

It's unfortunate that the majority of you have probably not read much (or any) of the early stuff he did for 2000AD.

 

Next to Watchmen, The Ballad of Halo Jones is the best thing he's written, in my opinion.

 

I'm going to put it in bold caps because I really think it needs more attention:

THE BALLAD OF HALO JONES

 

There we go. Any fan of Moore should pick it up, you won't regret it.

 

+1

 

Great story, not that keen on Ian Gibson's artwork.

 

I was having too much fun 'scraping the barrel' and thought I'd leave it for another Brit to mention.

 

I'm not greedy.

[dupont2005]

When did you first read Watchmen?

I think 2013

[dupont2005]

It's unfortunate that the majority of you have probably not read much (or any) of the early stuff he did for 2000AD.

 

Next to Watchmen, The Ballad of Halo Jones is the best thing he's written, in my opinion.

 

I'm going to put it in bold caps because I really think it needs more attention:

THE BALLAD OF HALO JONES

 

There we go. Any fan of Moore should pick it up, you won't regret it.

I've read very little 2000ad at all, but what I have read I had liked. I doubt any Moore was in the issues I stumbled upon though, they were more recent than that. But it's a very high quality anthology. Just comes out too often and priced too high for me to even attempt to keep up.

[Prince Namor]

When did you first read Watchmen?

I think 2013

 

Yeah, I suppose it's a lot like picking up Sgt. Pepper by the Beatles in 1995 and listening to three songs and saying, "What was the big deal about these guys?"

 

 

[InvstmntComcSuply]

I know a lot of people hate Alan Moore because he dares to speak bad about the people who own the intellectual property they love so dear, but I agree with pretty much everything he says regarding the industry. Having said that, not a huge fan of his work. I don't find it bad, just average. Not worthy of the acclaim it receives. I admit, I have only read a small sample of his work, mostly because I think Stormwatch is garbage no matter who is writing it, and Moore spent so much of his career on the kind of drek unworthy of a truly great writer. And that's why I think he gets so much acclaim. People who are used to the kinds of things Marvel and DC normally publish, and actually think that stuff is good, they see Watchmen and their minds are blown, because it's not completely stupid. He "deconstructed superheroes" by making people have motivations for their actions, by showing heroes aren't perfect, and villains aren't 100% pure distilled evil for the sake of being evil. Common things in every other type of storytelling, but apparently hadn't been done in superhero comics before.

 

Watchmen I found to be average in quality. Not bad, but not what I was promised would be the best thing any comic lover could ever hope to read. I won't be finishing that series.

 

I agree with dupont

I did finish Watchmen, but was sorely disappointed. Was not enjoyable as literature and horrific to slog through as a comic.

 

Miracleman was significantly better.

[dupont2005]

When did you first read Watchmen?

I think 2013

 

Yeah, I suppose it's a lot like picking up Sgt. Pepper by the Beatles in 1995 and listening to three songs and saying, "What was the big deal about these guys?"

 

Except that's not what I said when I listened to SGT Pepper, or when I read other great comics from the Golden Age and beyond.

 

When I look at Eisner's Spirit, I can clearly see he was ahead of his time. I can see it in the context of other Golden Age comics, like Detective and Action, and tell the difference in quality. I can look at something like Came The Dawn in the context of the time and see that things like tolerating Jews and interracial dating was scandalous in the 1950's and brave of a comic publisher to take that stance, even though it's the default position of most people who would make their opinion public today.

 

When I look at Watchmen, in the context of Love And Rockets and Cerebus and plenty of other great comics that were created around that time, created years earlier and still on the stands at that time, or created and ended decades prior, I don't see what the big deal is. UNLESS I'm looking at it strictly in the context of other DC superhero comics, which in my opinion were garbage anyway, so one being sort of alright compared to garbage is better, but still not a mind blowing experience for me. I can't imagine in 1987 it would have been a mind blowing experience for anyone who had already expanded their horizons beyond Avengers and Justice League. I suspect that those hailing it as the greatest comic story ever told are the ones that never looked past the Big Two offerings on the stands. The first time they read a comic that didn't have a target demographic of ten year old boys. I can easily say that when I first read The Maxx as a young kid I felt the same way. Is The Maxx a game changing comic? Not really. It's better than the rest of the Image launch titles, holds up pretty well. At the time, when I had never had any experience with slice-of-life alternative comic drama, did it introduce me to something completely new and unexpected? Yeah. Someone who had been reading Peter Bagge and Harvey Pekar for years at that point may have been less impressed though. Or may have never picked it up in the first place, since it was a purple spandex muscleman with claws from the publisher that brought you Youngblood and WildC.A.T.S.

