If you saw the 2009 Zack Snyder adaptation of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ graphic novel “Watchmen”, you could be forgiven for wondering what the fuss was about.
Whilst entirely reverent and handsomely constructed, the essential flaw bedevilling the film was its insistence on treating the Moore/Gibbons book as a sacred text. Faithful, yes but hardly allowing the film to say anything beyond what Moore did in his original comics scripts – and by the time that it came out, we had seen nearly two decades worth of films, TV and comics influenced by “Watchmen”, so the movie adaptation became a best intentioned, earnest ‘Me, too’ effort.
If we didn’t really need an adaptation of “Watchmen”, do we need DC’s newly confirmed sequence of prequel comics?
There’s an array of talent involved – I’m intrigued by the prospect of Darwyn Cooke and Amanda Conner’s take on the Silk Spectre – but it’s impossible not to feel that this can’t ever be more than a diverting curio rather than a work which can be as ground-breaking as “Watchmen” was, particularly as the various writing and art teams are putting together mini-series based around the core characters rather than presenting an equivalently sized, novelistic piece as Gibbons and Moore did.
I’m pretty sure that anybody with an interest in comics will feel compelled to take a look at the “Watchmen” prequels but I’m wondering if there’s any point in revisiting the universe without Moore being involved and Gibbons drawing it – and as Alan Moore is more likely to front a Simon Cowell-created boy band than ever work for DC Comics again, there’s no chance of that happening.