JEFF JENSEN ON EW'S WATCHMEN: AN ORAL HISTORY

[MattBrady]

Open up this week’s Entertainment Weekly, page past the articles on Charlize Theron and Robert Downey Jr, and you’ll come across one of the biggest, meatiest articles on a specific comic work to grace a mainstream publication in months, if not years.

“Watchmen: An Oral History” by EW Senior Writer Jeff Jensen takes a look back at the landmark comics work, while serves as an introduction and “why you should care” guide to EW readers who’ve never heard of it.

“Entertainment Weekly often does oral histories on pop culture classics, exploring their origins, impact and legacy,” Jensen said when asked of the origins of the piece. “Watchmen is a pop culture classic, one with a creative legacy that extends into mainstream pop culture and is being felt today, and we wanted to acknowledge that.”

The idea to turn the focus of one of their Oral History articles on to Watchmen came late last year, admittedly, when the Paramount movie seemed to be moving full steam ahead with director Paul Greengrass (the project was officially killed at the studio in early June).

“In light of that, we thought it would be interesting to explain and explore the significance of the comic book itself,” Jensen said. “But once we began talking it through, we realized this would be a cool idea even if the movie never came to pass--and it didn't.

“Watchmen is certainly one of the most influential comic books of the past 20 years. With Dark Knight, it is the reason why superhero comics are taken seriously today by the mainstream media. We also knew that many people in Hollywood claimed Watchmen as an influence on their work. Joss Whedon and Lost co-creator Damon Lindelof--these are the kids of Watchmen, and their work bears its mark. Personally, I'm fond of stories that illuminate the not-so-obvious classics and track their impact across time. Watchmen seemed to more than fit the bill.”

But still – five pages in EW is pretty valuable real estate. If you consider text only, the cover feature of this week’s issue on Charlize Theron only had four pages (plus one full-page photo. Page-wise, it’s one of the, if not the longest article in the magazine this week.

And it’s for a comic book.

“Our editors believed in the story--and the subject matter deserved it,” Jensen said. “We also had the benefit/curse of access to a number of people, which gave us an abundance of riches that demanded extra space. Honestly? I would have killed for an extra 1000 words. Okay, maybe not killed. But certainly maimed.”

And yes, Jensen knows that there are cynics who will point out that both Entertainment Weekly and Watchmen publisher are both owned by Time-Warner (something not noted in the article), and DC recently released a $75 Absolute Edition of the work that earns the company little money if it just sits on store shelves.

“When we learned that there was an Absolute Edition in the works, we did decide to time our oral history to its release,” Jensen said. “But we were doing it, anyway, and it would have run without the news hook. Amazingly, we were smart enough to come up with this on our own.It's not an ad, nor is it corporate synergy at work. It's journalism.”

So – potential controversy aside, what exactly is in an Oral History of Watchmen? Plenty, Jensen explained. “The oral history includes interviews with Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, colorist John Higgins and editors Len Wein and Barbara Kesel, as well as Neil Gaiman, Joss Whedon, Damon Lindelof, and Watchmen screenwriter David Hayter. There's also a special guest appearance by Jude Law. We have sidebars on all the major characters and Watchmen's influence on pop culture. The oral history proper tracks the origin of Watchmen, how Alan and Dave came up with the storytelling approach, and Alan's regard for the subsequent darkening of comics and Watchmen's possible cinematic extrapolation.”

Though a pretty serious comic reader and fan himself, Jensen said that, in putting the article together, there were nuggets of Watchmen lore that he’d never hear before.

“I loved learning things like Moore's favorite issue of Watchmen - issue four--the Dr. Manhattan origin story, or how Gibbons had his wife and son drawing up the nine panel grids to save time, or how Moore would hire taxi drivers to take pages of the script to Gibbons. Watchmen always struck me as a product of considerable forward thinking and pre-planning, but I was surprised to discover just how much of it ‘found’ along the way. It wasn't until after Alan wrote the first issue that he realized who was behind Rorschach's mask. He didn't know, when he began writing, that the series would alternate between origin stories and issues of pure plot; though they were contracted to produce 12 issues, Moore realized as he wrote the first issue that he really only had enough plot for six issues. So he and Dave came up with the idea of origin issues to fill out the run. Necessity became the mother of invention.”

In closing, Jensen said that, in his view (and the respective views of many of the comic fans who are now professionals in other fields who contributed to the article), Watchmen serves as a breakpoint – something that scuttles the idea of “Ages” in comics. Looking at the scope of the history of comics in America, Jensen said that you can put comics into “before Watchmen” and “after Watchmen” timeframes.

