27 thoughts on “So, as part of Rebirth, the Watchmen are now part of the main DC continuity?

  1. It’s a ridiculous idea, but it also seems interesting if I read it right. The rewriting of the DC Universe after Flashpoint may be due to Veidt and Doctor Manhattan’s interference. Might be worth it to see how it fits together, anyway.

  2. “I thought the reboot was supposed to be about love and friendship and hope”

    From what I gather, the premise of the story is that the recent lack of love and friendship and hope is due to malign influence from the Watchmen universe, which the relaunch event is aiming to fix.

  3. “I thought the reboot was supposed to be about love and friendship and hope” From what I gather, the premise of the story is that the recent lack of love and friendship and hope is due to malign influence from the Watchmen universe, which the relaunch event is aiming to fix.]]>

  4. David Benson Watchmen is a postmodern deconstruction of superhero comics. Spaceballs is satire, which itself is a kind of deconstruction and analysis. I figured that analogy was more in folks comfort zone than Rosencranz and Guildenstern are Dead or something.

  5. Watchmen is a postmodern deconstruction of superhero comics. Spaceballs is satire, which itself is a kind of deconstruction and analysis. I figured that analogy was more in folks comfort zone than Rosencranz and Guildenstern are Dead or something.]]>

  6. DC suffers from the problem of failing to see the appeal of their characters and as such, they try to mimic their own success, but copy all the wrong things. (“I know! What everyone wants is for us to throw away all the story we’ve built up for these characters and start over, because all these characters were popular in earlier decades, right?!?”)

  7. It’s worth checking out Rebirth issue 1 to see how they introduce this storyline, because it addresses a bunch of the queries in this thread.

    I’m not a big DC guy at all. I didn’t understand a lot of the issue, which undoes a bunch of the New 52 changes to revert to the old continuity. But I still really enjoyed it. The concept of DC optimism vs Watchmen cynicism is interesting, and Geoff Johns has a strong grasp of both continuity minutiae and the thematic core that makes characters compelling.

    By the end of the issue I thought the choice was really ballsy, and was looking forward to reading a bunch of DC books.

    On the other hand, I was hugely disappointed with this week’s Rebirth: Batman, Superman, and Green Lantern issues. I assumed they were the first issues of the new runs, and they’re not. They’re just weird bridging issues in which nothing happens except shuffling around a bunch of continuity I don’t get or care about. I’ll try again with the actual first issues.

    Disclaimer to all the above: I think Watchmen is just a comic book. I know it’s more to many comics fans.

  8. Chris Gardiner interesting. It’s still weird to me. I mean, what are we gonna have Batman and Comedian team up now? Geoff Johns might as well add himself to the continuity. “Geoff, write us out of this before Lex’s continuity bomb goes off!” “On it, Supes!”

  9. Yeah, I have no clue! I’m intrigued to see where they take it, though. And the DC multiverse is crazy enough to accommodate stories about warring dimensions.

    I also loved it when Marvel brought Angela from Spawn into their universe, too. The decade-long legal wranglings that preceded it made it all the more fun, somehow. Same with Marvel retconning Captain America into their world.

    I dunno. Fictional universes and real words tangling like this is weirdly transgressive and exciting. Pass the popcorn!

  10. It’s the third reboot in what, five years? At this point is a joke.  They are not selling comics anymore, they are selling “events”, worthless paper that you “have to buy” to stay current on DCgeekdom.

    I read the article linked above by Shervyn von Hoerl  and if that move is a meta-commentary as the article says, it’s a stupid commentary by shameless people that want to give the “fault” of writing the twenty years of shitty comics they wrote to somebody else, for example the guy who they are ripping off and will not work for DC anyway… shameless and stupid: it was not Alan Moore that wrote years of comics so shitty they have to cancel and reboot every few MONTHS to avoid sales dropping as a stone.

    DC doesn’t seems to know how to do comics, but maybe it’s a more general things: time-warner and DC seems totally unable to grasp the idea that comics are something more that shitty money-grabbing stunts, and if you see this you begin to realize how this can cause this kind of comics, and the kind of movies and TV series they do too. Every one, from the good (few) to the bad to the ugly wants to distance itself from comic book as much as possible.

  11. Chris Gardiner I get you. If it were any other property, I’d be indifferent, but Watchmen is unique. Treating those characters like normal superheroes with a “continuity” just seems to miss the point. To have Dr. Manhattan interact with a DC universe character, without irony, says to me the author didn’t understand Watchmen.

