Chinese worms are silkworms! Or are those Japanese and I'm just culturally ignant?

And he sold the movie rights why?

I'm always amazed when people sell the movie rights then get peeved when someone MAKES A MOVIE. If artistic integrity is so important to you, why did you sell the rights to your work to some random studio?

Moore can pound sand.

Alan Moore didn't sell the movie rights because he doesn't own them. DC owns the rights, and they sold it. Not Moore.

Dateline, 2011:

ALAN MOORE HATES EARTH, EVERYTHING ON IT

I heard that the artist actually has a lot of the rights...

Moore signed over those rights to DC as part of his contract. He is the creator; he would own it until he sold it (whether directly to a movie or to get published, w/e)

Point stands.

Actually, Watchmen was created at a time when creator's rights and contracts weren't worth the paper they were printed on.

What soured Moore on the American Comics industry and other people adapting his work was the fact that after Watchmen - a project which DC treated like a red-haired stepchild as it was being written - became a big hit, DC began immediately conspiring how to make more money off of it. The problem? Moore's contract gave him final approval on any merchandise that spun out of Watchmen.

DC's response? They released a special set of Watchmen pins that were promoted as "retailer gifts". Naturally most of these gifts wound up for sale, but since they weren't intended to be merchandise, this kept to the letter of the contract if not the spirit.

Think you're missing the words "in its modern form" in your super-sharp analysis of Moore's take on film.

Takeout's quite a good analogy. With the best places, you even get a Nite Owl toy and some blood-spattered smiley face stickers...

heh, he looks like Casanova Frankenstein

@Paul,
you heard wrong, the most he'll get is a characters created by credit at the end of the movie. Moore's frustration is understandable but I really don't see a reason for him to be so spiteful about it. I hope they don't make a Watchmen 2, his head might explode.

of course he hates ALL movies... he's an anarchist and movies are wasteful expensive pieces of pablum that he can do for almost nothing as a comic or novel and still have the same, if not a greater impact.

Alan Moore is a creative genius. Not a factory-working sell out like Frank Miller.

Alan Moore never owned the rights to Watchmen to begin with. He never sold the rights. He was working as a freelance writer for DC when he wrote Watchmen. DC has always owned the rights, Alan Moore has never had any control about what is done with Watchmen.

I'm going to bring up the "modern films" thing again, because it so far both the post (shit job by the guys at TR. Way to spin the story out of control) and most of the responses have been really over the top with shoving words into the Moore's mouth. Now, I may not agree with his headstrong (though principled, I guess) stand against his comics being raped for everything they are worth over the past 2+ decades, the guy should be allowed to speak his peace about things concerning his work.

...You know, someone needs to knock Moore's pompous ass off his high horse before that corncob in the middle of the saddle metastasizes to his brain. The guy has been a whining bitch ad nauseum about how DC and/or Marvel "screwed him over" for over a decade now, and it's just gotten boring to hear the same bogus complaints over and over again.

I can't decide which Moore needs worse: a major attitude adjustment with a baseball bat, or simply a shave and a haircut.

[shakes head in utter dismay]

I agree with Moore in this one. Modern mainstream film is mostly pretty bad save for the occasional proverbial good movie.

yeah, alan moore should definitely get a hair cut if he wants anyone to take him seriously. he should also stop saying negative things about corporations and help them promote their products as much as possible.

oh wait, i forgot that alan moore doesn't care about mundane bullshit.

He did say MODERN FORM...Since when is Citizen Kane modern?

Movies in the last decade, for the most part, SUCK ROYAL TESTICLES. You get one or two exceptions, but not enough to redeem the entire industry.

Have any of you actually seen League of Extraordinary Gentlemen? From Hell? Yeah V for Vendetta is pretty good, but it isn't even half as good as the comic.

In an age where people think Transformers is a good movie, wtf do they know about art? Alan Moore is a true artist, and one of the few who hasn't sold out *coughs* FRANK MILLER *coughs* MARK MILLAR *coughs*. But you mindless sheep actually attack Moore, instead of the corporate suits who have made a world, where art is as scarce as oil, and just as exploited.

Toxic and OM are surely talking out of their arses. As has been pointed out, Alan never owned the rights to Watchmen, in fact he has stipulated that his name never be attached to the movie and any money made from whatever crumbs Warners toss to the original creators go to the artists and letterer involved. He did sign over the movie rights of V for Vendetta, From Hell and LoEG to the artists because the movues bore little resemblence to the books and he really didn't want to be attached to them officially.

As to his thoughtd on movies: I agree with them wholeheartedly. It's rare when a film comes along and makes you think or truly lends iyself to the lable of the 7th Art. However, I still enjoy movies in general and wouldn't dimiss them out of hand, after all sometimes it's just a nice to eat a Big Mac as to have a cordon Bleu meal.

Well, it all depends on your taste in movies and the directors. I thought that, in the last year, In Bruges was the best movie I saw. I thought Transformers was a waste of the 30 minutes I watched. Sure, the special effects were great, but that's not a reasonable substitute for a good movie. The dialogue made me want to jump out a window.