 

When you read a Carl Barks duck story it's not just good for the time. It's good. Better than many that followed. Some may say better than ANY that followed. It's a quality comic. It's timeless, and needs no context in order to be great. It stands on it's own legs today. Now, will it change your life? No, but nobody is placing it on that pedestal either. Just that it's a solid, enjoyable comic that kids and adults will love.

 

Now, when someone who had been listening to Chuck Berry for years finally heard all this new "Rock & Roll" music they may not have been as impressed as the rest of the world when Beatlemania hit.

[kidcolt]

I enjoyed Watchmen and Superman annual 11. I have not read From Hell but I am a big fan of the Jack the Ripper stuff so one of these days I will have to buy the trade and read it. I loved the LOEG and V movies, never owned the books.

[Comicopolis]

[Comicopolis]

[The_Endless]

From Hell

[Bird]

Okay since no one, not one, of you seconded my mention of the Carlos D'Anda drawn Mr. Majestic story I assume no one read it. It is smokin'. A great story written by a master of the form and you should all go find it and read it. Officially it is Wildstorm Spotlight 1 from 1997. As I said earlier, the story is about the end of the Universe and is titled "The Big Chill". If you enjoy comics find this and read it, you will enjoy it I promise.

 

And my favorite Swamp Thing story by Alan Moore is about the underwater town that isn't quite dead yet. Constantine manipulating Swamp Thing in one of the most horrific stories I have read in comics, a true nightmare on the page.

[james1miller]

I thought Killing Joke was just OK. I tried #20, #21 and 1 or 2 other issues of Swamp Thing but couldn't get into it at all. I thought the writing was good but just couldn't get into the characters or the story.

 

Anyone read Skizz? It was in 2000 AD. I might try that soon.

 

I'm gonna try some stuff in Across The Universe The DC Universe Stories Of Alan Moore. Might try The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen vol 1 or The Courtyard and or Neonomicon

 

 

[ComicConnoisseur]

When did you first read Watchmen?

I think 2013

 

Yeah, I suppose it's a lot like picking up Sgt. Pepper by the Beatles in 1995 and listening to three songs and saying, "What was the big deal about these guys?"

 

Except that's not what I said when I listened to SGT Pepper, or when I read other great comics from the Golden Age and beyond.

 

When I look at Eisner's Spirit, I can clearly see he was ahead of his time. I can see it in the context of other Golden Age comics, like Detective and Action, and tell the difference in quality. I can look at something like Came The Dawn in the context of the time and see that things like tolerating Jews and interracial dating was scandalous in the 1950's and brave of a comic publisher to take that stance, even though it's the default position of most people who would make their opinion public today.

 

When I look at Watchmen, in the context of Love And Rockets and Cerebus and plenty of other great comics that were created around that time, created years earlier and still on the stands at that time, or created and ended decades prior, I don't see what the big deal is. UNLESS I'm looking at it strictly in the context of other DC superhero comics, which in my opinion were garbage anyway, so one being sort of alright compared to garbage is better, but still not a mind blowing experience for me. I can't imagine in 1987 it would have been a mind blowing experience for anyone who had already expanded their horizons beyond Avengers and Justice League. I suspect that those hailing it as the greatest comic story ever told are the ones that never looked past the Big Two offerings on the stands. The first time they read a comic that didn't have a target demographic of ten year old boys. I can easily say that when I first read The Maxx as a young kid I felt the same way. Is The Maxx a game changing comic? Not really. It's better than the rest of the Image launch titles, holds up pretty well. At the time, when I had never had any experience with slice-of-life alternative comic drama, did it introduce me to something completely new and unexpected? Yeah. Someone who had been reading Peter Bagge and Harvey Pekar for years at that point may have been less impressed though. Or may have never picked it up in the first place, since it was a purple spandex muscleman with claws from the publisher that brought you Youngblood and WildC.A.T.S.

 

When you read a Carl Barks duck story it's not just good for the time. It's good. Better than many that followed. Some may say better than ANY that followed. It's a quality comic. It's timeless, and needs no context in order to be great. It stands on it's own legs today. Now, will it change your life? No, but nobody is placing it on that pedestal either. Just that it's a solid, enjoyable comic that kids and adults will love.

 

Now, when someone who had been listening to Chuck Berry for years finally heard all this new "Rock & Roll" music they may not have been as impressed as the rest of the world when Beatlemania hit.

The Beatles did what Alan Moore did and reinvented an art form.

They made others see rock and comics in a new light.

The Beatles and Alan Moore are the gold standards.

[oakman29]

When did you first read Watchmen?

I think 2013

 

Yeah, I suppose it's a lot like picking up Sgt. Pepper by the Beatles in 1995 and listening to three songs and saying, "What was the big deal about these guys?"

