Archie characters in Watchmen

[Rik]

Allan Haverholm Apr 4 2004, 3:56 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.comics.misc
From: "Allan Haverholm" <a...@NOSPAMMITYhaverholm.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:56:08 +0200
Local: Sun,Apr 4 2004 3:56 pm
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

"Mark J. Reed" <m...@thereeds.org> writes:
news:eKKbc.11134$yN6.3712@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...



> Is this what you're looking for?
> ,!-- m -->, class="postlink" ,="http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Comi">http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Comi,!-- m -->­cs/Humor/Archie%20Comics%20Wat­chmen

> -Mark



Heh, heh, heh --

did anybody try to draw this up in faux Gibbons-style?
--
_A_H_

[Rik]

Cardinal 1 Apr 4 2004, 6:03 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.comics.misc
From: "Cardinal 1" <cardin...@erols.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 18:03:32 -0400
Local: Sun,Apr 4 2004 6:03 pm
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

The brainy one is Dilton Doily. If Moose is the second Nite Owl, would
Coach Kleats be the first? ,!-- s8) -->,!-- s8) -->


--
"Well, now that we *have* seen each other," said the Unicorn, "if you'll
believe in me, I'll believe in you. Is that a bargain?" (From Lewis
Carroll's "Through the Looking-Glass")
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~­~~~

[Rik]

Mikel Midnight Apr 5 2004, 12:25 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.comics.misc
From: Mikel Midnight <blakl...@best.outdamnspam.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 04:25:13 GMT
Local: Mon,Apr 5 2004 12:25 am
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

In article <eKKbc.11134$yN6.3...@newsread­2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Mark J. Reed <m...@thereeds.org> wrote:



> Is this what you're looking for?
> ,!-- m -->, class="postlink" ,="http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Comi">http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Comi,!-- m -->­cs/Humor/Archie%20Comics%20Wat­chmen


Yes! Thank you!

In article <pzLbc.11157$yN6.9...@newsread­2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Mark J. Reed <m...@thereeds.org> wrote:



> Wow, how exactly did Simon and Kirby not sued by the Shield folks over
> Captain America? Right down to the source of his powers.
Because


the Shield predated Captain America (there was a *second*
Shield who postdated Cap, but he was also written and drawn by Simon &
Kirby).

In article <HvMrLv....@spsystems.net>, Henry Spencer



<h...@spsystems.net> wrote:
> Nope. It's well-documented in print, including in accounts by Moore
> himself, that Watchmen was originally written around the *Charlton*
> superheroes, the rights to which DC had just acquired.


Nope. The proposal to DC was for the Charlton heroes, true. But he's
stated in interviews that he developed the plot years earlier for the
MLJ heroes.

[Rik]

BLAZERK0HL Apr 5 2004, 12:32 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
From: ,!-- e -->, ,="mailto:blazerk...@aol.commoc.loa">blazerk...@aol.commoc.loa,!-- e --> (BLAZERK0HL) - Find messages by this author
Date: 05 Apr 2004 04:32:38 GMT
Local: Mon,Apr 5 2004 12:32 am
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse



>From: ,!-- e -->, ,="mailto:h...@spsystems.net">h...@spsystems.net,!-- e -->
>Nope. It's well-documented in print, including in accounts by Moore
>himself, that Watchmen was originally written around the *Charlton*
>superheroes, the rights to which DC had just acquired.


Actually, I also read an article with Alan Moore where he said that he thought
about using the Crusaders characters but quickly turned his focus onto the
Charlton branch (In a story with a working title "Who killed the Peacemaker?").
I'm trying to think if I read this in the Kimota! companion or in an interview
somewhere. I'll keep looking.

Peter

[Rik]

Mr Vo Apr 5 2004, 3:28 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
From: Mr Vo <m...@home.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Apr 2004 02:28:16 -0600
Local: Mon,Apr 5 2004 4:28 am
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

,!-- e -->, ,="mailto:blazerk...@aol.commoc.loa">blazerk...@aol.commoc.loa,!-- e --> (BLAZERK0HL) wrote in
news:20040405003238.03425.00000603@mb-m01.aol.com:



> Actually, I also read an article with Alan Moore where he said that he
> thought about using the Crusaders characters but quickly turned his
> focus onto the Charlton branch (In a story with a working title "Who
> killed the Peacemaker?"). I'm trying to think if I read this in the
> Kimota! companion or in an interview somewhere. I'll keep looking.

