Alan Moore Calls For Boycott Of HERCULES Movie

Chuck_Melville

Alan Moore believes his late friend, Steve Moore (no relation) got a raw deal.

bleedingcool.com/2014/07/17/alan-moore-calls-for-boycott-of-wretched-film-hercules-on-behalf-of-friend-steve-moore/

Krescan

The Rock doesn't care what you call a boycott for!

spid

I am sorry in this day and age I don't feel sorry for creators who do not look out for themselves in terms of movie deals. Radical seemed pretty up front to the readers they were producing comics so that could base films off them. How did I know as a reader yet the creator not know?

Chuck_Melville

spid said:

I am sorry in this day and age I don't feel sorry for creators who do not look out for themselves in terms of movie deals. Radical seemed pretty up front to the readers they were producing comics so that could base films off them. How did I know as a reader yet the creator not know?

The problem wasn't that there was going to be a movie based on the comic -- the problems were that they weren't going to pay Steve Moore if the movie went forward (Radical appears to have misrepresented themselves when the contract for the comic was being written; a promise to pay $15,000 if a film was made seems to have vanished sometime between the contract's first draft and the final, signed version)... they completely changed a lot of the story, in spite of the care Moore put into keeping to historical facts about the time, the country and the original myths about Hercules... and then continued to use Moore's name to promote the film after he asked to have his name removed from, and to not be associated with, the production and then made it appear that their relationship with him was loving and cordial when it was anything but.

playdohsrepublic

I feel like this is going to be an easy one to skip...

Chuck_Melville

playdohsrepublic said:

I feel like this is going to be an easy one to skip...

Yeah, just based on the previews I wasn't inclined to rush out and see it anyway. Now I have a Moral Reason not to as well.

WetRats

Now I want to see it just to piss off Alan Mordru.

spid

Chuck_Melville said:

spid said:

I am sorry in this day and age I don't feel sorry for creators who do not look out for themselves in terms of movie deals. Radical seemed pretty up front to the readers they were producing comics so that could base films off them. How did I know as a reader yet the creator not know?

The problem wasn't that there was going to be a movie based on the comic -- the problems were that they weren't going to pay Steve Moore if the movie went forward (Radical appears to have misrepresented themselves when the contract for the comic was being written; a promise to pay $15,000 if a film was made seems to have vanished sometime between the contract's first draft and the final, signed version)... they completely changed a lot of the story, in spite of the care Moore put into keeping to historical facts about the time, the country and the original myths about Hercules... and then continued to use Moore's name to promote the film after he asked to have his name removed from, and to not be associated with, the production and then made it appear that their relationship with him was loving and cordial when it was anything but.

It sounds like to me Steve Moore did not pay attention to what he was signing. People get lawyers to look over contracts for a reason. I am sorry, but I have little sympathy for his situation. It was not just one bad deal and he got burned. He did two series for them if things were so bad why did he do a second book?

Chuck_Melville

spid said:

It sounds like to me Steve Moore did not pay attention to what he was signing. People get lawyers to look over contracts for a reason. I am sorry, but I have little sympathy for his situation. It was not just one bad deal and he got burned. He did two series for them if things were so bad why did he do a second book?

I don't know the timing, but I would expect that he hadn't yet realized he was burnt when he did the second book. I agree that he wasn't careful enough to check the final contract over when he signed it, but he did so in good faith, expecting it to be unchanged from the first draft. If the offer of bonus payment in the event of a film was withdrawn, then Radical was certainly beholden to inform him of that; withholding that info was a rather sleazy bit of business and I'm far more loathe to blame the victim than I am the snake oil salesman.

ChrisBeckett

I hate the "creator should look out for himself" argument. It's too simplistic and it pisses me off.
Sure, they need to look out for themselves, but when promises made - whether written down in initial drafts of a contract or done with a handshake - are broken, that is wrong. Christ, who doesn't understand that? But, no, let's blame the creator, who has deadlines and pressure from the company screwing them over, and just be done with it.
Stupid non-argument.

mwhitt80

Alan Mordru has turned into MSNBC/Fox News for comics. Interesting to listen too, but in a vacuum never trust his version of the truth.

SolitaireRose

mwhitt80 said:

Alan Mordru has turned into MSNBC/Fox News for comics. Interesting to listen too, but in a vacuum never trust his version of the truth.

Oddly, I feel the opposite. He doesn't need the money, so he has no problem calling out corporations when they screw over creators. After reading through what happened, the way Radical runs their business makes a used car salesman seem like a saint.

Must be why big name creators very quickly ran away from them after their big splash entry into comics.

Please name something he's said that has turned out to be wrong about how he was treated by DC or Marvel, because everything I've heard from his has turned out to be accurate. I'm not being snarky, I'm honestly asking. Marvel used shady international loopholes to rob him of his copyrights on his work on Captain Britain, DC was similarly shady in how the rooked him out of royalties on Watchmen merch and I could make a very good case that their contract on Watchmen was misrepresented.

I trust Moore because, while he has an axe to grind, it's not like he's out for the money.

mwhitt80

One should never trust anyone with an axe to grind and an unmalleable perspective without knowing more facts than what said person is presenting. That's how you get an edited video of government employee saying she didn't help white families get ag loans becoming a news story.

RedRight88

Chuck_Melville said:

playdohsrepublic said:

I feel like this is going to be an easy one to skip...

Yeah, just based on the previews I wasn't inclined to rush out and see it anyway. Now I have a Moral Reason not to as well.

