Why is Tomorrow Stories delayed?
William Denton
PROMETHEA (another excellent one). The guy behind the desk said TOMORROW
STORIES had been delayed because DC had yanked a story for fear they'd be
sued by the Scientologists, and Moore was in a towering rage. What's the
scoop on this? I don't think I've seen any such story mentioned here.
Bill
--
--
William Denton : Toronto, Canada : http://www.miskatonic.org/ : Caveat lector.
Jeremy Alps
This story is true. Check out the newest issue of the Comics Journal (#227,
it's got Carl Barks' Ducks on the cover) and you'll find a news story on the whole
controversey. Apparently the Scientologists are very quick to sue, and rather
than risk legal trouble with them, Paul Levitz (DC's Publisher) yanked the story.
Ironically, the article mentions that DC had already published a similar story
about Scientology in the Big Book of Conspiracies.
Personally I think DC is being ridiculous for not publishing everything that
they can by Moore (I mean, why is it taking them so long to get his Swamp Thing
run back into print in TPB format?), but I guess they are looking at things from a
shrewd business P.O.V. Chris Staros must agree with me though, because he stated
that he will be publishing the story in question in his Top Shelf anthology. Look
out for it in February.
This being, as far as I can recall, the second time DC has censored one of
Moore's ABC books (the first time being one the ads in League of Extraordingary
Gentlemen), I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop and Moore to just walk away
from DC as he did more than a decade ago. But Moore says he is enjoying himself,
and that he is committed to continuing on with ABC (his attempt to save mainstream
comics, I guess). I should hope so, because I have really grown to love Top Ten,
Promethea, Tom Strong, LoEG, and (to a lesser extent) Tomorrow Stories.
Higher Than The Mute
>I was at my local purveyor of comics yesterday, and picked up the new
>PROMETHEA (another excellent one). The guy behind the desk said TOMORROW
>STORIES had been delayed because DC had yanked a story for fear they'd be
>sued by the Scientologists, and Moore was in a towering rage. What's the
>scoop on this? I don't think I've seen any such story mentioned here.
Moore's in less of a towering rage than Gebbie, who's walked. The
story will be in the next issue of TOP SHELF, the anthology title
published by Top Shelf. There seems to be no good reason for the
still-continuing delay, except that Paul Levitz is presumably going
over every issue with a fine-tooth comb, looking for something else to
piss Moore off with.
-Chris
__________________________
More on the From Hell banning:
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/news/viewnews.cgi?newsid972760301,84862,
James Graham
Mute) wrote:
> Moore's in less of a towering rage than Gebbie, who's walked.
No great loss then. Cobweb was the weakest strip IMHO.
kccollectibles
I just got the first 2 issues of 'Lost Girls'. About as erotic as a tub of
coleslaw and that was mainly due to Melina Gebbie's awful illustrations.
Jimmy Kittenhands
www.geocities.com/jammingroom
surf punk ska pop samba mp3 a-go-go
Niclas Siljedahl
> This is funny because it was said on this group that the ABC books
> were 'work for hire' which I found strange since Moore mainly worked
> for Image because of his belief in creator rights. Anyway Comics
> International states that he owns the characters and when contracts
> are up he can walk with them. This seems to be emphasised by the
> Cobweb story being published elsewhere. The indicia in the front of
> the comic don't really tell us anything since they say the ABC books
> are owned by ABC comics which could just as well be Moore himself,
> Moore and Jim Lee or even DC.
The ABC work is all work-for-hire (except for LOEG, of course). DC/Wildstorm
owns it. Presumably the Cobweb story is either a special deal, or it will be
published slightly "revised", under another title and with the Cobweb
character taken out.
--
/niclas
[Now I'm A Poorly Updated Dynamo: http://home.swipnet.se/dynamo]
Steve K
lengthy discussion going on at the Comicon.com message boards about this very
subject, with input from ABC artist Rick Veitch and various other pros about the
nature of, reasons for, and regrets concerning this situation.