> Peter



The Crusaders were actively being published by Archie under the Red Circle
Imprint from 1983-1985. Considering that Watchmen was published by DC in
1986, Moore would most likely have been formulating the Watchmen series at
the exact same time.

Since the Watchmen developed when Giordano asked DC's writing Golden child
to come up with something for his beloved Charlton characters, it seems
highly unlikely that the series started as an idea for another company's
actively published characters.


DC wasn't involved with the Archie characters until 1991-1992.


Archie had ended the Red Circle line in 1985 and shortly thereafter wanted
to use the characters with a more modern style. They commissioned a few
creators who came up with several gritty, realistic proposals for the
charaters, I don't remember who. I do remember Archie deciding that the
proposals were a little to edgy for them and ended the whole idea after
only releasing a few preview covers.


I remember the Hangman was especially edgy.


The proposals had the style at the time which could have been considered
Watchmenesque... maybe that is what you are thinking of.

[Rik]

Mikel Midnight Apr 5 2004, 9:10 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
From: Mikel Midnight <blakl...@best.outdamnspam.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 13:10:08 GMT
Local: Mon,Apr 5 2004 9:10 am
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

In article <Xns94C219195A31Emrvo2020yahoo­...@38.119.106.5>, Mr Vo




- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

<m...@home.com> wrote:
> The Crusaders were actively being published by Archie under the Red Circle
> Imprint from 1983-1985. Considering that Watchmen was published by DC in
> 1986, Moore would most likely have been formulating the Watchmen series at
> the exact same time.

> Since the Watchmen developed when Giordano asked DC's writing Golden child
> to come up with something for his beloved Charlton characters, it seems
> highly unlikely that the series started as an idea for another company's
> actively published characters.


> DC wasn't involved with the Archie characters until 1991-1992.


> Archie had ended the Red Circle line in 1985 and shortly thereafter wanted
> to use the characters with a more modern style. They commissioned a few
> creators who came up with several gritty, realistic proposals for the
> charaters, I don't remember who. I do remember Archie deciding that the
> proposals were a little to edgy for them and ended the whole idea after
> only releasing a few preview covers.


> The proposals had the style at the time which could have been considered
> Watchmenesque... maybe that is what you are thinking of.



Nope, not even remotely. The MLJ proposal was never a formal proposal,
it was basically fanfic. It was just an idea in his head. He
basically had the Watchmen plot in mind ever since high school, or near
enough, and it was originally for the Crusaders. The Charlton proposal
was the first reworking of the idea into a form appropriate for
publication.

It's a fairly general plot which could be applied to any group of four
to seven superheroes ... in fact I did a post a while back permutating
the plot for a dozen different casts ... mainly DC but through other
publishers as well.

[Rik]

Mark J. Reed Apr 5 2004, 10:47 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.comics.misc
From: Mark J. Reed <m...@thereeds.org> - Find messages by this author
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 14:47:40 GMT
Local: Mon,Apr 5 2004 10:47 am
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

MJR = Mark J. Reed (me)
MM = Mikel Midnight


MJR> Is this what you're looking for?
MJR> ,!-- m -->, class="postlink" ,="http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Comi">http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Comi,!-- m -->­cs/Humor/Archie%20Comics%20Wat­chmen


MM> Yes! Thank you!


You're welcome!


MJR>



Wow, how exactly did Simon and Kirby not sued by the Shield folks over


MJR> Captain America? Right down to the source of his powers.

MM> Because the Shield predated Captain America (there was a *second*
MM>


Shield who postdated Cap, but he was also written and drawn by Simon


&
MM> Kirby).

I think you misunderstood; that the Shield predated Cap was my point. Since
the Shield came first, it seems like Simon and Kirby should have had their red,
white, and blue pants sued off of them by the creators of the Shield. We're
talking about a similarity far more striking than that between Superman and
Captain Marvel, which did lead to litigation.