Tell me about it; I saw the preview before Godzilla and the point in the trailer where The Rock goes "I am....HERCULES!!!" the entire audience burst into laughter.

I don't think that's what the filmmakers were going for.

bralinator

Can I still not see this movie, as planned, but now feel morally superior for my lack of enthusiasm for it?

CaptShazam

ChrisBeckett said:

I hate the "creator should look out for himself" argument. It's too simplistic and it pisses me off.
Sure, they need to look out for themselves, but when promises made - whether written down in initial drafts of a contract or done with a handshake - are broken, that is wrong. Christ, who doesn't understand that? But, no, let's blame the creator, who has deadlines and pressure from the company screwing them over, and just be done with it.
Stupid non-argument.

It is not a non argument because of decades of the industry screwing over creators. An initial draft and a handshake mean nothing. It is wrong for the company to screw you over but if someone is too naive to have a legal person look at the final copy, then while not doing anything "wrong" the creator is at least guilty of not doing everything right.

No matter how the company sells themselves, they are not the creators friends looking out for the best interest of the creator. They are a business looking to make the most money possible. After generations of creators being done wrong by companies, a creator not reviewing every version of a business deal with legal representation is basically allowing the companies lawyers to dictate terms and possibly rip the creator off.

It should not be this way. You should be able to have trust in that initial handshake or rough draft of a deal. We all know though that when money is involved, that this type of trust is unrealistic.

spid

CaptShazam said:

ChrisBeckett said:

I hate the "creator should look out for himself" argument. It's too simplistic and it pisses me off.
Sure, they need to look out for themselves, but when promises made - whether written down in initial drafts of a contract or done with a handshake - are broken, that is wrong. Christ, who doesn't understand that? But, no, let's blame the creator, who has deadlines and pressure from the company screwing them over, and just be done with it.
Stupid non-argument.

It is not a non argument because of decades of the industry screwing over creators. An initial draft and a handshake mean nothing. It is wrong for the company to screw you over but if someone is too naive to have a legal person look at the final copy, then while not doing anything "wrong" the creator is at least guilty of not doing everything right.

No matter how the company sells themselves, they are not the creators friends looking out for the best interest of the creator. They are a business looking to make the most money possible. After generations of creators being done wrong by companies, a creator not reviewing every version of a business deal with legal representation is basically allowing the companies lawyers to dictate terms and possibly rip the creator off.

It should not be this way. You should be able to have trust in that initial handshake or rough draft of a deal. We all know though that when money is involved, that this type of trust is unrealistic.

It is also not like the guy had a friend who constantly claims someone screwed him over in a movie deal like say Alan Moore. Personal responsibility does not go out the door just because you are creative. It wouldn't work for any of us in court why does it work for creators now know darn well their work could turn into a movie. This is not a work from the 20s, 30s, or 40s this is a deal from 2007/2008 when everyone knows what could happen to a comic property.

DoctorDoom

I like the Rock, but I wasn't going to see it. But I guess it comes with a free side of this mystical "moral superiority" thing now?

Chuck_Melville

And yet, my sympathies are still with Steve Moore on this. There's no question that he wasn't as careful as he should have been, that he should have checked the contract over more carefully before actually putting his signature on it. But his errors in this regard are foolish oversights, whereas Radical's actions are more criminal, and I think that's the chief difference.

Besides, the issues over the contract have nothing to do with Radical's other transgressions: rewriting his story for the movie, continuing to use his name to promote the film despite requests to remove his name entirely, or putting out public statements declaring how Moore was completely in synch with everything Radical or the studio was doing (an action best known as 'lying').

playdohsrepublic

Radical was kind of a dirtbag company though so this isn't a surprise. Do they even still exist as a publisher? Radical hasn't released a book in over 2 years.

spid

Chuck_Melville said:

And yet, my sympathies are still with Steve Moore on this. There's no question that he wasn't as careful as he should have been, that he should have checked the contract over more carefully before actually putting his signature on it. But his errors in this regard are foolish oversights, whereas Radical's actions are more criminal, and I think that's the chief difference.

Besides, the issues over the contract have nothing to do with Radical's other transgressions: rewriting his story for the movie, continuing to use his name to promote the film despite requests to remove his name entirely, or putting out public statements declaring how Moore was completely in synch with everything Radical or the studio was doing (an action best known as 'lying').

We are only hearing one side of the story from a third party, and even this bias source paints Steve Moore's behavior as foolish in this day and age.

I wish some of the effort calling for boycotts were spent helping future creators avoid this kind of foolish behavior. How about establishing a legal fund to help creators review contracts?

RickM

That's all well and good, but Irina Shayk is in this movie.

nweathington

The local movie reviewer said this morning that it’s “easily the worst movie of the year.” Sounds like Steve Moore was right to try to disassociate himself from the movie.

playdohsrepublic

I'm sorry, but I have trouble believing that a Brett Ratner film could possibly be the "worst movie of the year".... Oh wait...

spid

IGN has a more positive take on the movie

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/07/25/hercules-review

The knocks I've seen about the movie seem to be things that were in the comic book.

tazmaniak

spid said:

IGN has a more positive take on the movie

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/07/25/hercules-review

The knocks I've seen about the movie seem to be things that were in the comic book.

From the dozen or so reviews I've glanced at, most of them had a positive take on it. None of them claim it's a great movie, but they seem to agree that it's a fun action-adventure film.

I tend to only see superhero films in the theaters, so I won't be seeing this one until it's out on streaming or Blu-ray. If anyone does catch it, let us know what you thought about it.