“I do think what gets missed is that Watchmen really was a summary of everything that came before it. To paraphrase something Joss Whedon told me, 'Watchmen was proof of everything a comic could do, but also an affirmation of everything comics had done.' It was made with equal parts comic book fandom and superhero revisionism. I agree that Watchmen ushered in the age of more sophisticated, older-skewing comics, one that's really bearing fruit today, with kids of Watchmen like Bendis and Brian K. Vaughan, and film and TV types like Whedon and Lindelof who are coming into comics.”

EW graciously provided and allowed Newsarama to show the pages from the article for this report. Though readable (depending upon your eyesight), EW recommends that you buy this week's issue for the full reading expereince. Likewise, if this issue shows strong sales, the magazine will be more likely to tackle comics in a similar fashion in future issues.

[AllAboutMe]

Awesome comic coverage!
Is it me, or does it look like in the title page of the articel that it is presented as "Watch Men"?

[BriRi]

Originally posted by AllAboutMe
Is it me, or does it look like in the title page of the articel that it is presented as "Watch Men"?

That's probably intentional since the image we're seeing looks like it is actually a 2 page spread, and the title runs through the gutter. If you were looking at it in a magazine, it would look more like one word.

[Dave Hudson]

Apart from the inanity of calling it an 'Oral History' this looks like an in-depth and well written article not the usual moronic rubbish that mainstream journalists cook up when covering the subject of comics.

[roccomorocco]

Another TimeWarner coincidence: This week's Time Magazine includes Watchmen in its list of the 100 best novels of the last 80 years.

Watchmen deserves the praise, but the continued recognition is likely to keep Watchmen in print forever, foreclosing the return of the publication rights to alan Moore.

[RAB]

I was *stunned* to flip the page in the new EW yesterday and see the huge Watchmen article. Even more, to realize that Moore and Gibbons were interviewed for the story. The only thing that jumped out at me as I read it was the way in which quotes from other creators were almost randomly inserted in the middle of the story at various points (Gaiman, Whedon, etc.). In print, it leads you to think that all the creators participated in the interview, but as you read through it you get the feeling it was a bit of "cut and paste" with various quotes. A very well done piece nonetheless.

FYI: The Watchmen Absolute edition also gets a nod in the new Rolling Stone...

[Regulator]

It never fails to amuse me. When something like this happens, it's like we, as comic fans, had never read a magazine before. You've never seen quotes interspersed into an article? And the Oral History thing, if you read the Newsarama article, seems to be EW's own nomenclature for an in-depth review. It's called that because it's an EW feature, not because it's Watchmen or a comic book.

[Blind Assassin]

oops double post...see below

[Blind Assassin]

Also in this week's EW, they give stellar scores and reviews to books like

Infinite Crisis #1
Pyongyang HC
Black Hole HC
Bone Sharps and Thunder Lizards OGN

Nice variety there, and I highly recommend both Pyongyang (a tale of a french animator's experience living in Pyongyan) as well as Black Hole (Charles Burns epic story of mutation and murder among 1970's seattle teens.)

[KingPagla]

DC has been doing a great job in getting coverage in the mainstream press lately.

There was mention of both Idnetity Crisis and Infinite Crisis in the New York Times recently as well.

[RAB]

Originally posted by Regulator
It never fails to amuse me. When something like this happens, it's like we, as comic fans, had never read a magazine before. You've never seen quotes interspersed into an article? And the Oral History thing, if you read the Newsarama article, seems to be EW's own nomenclature for an in-depth review. It's called that because it's an EW feature, not because it's Watchmen or a comic book.

Uhm...yes, of course I've seen quotes interspersed throughout articles before. I just thought, on the first read-through, that perhaps all the creators were involved in the same interview, given that their quotes were sometimes placed beside or right after one another in the main article. I wasn't complaining or even critiquing, just making an observation. I was far from confused about a magzine being the same thing as a comic book. I'll try to choose my words more carefully next time.

[President Kang]

I really, REALLY think that the hotness of Charlize Theron on the cover should be a selling point of this article as well.



For British eyes only....

[OM]

Originally posted by President Kang
I really, REALLY think that the hotness of Charlize Theron on the cover should be a selling point of this article as well.



For British eyes only....

...Yeah, you gotta admit that as great as Watchmen is, most of us would rather have some sort of oral history with Charlize :->

[metr0man]

This seems like a really cool insightful article from teh screencaps.