Not that I'm complaining. Cap is a great character, and has certainly
long since come into his own. It just strikes me as odd. Of course,
we weren't as lawsuit-happy back then, either.


-Mark

[Rik]

Mr Vo Apr 5 2004, 2:15 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe
From: Mr Vo <m...@home.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Apr 2004 13:15:40 -0600
Local: Mon,Apr 5 2004 3:15 pm
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

Mikel Midnight <blakl...@best.outdamnspam.com­> wrote in
news:050420040610084923%blaklion@best.outdamnspam.com:




- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

> In article <Xns94C219195A31Emrvo2020yahoo­...@38.119.106.5>, Mr Vo
><m...@home.com> wrote:

>> The Crusaders were actively being published by Archie under the Red
>> Circle Imprint from 1983-1985. Considering that Watchmen was
>> published by DC in 1986, Moore would most likely have been
>> formulating the Watchmen series at the exact same time.


>> Since the Watchmen developed when Giordano asked DC's writing Golden
>> child to come up with something for his beloved Charlton characters,
>> it seems highly unlikely that the series started as an idea for
>> another company's actively published characters.


>> DC wasn't involved with the Archie characters until 1991-1992.


>> Archie had ended the Red Circle line in 1985 and shortly thereafter
>> wanted to use the characters with a more modern style. They
>> commissioned a few creators who came up with several gritty,
>> realistic proposals for the charaters, I don't remember who. I do
>> remember Archie deciding that the proposals were a little to edgy for
>> them and ended the whole idea after only releasing a few preview
>> covers.


>> The proposals had the style at the time which could have been
>> considered Watchmenesque... maybe that is what you are thinking of.


> Nope, not even remotely. The MLJ proposal was never a formal
> proposal, it was basically fanfic. It was just an idea in his head.
> He basically had the Watchmen plot in mind ever since high school, or
> near enough, and it was originally for the Crusaders. The Charlton
> proposal was the first reworking of the idea into a form appropriate
> for publication.


> It's a fairly general plot which could be applied to any group of four
> to seven superheroes ... in fact I did a post a while back permutating
> the plot for a dozen different casts ... mainly DC but through other
> publishers as well.



I caught this thread at the end and thought it was referencing the Watchmen
with MLJ characters a formal proposal... didn't realize it that was not the
how the original conversation started.

That's what I get for leaping before I look... I officially withdraw my 2
cents.

[Rik]

Bill F Apr 5 2004, 5:57 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.comics.misc
From: ,!-- e -->, ,="mailto:frs5...@yahoo.com">frs5...@yahoo.com,!-- e --> (Bill F) - Find messages by this author
Date: 5 Apr 2004 14:57:16 -0700
Local: Mon,Apr 5 2004 5:57 pm
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse

Mark J. Reed <m...@thereeds.org> wrote in message <news:gkecc.11123$NL4.7971@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>...



> I think you misunderstood; that the Shield predated Cap was my point. Since
> the Shield came first, it seems like Simon and Kirby should have had their red,
> white, and blue pants sued off of them by the creators of the Shield. We're
> talking about a similarity far more striking than that between Superman and
> Captain Marvel, which did lead to litigation.

> Not that I'm complaining. Cap is a great character, and has certainly
> long since come into his own. It just strikes me as odd. Of course,
> we weren't as lawsuit-happy back then, either.



I think that after captain america came out that MLJ (Archie) did object
and that there were changes made (such as the shape of the shield) by
Timely to reduce the amount of similarity. I think there was also a
hangman character featured in one of the early issues that got them angry.

The reason why there wasn't a lawsuit was in part because of the complicated
relationships and conficts of interests among the two companies. The "M" in
MLJ was Maurice Coyne who worked closely with Martin Goodman on plups
in the early 1930s.


Joe Simon gave some interesting details in his book "the comic book makers". Of
course he doesn't tell anything like the whole truth in that book
with respect to captain america. The whole truth is never going to come out
because the "creators" are hardly likely to admit they stole the character
and the publishers are not going to talk about backdoor deals they did
with each other.