    But I may simply be a stickler. DC owns the characters, and they’ve decided long ago to give a middle finger to Moore and make more comics with the they can sell, so why am I surprised. I’m just surprised that no one involved pointed out how artistically clueless this is (or just they were finally shouted down).

  12. Watchmen is unique. Treating those characters like normal superheroes with a “continuity” just seems to miss the point. To have Dr. Manhattan interact with a DC universe character, without irony, says to me the author didn’t understand Watchmen. But I may simply be a stickler. DC owns the characters, and they’ve decided long ago to give a middle finger to Moore and make more comics with the they can sell, so why am I surprised. I’m just surprised that no one involved pointed out how artistically clueless this is (or just they were finally shouted down).]]>

  13. “If it were any other property, I’d be indifferent, but Watchmen is unique.”

    Sure – I disagree on this point, which I think explains our divergent thinking on this. Which is cool! Different strokes.

    But that’s why I don’t think it’s artistically clueless. Rebirth 1 is handled with a huge amount of savvy and awareness.

    Of course there are financial concerns. I’m sure there were people at DC/WB looking at this Watchmen IP they’re sitting on and thinking “how can we use this for $$$”.

    But I don’t think artistry and commercial concerns are diametrically opposed. You can tell Johns isn’t going “Oh Christ look what they’re making me do” when he’s writing this. He’s going “Fuck, yeah!” and has found a really clever core theme to make this story rotate around.

    And (and this is a fledgling thought, be gentle with it) if it’s ok for Watchmen to parody mainstream comics, then the reverse should be ok too, right? This feels like DC parodying it right back…

    I may be abusing the word ‘parody’, there.

    > I now want to see if Blue Beetle and Night Owl ever meet.

    This is why I want to see this! Comic heroes are always meeting alternate versions of themselves and it rarely means much. This, though… 🙂

  14. course there are financial concerns. I’m sure there were people at DC/WB looking at this Watchmen IP they’re sitting on and thinking “how can we use this for $$$”. But I don’t think artistry and commercial concerns are diametrically opposed. You can tell Johns isn’t going “Oh Christ look what they’re making me do” when he’s writing this. He’s going “Fuck, yeah!” and has found a really clever core theme to make this story rotate around. And (and this is a fledgling thought, be gentle with it) if it’s ok for Watchmen to parody mainstream comics, then the reverse should be ok too, right? This feels like DC parodying it right back… I may be abusing the word ‘parody’, there. > I now want to see if Blue Beetle and Night Owl ever meet. This is why I want to see this! Comic heroes are always meeting alternate versions of themselves and it rarely means much. This, though… :)]]>

  15. “To have Dr. Manhattan interact with a DC universe character, without irony, says to me the author didn’t understand Watchmen.”

    I don’t think it’s irony, but I think they’re intentionally doing an “it’s a story about stories” thing. People probably didn’t point out it was artistically clueless because it’s more likely that the problem is being artistically overwrought and/or self-serving.

  16. “To have Dr. Manhattan interact with a DC universe character, without irony, says to me the author didn’t understand Watchmen.” I don’t think it’s irony, but I think they’re intentionally doing an “it’s a story about stories” thing. People probably didn’t point out it was artistically clueless because it’s more likely that the problem is being artistically overwrought and/or self-serving.]]>

  17. A guy I know let me read his “DC Universe: rebirth #1”.
    It’s worse than I thought.
    Most of the book was totally obscure, but I expected that. This is a book for hardcore fans who keep current with DC continuity, they stopped even caring about casual or new readers a lot of time ago.

    The prose was overblown, the text in the balloons overbearing and dense, but i expected that too, it’s what pass for “good writing” in DC and Marvel books these days.

    What I did NOT expect, was that the writer could show, in the very first book, that they were not even able to understand Watchmen. And I am not talking about some “hidden meaning”: they clearly could not understand even the story.

    For the people who have read the book: the object that Batman find at the end of the 4th chapter. It never, ever had any meaning at all for the characters in Watchmen. It was only between the writer and the readers.
    It  “make sense” to use it only because it was used for marketing the book. So, it makes no sense at all in the fiction.
    The only version of Watchmen where the characters were using that object was this one, so probably it’s the one the writers were thinking about: