V For Vendetta

[©brad]

from imdb:

V For Vendetta creator Alan Moore is desperate to be disassociated from the screen adaptation of his classic comic strip - and is begging the producers not to credit him for his work. The cartoonist, who also conceived From Hell and The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen, hates seeing his work diluted by movie-makers, and refuses to put his name to the result. He says, "I want them to say, 'We're not going to give you any money for your work, you're not going to get any credit for it and we're not going to put your name on it.' To see a line of dialogue or a character that I have poured that much emotional involvement into, to see them casually travestied and watered down and distorted... it's kind of painful. It's much better just to avoid them altogether."

Ouch!
i'm kinda glad i skipped this. i'll definitely rent it though

huh...

well whatever. the weirdo should be happy his work is even getting made in the first place.

[Split Infinitive]

huh...

well whatever. the weirdo should be happy his work is even getting made in the first place.

Are you serious?  Why should it necessarily be pleasing to an artist who specializes in one medium that his or her work is being adapted into another medium?  Especially if that adaptation is missing the point of the artist's original work?  The way you phrased that makes it seem like Moore should be incredibly honored that his work was deigned worthy to be made into film.

[snaporaz]

if the guy believes movie adaptations can't work, oh well. i thought this movie kicked ass.

so...did this movie actually use miniatures instead of cg?

[Pubrick]

well whatever. the weirdo should be happy his work is even getting made in the first place.

why? he doesn't need hollywood or whatever transexuals besmirching his work's already-brilliant status.

anyway it's already common knowledge that alan moore hates his adaptations. and rightly so.

EDIT: split infinitive said it better.

[ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ]

Why does Moore allow his films to be adapted, then?  Looking at the track record From Hell was slaughtered, LoEG was well... the book kind of sucked, but V for Vendetta was cut up a little, too.  Will we never see any more Moore adaptations or will he continue to grumble through them?

He said in an interview that he wrote for the art of it, if he wrote for money then he would've penned the Robocop screenplays like he was asked to.  How the hell would that have turned out if he had?

[modage]

He said in an interview that he wrote for the art of it, if he wrote for money then he would've penned the Robocop screenplays like he was asked to.  How the hell would that have turned out if he had?

not much better.  frank miller was involved with Robocop 2 & 3.

[©brad]

huh...

well whatever. the weirdo should be happy his work is even getting made in the first place.

Are you serious?  Why should it necessarily be pleasing to an artist who specializes in one medium that his or her work is being adapted into another medium?  Especially if that adaptation is missing the point of the artist's original work?  The way you phrased that makes it seem like Moore should be incredibly honored that his work was deigned worthy to be made into film.

yes, yes, yes, look i agree, but...

Why does Moore allow his films to be adapted, then?

exactly. he's obviously cashing the checks right? the movie will no doubt send ppl running to the stores to pick up his books right? i just don't feel too sorry for the guy is all.

[cron]

Why does Moore allow his films to be adapted, then?

exactly. he's obviously cashing the checks right? the movie will no doubt send ppl running to the stores to pick up his books right? i just don't feel too sorry for the guy is all.

here i agree completely. he's saying things as if someone had stolen his books' rights after raping him.

[Split Infinitive]

If I recall correctly, Moore has not accepted any money for the adaptations of From Hell and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, and tried to have his name removed from them.  His share of the profits went to the artists.  V for Vendetta was sold back in 1988 or '89, well before it or any other adaptation of his work was filmed.  His subsequent experiences in Hollywood jaded him to the point where he is now.  I also believe that the rights to some of his work are not owned by him; they're owned by the comic publishers.  So it's up to them to sell the rights to the properties, not Moore.  Whatever titles he owns the rights to will probably not be made into movies in his lifetime.  The others -- who knows?

Moore also is one of the premier names in comic book writing.  His books were selling just fine before Hollywood started butchering them.

[Ghostboy]

Split Infinitive is correct. While Moore may be a little testy, he's one of the few artists who puts his money where his mouth is, and deserves nothing but respect for maintaining such a solid stance.

[The Red Vine]

Ghostboy, were you able to see it again over the weekend?

[Ghostboy]

No, but I'm seeing it tomorrow, and will report back then.

I've read a lot of the reviews, both positive and negative, and I have to say that both sides of the argument seem pretty valid. I think I'll still really love the film, but I can definitely see where some might take umbrage with it.

[ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ]

If the rights do not belong to him, then I fully understand where he's coming from by disowning the adaptations.

However, if he's so closely tied to these characters, and he invented them, at some point wouldn't he have had to whore them out?

Unless I'm missing a big step in the process, he's only setting himself up for disappointment.

[Split Infinitive]

If the rights do not belong to him, then I fully understand where he's coming from by disowning the adaptations.

However, if he's so closely tied to these characters, and he invented them, at some point wouldn't he have had to whore them out?

Unless I'm missing a big step in the process, he's only setting himself up for disappointment.

When you work in the comics industry, it's often part of the bargain that the characters you create become the property of the publisher, not yourself.  Basically, it's a choice between not writing in the comic industry or writing for the industry and giving up the rights to your characters.  That's how I understand it, anyway.  I'm sure there are cases where I'm totally wrong.  And after a while, Moore did start his own company to retain rights and independence, but it ended up getting swallowed up later anyway, if I recall correctly.

The thing is, Moore chose to "whore them out" for the medium in which he had creative control.  He chose to write in comics, not film.  So even if the rights weren't his, he still had the clout within the industry to effectively retain creative control.  And he wasn't happy about the lack of control there, either (as the articles bear out).  But it's the nature of the beast.  He could just work at a gas station somewhere and publish his comics on-line, but I think he made the right choices.

[Ghostboy]

Moore has severed all ties with the big publishers, so I imagine he'll be on his own from this point on. Creator-owned material has always been a big issue in comics. Frank Miller, Mike Mignola, Paul Chadwick and others started the Legend imprint in the 90s to retain control of their characters. I think Image originally had the same intentions when it was formed.