One interesting note is that Alan Moore has read Hayter's draft, and says "David Hayter's screenplay was as close as I could imagine anyone getting to Watchmen".
When you combine that with the positive reviews the script has gotten, i get a good feeling that his movie (if it ever gets made) will be good and not an LXG cluster____.

[BuckySinister]

Lots of cool opinion/behind-the-scenes stuff in that article. I wish the Absolute edition had more of that kind of thing; I loved seeing the original pitch, but I'd have liked this kind of commentary, too. Might have made the 75 bucks sting a little bit less.

Anyway. My favorite odd bit of info here: the Comedian was based, in part, on G. Gordon Liddy. Nice!

[Supreme Convoy]

Just bought it today and I thought it was a well done article!

[President Kang]

so, is this issue hitting on Tuesday or is it out already?

[Mercury]

"Mainstream" coverage of comic books! Someone splash cold water on Joe Quesada right away, he is sure to be having a seizure. Incidentally, Alan Moore's quote is spot on- his book is a comic book, not a movie, not this or that.. I wish more shared those views and didn't try to make comics something their not, with 'director's cuts', 'season 2's, and 'tons of dvd-style extras'.

-Mercury-

[Blind Assassin]

Originally posted by President Kang
so, is this issue hitting on Tuesday or is it out already?

I got mine in the mail today.

[Blind Assassin]

Originally posted by Mercury
"Mainstream" coverage of comic books! Someone splash cold water on Joe Quesada right away, he is sure to be having a seizure.

Why?

didn't marvel get coverage on CNN for The Rawhide Kid, as well as having Stan Lee (and others) interviewed over the success of Spider-Man and X-Men?

its not as if Marvel has never had any mainstream coverage.

[manosx]

Originally posted by Mercury
"Mainstream" coverage of comic books! Someone splash cold water on Joe Quesada right away, he is sure to be having a seizure.
-Mercury-

Yeah, I don't get this either. Joe Q. said that the most mainstream press he has recieved was on Areana(sp?), and he has done a ton of interviews since taking over as E-I-C. Can you explain what you meant by this? (And I really hope it's not just general Marvel-bashing. That's be really sad.)

[Blind Assassin]

Originally posted by manosx
Yeah, I don't get this either. Joe Q. said that the most mainstream press he has recieved was on Areana(sp?), and he has done a ton of interviews since taking over as E-I-C. Can you explain what you meant by this? (And I really hope it's not just general Marvel-bashing. That's be really sad.)

I forgot about the Arana coverage.

I know people all laughed about it, but I had a guy come into the shop and ask about the book because he had read about it in a magazine.

So, any coverage for any company is always a good thing.

EW has been very comic supportive for quite some time now and you can find graphic novel and trade reviews in their magazines very often. Sometimes, some of them get reviewed in the book section (I think Persepolis was one that ended up there)

[Mercury]

I didn't mean it in regards to Marvel *not* getting mainsteam coverage, and I don't "bash" anything- that'd be prejudicial and biased and small-minded, and I absolutely love and have an emotional investment in much of the Marvel Universe, so am reluctant to blindingly "bash" something. so theres that. it was really a bemused joke that refers to Joe Q.'s mission for mainsteam acceptance for comics. No, I don't say hes wrong, I understand its a business, whatever- I was refering to that only. And if you dont know what I'm talking about, then you only need do your homework and read several interviews or Joe Fridays to see Joe's consistent and regular comments of "one more step towards the mainstream!" "this will get mainsteam attention", and so forth, and the trend of having various television, b-movie, and script writers write comics in place of comic professionals. So.. THAT is what my comment was about.

No, thats not bashing, and all of those points I stated were fact. Joe Quesada has many good points, so there you go.

[zeraze1]

Originally posted by Blind Assassin
Why?

didn't marvel get coverage on CNN for The Rawhide Kid, as well as having Stan Lee (and others) interviewed over the success of Spider-Man and X-Men?

its not as if Marvel has never had any mainstream coverage.

Too true. Joss Whedon work's Astonishing X-Men got coverage TV Guide and Entertainment Weekly.

Earlier this year, Reginald Hudlin's current run on Black Panther series was well covered in mainstream outlets like:

Upscale Magazine

Black America Web

NY Daily News

Chicago Sun Times

The Seattle Times

So, Marvel titles can and do get attention from mainstream media.

zeraze

[Blind Assassin]

yeah, and if KING turns out to be who everyone thinks it is, be sure that they will have even more mainstream coverage.