 

Except that's not what I said when I listened to SGT Pepper, or when I read other great comics from the Golden Age and beyond.

 

When I look at Eisner's Spirit, I can clearly see he was ahead of his time. I can see it in the context of other Golden Age comics, like Detective and Action, and tell the difference in quality. I can look at something like Came The Dawn in the context of the time and see that things like tolerating Jews and interracial dating was scandalous in the 1950's and brave of a comic publisher to take that stance, even though it's the default position of most people who would make their opinion public today.

 

When I look at Watchmen, in the context of Love And Rockets and Cerebus and plenty of other great comics that were created around that time, created years earlier and still on the stands at that time, or created and ended decades prior, I don't see what the big deal is. UNLESS I'm looking at it strictly in the context of other DC superhero comics, which in my opinion were garbage anyway, so one being sort of alright compared to garbage is better, but still not a mind blowing experience for me. I can't imagine in 1987 it would have been a mind blowing experience for anyone who had already expanded their horizons beyond Avengers and Justice League. I suspect that those hailing it as the greatest comic story ever told are the ones that never looked past the Big Two offerings on the stands. The first time they read a comic that didn't have a target demographic of ten year old boys. I can easily say that when I first read The Maxx as a young kid I felt the same way. Is The Maxx a game changing comic? Not really. It's better than the rest of the Image launch titles, holds up pretty well. At the time, when I had never had any experience with slice-of-life alternative comic drama, did it introduce me to something completely new and unexpected? Yeah. Someone who had been reading Peter Bagge and Harvey Pekar for years at that point may have been less impressed though. Or may have never picked it up in the first place, since it was a purple spandex muscleman with claws from the publisher that brought you Youngblood and WildC.A.T.S.

 

When you read a Carl Barks duck story it's not just good for the time. It's good. Better than many that followed. Some may say better than ANY that followed. It's a quality comic. It's timeless, and needs no context in order to be great. It stands on it's own legs today. Now, will it change your life? No, but nobody is placing it on that pedestal either. Just that it's a solid, enjoyable comic that kids and adults will love.

 

Now, when someone who had been listening to Chuck Berry for years finally heard all this new "Rock & Roll" music they may not have been as impressed as the rest of the world when Beatlemania hit.

The Beatles did what Alan Moore did and reinvented an art form.

They made others see rock and comics in a new light.

The Beatles and Alan Moore are the gold standards.

 

Bravo!

[Prince Namor]

When did you first read Watchmen?

I think 2013

 

Yeah, I suppose it's a lot like picking up Sgt. Pepper by the Beatles in 1995 and listening to three songs and saying, "What was the big deal about these guys?"

 

Except that's not what I said when I listened to SGT Pepper, or when I read other great comics from the Golden Age and beyond.

 

When I look at Eisner's Spirit, I can clearly see he was ahead of his time. I can see it in the context of other Golden Age comics, like Detective and Action, and tell the difference in quality. I can look at something like Came The Dawn in the context of the time and see that things like tolerating Jews and interracial dating was scandalous in the 1950's and brave of a comic publisher to take that stance, even though it's the default position of most people who would make their opinion public today.

 

When I look at Watchmen, in the context of Love And Rockets and Cerebus and plenty of other great comics that were created around that time, created years earlier and still on the stands at that time, or created and ended decades prior, I don't see what the big deal is.

 

How could you? In your own words you only read half of Watchmen and none of Miracleman. If I watched half of the movie Usual Suspects and said, "What's the big deal?", obviously part of it would be the ending as a huge part of what that movie would be about. How could I truly comment on it without having watched it all?

 

When I look at Cerebus, a book that I never really followed, I don't get it, but I understand I don't get it, because I haven't READ it. I'd read an issue here and there, but for me to truly understand it, I need to get into more than THAT. It'd be somewhat strange for me to critique it, if I haven't read it.

 

You speak of what you 'believe' Alan Moore's deconstruction is all about, but it's based on pure speculation, because you haven't read it.

 

You make comment of his work on 'Stormwatch', a book he's never written, and 'how so much of his American work is Spawn and Supreme and Glory and Youngblood', which just isn't true.

 

You may not like Alan Moore, but you've nowhere near read the best of Alan Moore. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but to compare it to other work you've read in full seems a bit lopsided.

 

UNLESS I'm looking at it strictly in the context of other DC superhero comics, which in my opinion were garbage anyway, so one being sort of alright compared to garbage is better, but still not a mind blowing experience for me. I can't imagine in 1987 it would have been a mind blowing experience for anyone who had already expanded their horizons beyond Avengers and Justice League. I suspect that those hailing it as the greatest comic story ever told are the ones that never looked past the Big Two offerings on the stands. The first time they read a comic that didn't have a target demographic of ten year old boys.