The thread, titled "What's the deal w/ ABC now? (or is there a deal?)", is in the
Comic Books forum.
or just go right here:
http://209.198.111.165/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000839.html
steve K
Garjones wrote:
> I told a slight lie inadvertantly anyway, the statement wasn't in CI
> but somewhere else I can't locate at the moment. I still find it
> slightly hard to believe that the ABC stuff is totally work-for-hire,
> it may have an element of that but Moore is a man who can pretty much
> set his own terms I would have thought. One of the first questions
> asked of Joe Quesada when he became chief at Marvel was what about
> Alan Moore and his answer was I'm looking for the best writers and
> Moore is top of the list. You may be right but I'd have to see the
> contracts to be convinced he'd signed a total work-for-hire contract,
> especially when lesser writers like Kurt Busiek can manage to get Lee
> to gove him creator owned status. DCs involvement was after the ABC
> contracts were signed.
>
> Back to the Quesada bit he said he wanted to ask Moore what he
> disliked so much about Marvel that he never worked for them (apart
> from 3 pages of a charity X-Men comic and allowing Captain Britain to
> be reprinted mainly because he felt he was being unfair to Alan Davis
> by preventing it). He has stated before quite clearly that his
> hostility is based on Marvel refusing to give artwork back to Jack
> Kirby despite him being at least 50% of the reason that any of them
> have a job. Since Kirby has now passed away it may be impossible for
> Marvel to make amends on this issue.
>
> Cheers Drive!
>
> Gareth
kcup
such a controversy, according to Moore. "We're going to be able to buy back
the Cobweb story from DC for a nominal fee," Moore told Newsarama. "We've
spoken with Chris Staros at Top Shelf Productions, and he would be very
happy to run it in slightly altered form, just with slight changes made in
terms of the character, or the character's name, so that should be appearing
in print. I'm not sure where or when, but that's the plan... It was a snappy
little piece of work, so we're very glad that it's going to be published,
and Chris, is quite happy as well, because he's got Lost Girls [by Moore and
Cobweb artist Melinda Gebbie] coming out next year, so this gives an odd
little prequel to what's coming."
The above, from the AM fansite suggests that ABC is for hire (except for
LOEG?)
as Mute originally said here way back.
Alan's motive was originally given as raising enough
money to go off and finish more personal projects that he simply cant afford
to do at the moment e.g. A Grammar. We can be sure he wouldn't have made
the for hire deal with D.C. - he was sort of still dealing with "an Image
company"
sort of, probly.
Doesn't explain why the books would all have the same copyright notice
though (if
they do - I can't be bothered to look!)
kcup
Garjones <garj...@spamlessntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:q7hrvsgodur6vkrcp...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 06:38:16 GMT, Jeremy Alps <j...@georgetown.edu>
> wrote:
>
> I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop and Moore to just walk away
> >from DC as he did more than a decade ago. But Moore says he is enjoying
himself,
> >and that he is committed to continuing on with ABC (his attempt to save
mainstream
> >comics, I guess). I should hope so, because I have really grown to love
Top Ten,
> >Promethea, Tom Strong, LoEG, and (to a lesser extent) Tomorrow Stories.
>
> This is funny because it was said on this group that the ABC books
> were 'work for hire' which I found strange since Moore mainly worked
> for Image because of his belief in creator rights. Anyway Comics
> International states that he owns the characters and when contracts
> are up he can walk with them. This seems to be emphasised by the
> Cobweb story being published elsewhere. The indicia in the front of
> the comic don't really tell us anything since they say the ABC books
> are owned by ABC comics which could just as well be Moore himself,
> Moore and Jim Lee or even DC.
>
>
> Cheers Drive!
>
> Gareth
Joel Luber
"Niclas Siljedahl" <niclas.s...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
news:FBlL5.1249$zd1....@nntpserver.swip.net...
When this story broke, one news (or rumor) source said that Moore and or
Gebbie had paid a minimal fee (or some such wording) to re-acquire the
copyright to the story in question. Of course, they would have to alter the
story to take away any reference to "Cobweb" as DC Comics is the owner of
the trademark of the character and title name. Cobweb is trade mark serial
number 75521730
(http://tess.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4ljivq.15.41).
Or, I suppose, DC could license the rights to the name, but somehow I doubt
that would happen.
Joel Luber
Scott
I agree, but this mess is keeping us from all of the other stories in the
issue, as well.
"Drunken maria, don't sleep. Sleepy Maria, don't drink!"
-The Monks
James Graham
wrote:
> Alan's motive was originally given as raising enough
> money to go off and finish more personal projects that he simply cant
> afford
> to do at the moment
Fair enough, but that does rather betray the lie that he refuses to work
for other companies out of his highfalutin principles.
I find it amazing that he can square working for DC again, but not for
2000ad. The mighty dollar wouldn't have anything to do with it perchance?
James
Newscomedy
>2000ad. The mighty dollar wouldn't have anything to do with it perchance?
>
I think this is hardly fair. His entire ABC deal was signed with Wildstorm,
which was separate from DC. When DC bought Wildstorm, Moore clearly had qualms
about the arrangement, but agreed to stick to his deal despite them and after
certain assurances about editorial distance were given (even if they seem to
have been forgotten by DC). If the almighty pound were Moore's primary
motivating factor, why wouldn't he just write X-Men? (Joe Quesada, prove me
wrong!)
Pearce Duncan's News
To be honest, I thought the only TS strip of any real value if Jack B.
Quick. I've considered dropping it from my file since that strip ended, and
the only reason I haven't is because it hasn't been coming out.
Moore used to do great anarchic humour, eg DR & Quinch. But First American
and Splash Brannigan are obvious and forced, and Cobweb doesn't appeal at
all. A couple of Grayshirts have kept my attention, largely due to their
experimental nature and Rick Veitch's wonderfully ugly art. But it all seems
a little half-arsed coming from Moore, much like a lot of his Image work for
hire garbage.
Pearce
Kevin J. Maroney
>Back to the Quesada bit he said he wanted to ask Moore what he
>disliked so much about Marvel that he never worked for them (apart
>from 3 pages of a charity X-Men comic and allowing Captain Britain to
>be reprinted mainly because he felt he was being unfair to Alan Davis
>by preventing it). He has stated before quite clearly that his
>hostility is based on Marvel refusing to give artwork back to Jack
>Kirby despite him being at least 50% of the reason that any of them
>have a job. Since Kirby has now passed away it may be impossible for
>Marvel to make amends on this issue.
"Before DC offered me work, there were really only three companies
that you could work for. There was Quality, which I was having a lot
of serious problems with; there was Marvel, who seemed to me to have a
contemptuous attitude both to the material they were producing and the
people that were producing it; and there was I.P.C. Of the three, IPC
is the only one I'm still working for, purely for the reason that IPC
so far have avoided lying to me, cheating me, or generally treating me
like shit."--Alan Moore, _Arkensword_ #13/14, May 1985.
Moore's stated hostility towards Marvel springs largely from his
experience writing for Marvel UK, when they fired Bernie Jaye, his
editor on _Daredevils_, on no notice in 1983. Many incidents since
then have confirmed his antipathy towards the company--Kirby's art,
the Miracleman lawsuit, the various Marvel gluts, and on and on.
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Unplugged Games | kmar...@ungames.com
Games are my entire waking life
James Graham
newsc...@aol.comSPAMALOT (Newscomedy) wrote:
> I think this is hardly fair. His entire ABC deal was signed with
> Wildstorm,
> which was separate from DC. When DC bought Wildstorm, Moore clearly had
> qualms
> about the arrangement, but agreed to stick to his deal despite them and
> after
> certain assurances about editorial distance were given (even if they
> seem to
> have been forgotten by DC).
Moore could have walked. He didn't. I don't condemn this, indeed, I
welcome it. I just find the self-justisification for his actions to be a
little sanctimonious at times.
> If the almighty pound were Moore's primary
> motivating factor, why wouldn't he just write X-Men? (Joe Quesada,
> prove me
> wrong!)