As for our matter at hand, I don't think OM was out of line or "talking out of his arse," Alan Moore seems a little pompous. Sure, there's a good reason behind his spite, but to go the unnecessary step forward and just hate anything that has to do with film? I agree that a book/comic will always be better than a film in its name, but it's always good to respect them for what they are rather than shove your head so far up your own ass that you wear your colon as a turtleneck. Not to mention he compared film to birds regurgitating worms... His argument about film just kind of runs off and I think he lost the meaning of it. Case and point.

It;s understandable that he doesnt like a movie he feels should not have been made, it's his baby, and its been taken away form him, it doesnt mean he's insane, we dont need to proves he's insane, he's done much to prove that wihtout iffy reasoning.

You poor pathetic nothing.

He hates Hollywood, and he does well. Hollywood incarnates everything that's wrong with your country, and, if I might, you are pretty far from short on things that are wrong with it.

I love you puny little things affording yourselves the luxury of critizising an artist of his stature.

Please, make something of your lives, before you find that all your good years are past you ... And they, too, were not far from puny and irrelevant themselves.

Cheers, luv.

OM (and I don't know why you're using a Buddhist chant for your name; you aren't worthy), how about you and I arrange a meeting so you can try your cure for Moore on me.

Moore's got more integrity and value than half of you folks running his name, reputation, and views down.

There's a lot of missing the point going on here. Moore's assessment of modern films is pretty spot-on, if you ask me. Doesn't mean that all modern films suck, but the man's got a point about the 'bullying' aspect. A lot of modern films are overbearing, unsubtle product full of near-deafening sound and the sort of editing that could induce seizures. It's why I hardly go see anything anymore. Except The Wrestler. That sure was good.

Also, surely I'm not the only one who found his quote funny and a bit playful instead of bilious and spiteful. But then, maybe I'm pompous and pretentious, too. Probably.

Also, 'Chinese worms' in this metaphor are clearly worms that are preferable simply because they're at least not the same damned worms that have been repeatedly fed us before. It's really not that hard.

Ummmm just as a quick aside for everyone who always wants to state that the films of past are always greater needs to really take a look at the films of the past, at the end of the day, a whole lot of films made in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's, were god-awful in some way, but ended up being entertaing, or relevant to the time period, which is why people saw them (ahem...like movies today), not every movie was Citizen Kane which is why movies like that are so speacial, there the once in a while really good film, that manages to take all the right elements and make a film of lasting quality, why do you think that when people refer to the movies of a "bygone era" do you think they always revert to the same staid examples? its not like every single film in the past was a best oscar masterpiece, only a few, just like in the present, expecting every movie ever done whether they spent $100 or a $100 million, isn't just unfair but unforgivably ignorant and stupid. Just because a movie came out in the past doesn't make it a magical piece of art, just the same as now, it certainly takes a very high level of arrogance to state unequivocally that a movie from the past is better then a movie from the present because there was more art involved or less money. Furthermore i continue to be aghast at the immaturity of people who condemn film because some movies are made for entertainment value, rather then artistic integrity. Just because Iron Man, or American Pie, doesn't hold up to the high artistic standards of some snobbish art fiend, doesn't mean that a movie is bad, it just means its catering to a different demographic or idea then what you wanted to see, disappointing perhaps, but come on, how awful would that world be, a place where nothing is fun or entertaining, just to be fun or entertaining, sounds like a whole lot of sad children.

....In regards to Alan Moore, I want to preface this by stating that I have an immense respect for his body of work, just not his actual body. It seems to me the height of arrogance and cowardice to say, they screwed me once and made a bad movie, so I will never work with them again. Thats like saying I got food poisoning the first time I ate kobe beef, so i will never eat Kobe Beef again. Whether Alan Moore likes it or not, because of the profile of the coming movie, his legacy to the majority of people worldwide (those who aren't comic book readers, but see or hear about the film) will be the Watchmen film, its sad that it won't be the book, but fifty years from now the Movie is going to be far more known, its a simple fact, hell how many of you have read Jurassic Park? seen the movie? see my point? so how much of a coward do you have to be to stand up and say it didn't work once, so instead of going back and working hard and making sure it comes out right this time, I am going to sit in my cave, doing LSD and spewing Bile and Vitriol over anything thats been made for more then $10 or after 1990. Seems to me that Alan was content to make money off of this watered-down cultural imagination, but then decides after hes made enough money to comfortably live the rest of his life in his lifestyle that he is free to go back and not just condemn the people who have ruined his work (League had nothing to do with the book, although Moore took home a big cheque for it) but also the paying customers who have celebrated his artistic genius for decades. BTW has anyone read his recent stuff? its pretty effing terrible. why can't we just leave the old man alone and let him conjure his own insane visions, rather then let him yell and belittle our own collective cultural vision, because he doesn't like whats been done to some of his work because of his own lack of care or involvement. My guess is that Alan Moore just doesn't like happiness, I think he despises joy and only wants to spread a cloud of suffering and despair....otherwise like any other decent human being his comment would have been "No Comment"