Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Moore Slams V For Vendetta film, Pulls LoEG from DC Comics

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Typhoid_Mary
    Little Voice
    • Jun 2004
    • 541

    Moore Slams V For Vendetta film, Pulls LoEG from DC Comics
  • DeeCrowSeer
    Eternal Champion
    • Feb 2004
    • 2214

    Good for him! Considering some of the cinematic dross that has been spawned in his name, it's about time he drew a line in the sand.

    What still annoys me is when film reviewers refer to something as being "comic book" as if that implied inferiority or crudeness, whereas (in the case of so many adaptations) the film version is often the crudest and most simplistic rendering of the idea or story involved. I love the cinema, I really do, but their are financial constraints on films with special FX that don't constrain a comic book artist. It costs as much to draw a spaceship as it does to draw a toaster, so you can draw a comic about spaceships aimed at a marginal audience... a film about spaceships, if you wnat them to look good, has to be aimed at the widest possible audience, and for some reason that translates in film producers' head to mean that it should be mediocre swill.

    Rant, rant, rant. Gnash.
    "That which does not kill us, makes us stranger." - Trevor Goodchild


    • Typhoid_Mary
      Little Voice
      • Jun 2004
      • 541

      V for Vendetta script review on Ain't It Cool News:

      Joe Michael Straczynski's V for Vendetta script review:


      • McTalbayne
        Eternal Companion
        • Jan 2004
        • 557

        JMS likes it apparently.
        It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But the half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.


        • Peasily
          Corsair of the Second Ether
          • Feb 2005
          • 80

          It is mind-boggling how they think. They'll look at something stylish like his League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, say among themselves "now that would great on the screen," and then proceed to film something vaguely--if not at all--like the original work, thereby alienating the built-in audience. Bizarre.


          • David Mosley
            Eternal Administrator
            • Jul 2004
            • 11823

            But that 'built-in' audience is incredibly small compared to the audience that the studio wish to reach with their movie.

            It like when Russell T. Davies, Executive Producer for Doctor Who, said he wasn't making the new show for the 'built-in' audience of existing fans, since if they didn't like it they'd only watch it 20 times instead of 30. He was more concerned (correctly imo) to make something that appealed to 7m non-fans who had never heard of, or watched, Dr Who previously.

            To be honest Moore's attitude confuses me somewhat since when I interviewed him in 1991 and we discussed the possibility of a movie version of Watchmen he said he saw it as kind of like selling your children to the gypses. If you were prepared, he said, to sell the film rights to your work then it didn't make a lot of sense to complain when the film-makers mucked about with it. The original comics would continue to exist and would always be the 'definitive' version, all a movie could hope to be is an 'interpretation' of the original.

            That attitude is in line with his recent decision not to accept monies from the sale of the film rights (all his residuals go to the artist(s)) and to have his name taken off the credits. It's a kind of distancing of oneself from the eventual film without disadvantaging your co-creator(s). (Moore used to block the reprinting of his Captain Britain strips because he'd fallen out with Marvel Comics, but relented because he didn't feel it was right that his personal problems with Marvel should 'harm' the artists, who might need the royalties that would result.)

            As I understand it, the current disagreement over the film is to do with comments made by Joel Silver at a press conference that he, Moore, was supporting how the film was being developed, which Moore felt misrepresented his actual feelings. He asked for Silver to withdraw the remarks and when Silver refused (I guess he wanted all the Moore-fanboys on his side or something) Moore decided to walk away.

            Which has always been Alan Moore's attitude whenever he doesn't get his own way.
            _"For an eternity Allard was alone in an icy limbo where all the colours were bright and sharp and comfortless.
            _For another eternity Allard swam through seas without end, all green and cool and deep, where distorted creatures drifted, sometimes attacking him.
            _And then, at last, he had reached the real world – the world he had created, where he was God and could create or destroy whatever he wished.
            _He was supremely powerful. He told planets to destroy themselves, and they did. He created suns. Beautiful women flocked to be his. Of all men, he was the mightiest. Of all gods, he was the greatest."


            • Guest's Avatar

              He's possibly also irritated by the script, and by getting burned over the whole "League..." movie lawsuit.


              Alan gave some details about bits of the V For Vendetta shooting script he'd seen. "It was imbecilic; it had plot holes you couldn't have got away with in Whizzer And Chips in the nineteen sixties. Plot holes no one had noticed."

              What Moore found most laughable however were the details. "They don't know what British people have for breakfast, they couldn't be bothered. 'Eggy in a basket' apparently. Now the US have 'eggs in a basket,' which is fried bread with a fried egg in a hole in the middle. I guess they thought we must eat that as well, and thought 'eggy in a basket' was a quaint and Olde Worlde version. And they decided that the British postal service is called Fedco. They'll have thought something like, 'well, what's a British version of FedEx... how about FedCo? A friend of mine had to point out to them that the Fed, in FedEx comes from 'Federal Express.' America is a federal republic, Britain is not."




              • Talisant
                Champion of the Balance
                • Dec 2003
                • 1299

                Originally posted by Anonymous
                Now the US have 'eggs in a basket,' which is fried bread with a fried egg in a hole in the middle.
                a.k.a uncle toast :up:
                "A man is no man who cannot have a fried mackerel when he has set his mind on it; and more especially when he has money in his pocket to pay for it." - E.A. Poe's NICHOLAS DUNKS; OR, FRIED MACKEREL FOR DINNER