Because with ABC, he can have the best of both worlds. I didn't say that
the "dollar" was his only motivating factor, just that it is the reason
why he is ultimately prepared to compromise with ABC, but nothing else.
James
Kevin J. Maroney
>Moore could have walked. He didn't. I don't condemn this, indeed, I
>welcome it. I just find the self-justisification for his actions to be a
>little sanctimonious at times.
Moore felt that he had an obligation to Jim Lee to fulfill his
agreement to produce the ABC titles. This obligation had a greater
moral force for Moore than his reluctance to work with DC again.
TK-421
<kmar...@ungames.com> wrote:
>james...@cix.co.uk (James Graham) wrote:
>>Moore could have walked. He didn't. I don't condemn this, indeed, I
>>welcome it. I just find the self-justisification for his actions to be a
>>little sanctimonious at times.
>
>Moore felt that he had an obligation to Jim Lee to fulfill his
>agreement to produce the ABC titles. This obligation had a greater
>moral force for Moore than his reluctance to work with DC again.
There's also his obligation to the other creators working on the ABC
titles. It wouldn't be fair on them to just walk waya from the
project.
----------------------------------
http://run.to/valhalla
http://marvelman.webjump.com
http://marvel-universe.webjump.com
James Graham
paul...@yahoo.com (TK-421) wrote:
> >Moore felt that he had an obligation to Jim Lee to fulfill his
> >agreement to produce the ABC titles. This obligation had a greater
> >moral force for Moore than his reluctance to work with DC again.
>
>
> There's also his obligation to the other creators working on the ABC
> titles. It wouldn't be fair on them to just walk waya from the
> project.
Both of which were to honour 12-issue contracts. And, yes, none of the ABC
titles have yet reached issue 12 (although they should have done), but he
is carrying on after that as well.
Sorry, doesn't wash.
James
Newscomedy
>the "dollar" was his only motivating factor, just that it is the reason
>why he is ultimately prepared to compromise with ABC, but nothing else.
I don't see how he's getting the best of both worlds with ABC. DC has twice
interfered editorially now, but Moore has stuck with it. I think I've lost the
gist of your original argument. My impression is that Moore has said he wants
to do good, commercial comic books celebrating all the wacky, fun stuff of
"science" heroes, but without having to play in the corporate playground of
either of the big two. I really don't see sanctiomony or, self-justification.
Newscomedy
>experience writing for Marvel UK, when they fired Bernie Jaye,
I forgot about Bernie Jaye! I'm pretty sure he had a statement on this subject
in Daredevils or something at the time...
Higher Than The Mute
>On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 23:24:12 -0000, "kcup" <kett...@tesco.net>
>wrote:
>>The above, from the AM fansite suggests that ABC is for hire (except for
>>LOEG?)
>>as Mute originally said here way back.
>>Alan's motive was originally given as raising enough
>>money to go off and finish more personal projects that he simply cant afford
>>to do at the moment e.g. A Grammar. We can be sure he wouldn't have made
>>the for hire deal with D.C. - he was sort of still dealing with "an Image
>>company"
>>sort of, probly.
>That's true enough, he dealt with what was Homage Comics before they
>sold out to DC, there were worries that he'd pull out when Lee made
>the deal but they were settled, for how long I don't know.
Only LOEG was with Homage. The ABC line was with Wildstorm proper.
-Chris
__________________________
From Hell, the OFLC Approved Edition:
http://www.psycomic.com/columns/2000/pkeller/
Higher Than The Mute
Simon Gurr
mu...@tpg.com.au wrote on 11/2/00 7:14 AM:
> Cobweb's continuing, just without Gebbie.
Cant see it working without Gebbie.
SiG
Steve K
> > Cobweb's continuing, just without Gebbie.
>
> Cant see it working without Gebbie.
I can't see it being the same strip, but it sounds like Moore's
interested in geting other talented female artists to take Gebbie's
place, which could be pretty interesting. Plus, I think I read
somewhere that Gebbie's pretty busy working on Lost Girls lately anyway,
so perhaps it's for the best.
steve K