Besides which, both sides would have done the math and determined that
a lawsuit would take longer and cost more than either was likely to make
out of the characters in the short run. The superman lawsuit was filed in
1941 and was still going in 1953. And if captain marvel had still been
bringing in money in 1953, it might have gone on years longer.

[Rik]

Bill F Apr 6 2004, 12:58 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.comics.misc
From: ,!-- e -->, ,="mailto:frs5...@yahoo.com">frs5...@yahoo.com,!-- e --> (Bill F) - Find messages by this author
Date: 6 Apr 2004 09:58:21 -0700
Local: Tues,Apr 6 2004 12:58 pm
Subject: Re: Archie characters in Watchmen
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original | Report Abuse



> The reason why there wasn't a lawsuit (over captain america's similarity to
> the MLJ character the shield) was in part because of the complicated
> relationships and conficts of interests among the two companies. The "M" in
> MLJ was Maurice Coyne who worked closely with Martin Goodman on plups
> in the early 1930s.


Some additional information. Maurice Coyne, in addition to being one of the
three principals at MLJ (Archie) at the time, was also the accountant for
Timely. His involvement with MLJ was a secret.

According to Joe Simon, after the second dispute with MLJ, Coyne took him
aside and explained in great detail how much money captain america was making
for Timely and how (in effect) he was being cheated by Timely. This according
to Joe Simon was one of the big motivations for him (and kirby) to leave
Timely for DC/National.


So while there was no lawsuit, its possible to speculate that MLJ did get
"even" with Timely in a different way. Its also possible that those
involved expected Simon and Kirby to move to MLJ rather than DC/National.

On the Watchmen/Crusaders topic, here's a quote from an interview with Moore, from "Toasting Absent Heroes" in Comic Book Artist #09 (2000):

CBA: I always had a suspicion there was an element of the MLJ characters—The Hangman, The Shield, etc. —within Watchmen, and upon recently reading your intro to the Graffitti Watchmen special edition, I read that my inkling was indeed true. You were exposed to the MLJ characters, such as The Mighty Crusaders, and so on?
Alan: Right. That was the initial idea of Watchmen—and this is nothing like what Watchmen turned out to be—was it was very simple: Wouldn't it be nice if I had an entire line, a universe, a continuity, a world full of super-heroes—preferably from some line that has been discontinued and no longer publishing—whom I could then just treat in a different way. You have to remember this was very soon after I'd done some similar stuff, if you like, with Marvelman, where I'd used a pre-existing character, and applied a grimmer, perhaps more realistic kind of world view to that character and the milieu he existed in. So I'd just started thinking about using the MLJ characters—the Archie super-heroes—just because they weren't being published at that time, and for all I knew, they might've been up for grabs. The initial concept would've had the 1960s-'70s rather lame version of the Shield being found dead in the harbor, and then you'd probably have various other characters, including Jack Kirby's Private Strong, being drafted back in, and a murder mystery unfolding. I suppose I was just thinking, "That'd be a good way to start a comic book: have a famous super-hero found dead." As the mystery unraveled, we would be lead deeper and deeper into the real heart of this super-hero's world, and show a reality that was very different to the general public image of the super-hero. So, that was the idea.
When Dick Giordano had acquired the Charlton line, Dave Gibbons and I were talking about doing something together. We had worked together on a couple of stories for 2000 A. D., which we had a great deal of fun with, and we wanted to work on something for DC. (We were amongst that first wave of British expatriates, after Brian Bolland, Kevin O'Neil, and I was the first writer, and we wanted to work together. ) One of the first ideas was that perhaps we should do a Challengers of the Unknown mini-series, and somewhere I've got a rough penciled cover for a Martian Manhunter mini-series, but I think it was the usual thing: Other people were developing projects regarding those characters, so DC didn't want us to use them. So, at this point, I came up with this idea regarding the MLJ/Archie characters, and it was the sort of idea that could be applied to any pre-existing group of super-heroes. If it had been the Tower characters—the T. H. U. N. D. E. R. Agents—I could've done the same thing. The story was about super-heroes, and it didn't matter which super-heroes it was about, as long as the characters had some kind of emotional resonance, that people would recognize them, so it would have the shock and surprise value when you saw what the reality of these characters was.

p.s. thanks to Rik for re-opening the board.