 

What else would you compare it to? It was a mainstream comic. You choose to compare it to Love and Rockets and Cerebus, two of the greatest examples of non-mainstream comics, but how is that fair? Alan Moore was a writer only, not a writer/artist, and he worked within the mainstream of comic publishing for DC Comics.

 

Swamp Thing wasn't a superhero book, wasn't approached by Alan Moore that way, and probably had a lot to do with the the eventual thought process behind the Vertigo line. The Big Two didn't do books like that as a part of their regular line of comics. It's MAINSTREAM success helped pave the way for books like Gaiman's Sandman.

 

As much as I favor Love and Rockets (Jaimie's stuff mostly) to almost anything, it is a niche market, who's long term commitment to it's standard's has built up a great following, it still probably never sold anywhere close to what some of the even smaller Vertigo books sold.

 

I can understand those who prefer the simpler style stories not liking Moore's work, but you're criticizing him (without completely reading the best of his work completely) for wanting to improve the quality of story in mainstream comics, because his work doesn't compare to that of the greatest independent comics of the same generation.

 

Plus you're comparing him to artists. Moore doesn't have a defined look for his work that follows him in everything he does, and it IS a visual medium. As much as he tries to control the look of the work, he doesn't have a specific style that follows him to each project.

 

I can easily say that when I first read The Maxx as a young kid I felt the same way. Is The Maxx a game changing comic? Not really. It's better than the rest of the Image launch titles, holds up pretty well. At the time, when I had never had any experience with slice-of-life alternative comic drama, did it introduce me to something completely new and unexpected? Yeah. Someone who had been reading Peter Bagge and Harvey Pekar for years at that point may have been less impressed though. Or may have never picked it up in the first place, since it was a purple spandex muscleman with claws from the publisher that brought you Youngblood and WildC.A.T.S.

 

He's an artist.

 

When you read a Carl Barks duck story it's not just good for the time. It's good. Better than many that followed. Some may say better than ANY that followed.

 

He's an artist.

 

It's a quality comic. It's timeless, and needs no context in order to be great. It stands on it's own legs today.

 

It does? You're saying that if it was released as something brand new today, it would be viewed as visionary? I think not...

 

Now, will it change your life? No, but nobody is placing it on that pedestal either. Just that it's a solid, enjoyable comic that kids and adults will love.

 

And some feel that way about Watchmen, without any context. Most who make a decision on it either way have at least read it all the way through.

 

 

[dupont2005]

Keith wrote The Maxx.

 

Barks wrote most (if not all) his Duck stories. They were writer/artists. Pulling double duty. I was speaking about both comics in context of storytelling, not illustration.

 

What else would I compare Watchmen to? Other things on the stand at the time. Plenty of great comics existed before Watchmen.

 

And what exactly made it mainstream in 1987? Being direct market exclusive, featuring no recognizable characters, and being for mature readers only? It was pretty far from mainstream. The only things making it mainstream was him being on as writer and DC being publisher. The comic could have just as easily been published at any number of companies at the time. And regardless of what it made people think of comics, that has nothing to do with the contents.

 

And I didn't say Barks comics were Visionary. I said they were quality enjoyable comics. And they are released today, internationally, to much acclaim. Selling millions of copies. A much larger audience than Watchmen for sure.

 

 

Now, if people were saying Watchmen was solid and enjoyable, I wouldn't have any bone to pick with the statement. When they act like it's the greatest thing to ever happen to comics, that's another matter. It's average work. Even in the context of the time, average. Just put on a pedestal by people who up until that point had read nothing but below average stuff.

[SquareChaos]

I am pretty sure that I am nowhere near as well versed as Dupont is on the indie scene of the late 80s, but I am hard pressed to believe that a book of the scope and execution of Watchmen is somehow barely worthy of being noticed in comparison to other indie offerings.

 

It honestly boggles the mind - if it is considered mediocre, please point me to the incredibly well designed and executed stories that overshadow it.

 

Issue #4 still stands as one of the high water marks of individual issues as far as I am concerned - indie or otherwise.

[SquareChaos]

Now, if people were saying Watchmen was solid and enjoyable, I wouldn't have any bone to pick with the statement. When they act like it's the greatest thing to ever happen to comics, that's another matter. It's average work. Even in the context of the time, average. Just put on a pedestal by people who up until that point had read nothing but below average stuff.

 

So you're saying if I randomly pick comics off of a rack in 1987, I can expect half of them to be better than Watchmen?

 

[Ryan.]

I like all of those things, each in their own way.