sfletcher26's review against another edition
4.0
When I heard DC were putting this project together I was more than a little concerned though not surprised. I understand their reasons for doing so seeing as Watchmen is without doubt the greatest Graffic Novel ever produced.
when however I hear JMS would be involved in the project I was hopeful it would be something a little more than milking the cash cow.
This book though is a little mixed. The Nite Owl and Molloch stories are good but I have to wonder whether they actually add to the story. The Dr Manhattan story is however fantastic. I don't think anyone other than JMS could have written this and given us a take on the character.
when however I hear JMS would be involved in the project I was hopeful it would be something a little more than milking the cash cow.
This book though is a little mixed. The Nite Owl and Molloch stories are good but I have to wonder whether they actually add to the story. The Dr Manhattan story is however fantastic. I don't think anyone other than JMS could have written this and given us a take on the character.
jessjarbinks's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
joshgauthier's review against another edition
3.0
Honestly, I have a hard time rating some of these prequels.
Problems:
The whole in Nite Owl just feels tired by now. We've seen that character before and this version doesn't even feel particularly believable.
Separately, it was just one line, but it felt like they lost sight of Rorschach's character for a moment.
The chaotic, reality-bending story in Dr. Manhattan didn't feel (to me) like it added a whole lot to the character or the story, and I wasn't particularly a fan of the ending. It also felt too dependent on knowledge of the original novel rather than building anything new.
Successes:
The stories were otherwise generally interesting, complex and did manage to add some unique insight and information to the world and characters of Watchmen.
Moloch's story was engaging and was an instance where these prequels really did manage to cover new ground.
All in all, this volume was a fair and generally interesting read. It's not mind blowing, but it tells a sound story, particularly for fans of the original who aren't put off by the idea of the prequels in general.
Problems:
The whole
Spoiler
psycho, evil preacher storylineSeparately, it was just one line, but it felt like they lost sight of Rorschach's character for a moment.
The chaotic, reality-bending story in Dr. Manhattan didn't feel (to me) like it added a whole lot to the character or the story, and I wasn't particularly a fan of the ending. It also felt too dependent on knowledge of the original novel rather than building anything new.
Successes:
The stories were otherwise generally interesting, complex and did manage to add some unique insight and information to the world and characters of Watchmen.
Moloch's story was engaging and was an instance where these prequels really did manage to cover new ground.
All in all, this volume was a fair and generally interesting read. It's not mind blowing, but it tells a sound story, particularly for fans of the original who aren't put off by the idea of the prequels in general.
mschlat's review against another edition
2.0
Some caveats: I never thought the Before Watchmen project was necessary or even desirable --- I think Moore and Gibbons' work is an outstanding piece of literature on its own. I have also never read any Straczynski that moved me. So I probably wasn't very disposed to the book to start with, and only really picked it up due to vague curiosity and the Adam Hughes artwork.
That being said, I thought the Nite Owl story was horrendous.
I do have to give Straczynski credit --- none of the stories are simple fill-ins with little connection to Watchmen. Indeed, the stories here are more appropriately titles During Watchmen than Before Watchmen. However, the Nite Owl story decides to give the character almost the same awakening he experiences in Watchmen before the events in Watchmen. It pretty much invalidates much of the character development in Moore's work. Moreover, the Kubert art, while nice, seems like an odd fit with a Ditko-inspired character. Also, we have a rampaging stereotyped insane Christian fundamentalist preacher as a villain.
The Dr. Manhattan story is better, if only because it explores the physical and metaphysical implications of the character. However, we still end up with a scene that totally reinterprets the events of the core novel just to titillate the continuity fans.
That being said, I thought the Nite Owl story was horrendous.
I do have to give Straczynski credit --- none of the stories are simple fill-ins with little connection to Watchmen. Indeed, the stories here are more appropriately titles During Watchmen than Before Watchmen. However, the Nite Owl story decides to give the character almost the same awakening he experiences in Watchmen before the events in Watchmen. It pretty much invalidates much of the character development in Moore's work. Moreover, the Kubert art, while nice, seems like an odd fit with a Ditko-inspired character. Also, we have a rampaging stereotyped insane Christian fundamentalist preacher as a villain.
The Dr. Manhattan story is better, if only because it explores the physical and metaphysical implications of the character. However, we still end up with a scene that totally reinterprets the events of the core novel just to titillate the continuity fans.
pbobrit's review against another edition
4.0
This is my favourite of the Before Watchmen series. It starts with Bill Sienliewicz (Elecktra) drawn story about Nite Owl ... art work is amazing and the story decent. The Dr. Manhattan story is probably the best of them so far, nice and complex and nuanced with good artwork. The book ends with Moloch's story, the weakest for artwork but the story ties nicely with the original Watchmen novel.
mjfmjfmjf's review against another edition
4.0
Yet another good addition to the Watchmen universe. The one on the 2nd Nite Owl was most enjoyable. The Dr. Manhattan was the deepest and most involved. The Moloch one the most surprising. The art is consistently good enough - and tying all the threads together continues to work just fine.
buer's review against another edition
1.0
Like everybody who is alive and who has given it a fair shot, I love Watchmen. Moore and Gibbons wanted Watchmen to prove that comic books can tell a powerful story in a way that cannot be achieved through any other medium and they succeeded. Exceptionally.
Before Watchmen, like many prequels or sequels, especially those that are only related to their inspiration by brand rather than creators, sucked. And I hate to use such a boring, overused word for how awful this book is, but that's all it deserves.
Watchmen ushered in a new kind of comics. It was serious, political, and very adult. Before Watchmen took memorable images and events from Watchmen and explained them with stories that we have seen many, many times before. And have seen done better before. Rorschach, for instance, evidently got is "The End is Nigh" sign from his maniac preacher who was trying to "cleanse the city" by sleeping with, killing and then stockpiling prostitutes in his church's basement, with the plan of burning the pile of corpses (and his church with it) once the pile got big enough. I mean seriously, how many TIMES have we seen the corrupt preacher trope at this point? And how many times has it been at least a little bit more elegant than "homophobe preacher who likes paying cheap prostitutes for sex kills one, finds out he likes it and then FILLS HIS BASEMENT WITH PROSTITUTES WITH THE INTENTION OF BURNING HIS CHURCH DOWN FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY?!?! Rorschach did not need that back story.
Watchmen did not shy away from adult themes, but Before Watchmen relied on them. Moore and Gibbons made superheroes people by showing us every facet of their lives, including their awkward or violent sex lives. The crew of idiots (sorry, but seriously) who who put together Before Watchmen fanboyed their way through every scene that involved a female, even if only peripherally, by drawing the biggest boobs and most scanty, tight or see-through clothing. Sex and nudity is a thing in graphic novels, I get that. Everyone who reads graphic novels gets that. But there is sex and nudity that makes sense and there is sex and nudity that is there because either the artist feels like drawing a naked woman or because DC decided that the comic will sell better if there are lots and lots of naked ladies in it.
Now, I understand that the exploration of the Rorschach/Nite Owl partnership was also supposed to be used as a vehicle to discuss violence against women. But it was so clumsily done (the discussion essentially boiled down to the very offensive questions of 1) if crimes against prostitutes should even be investigated because they're "just whores" and 2) if, indeed, "real men" beat women. (Spoiler, our heroes don't think so, but everyone else does.) Rather than pointing out that women have independent worth as human beings, the story focuses on how different men see women. Not only that, but that section in particular was so full of picture after picture of objectified women that any pro-woman message was swallowed up by very objectified bodies. It also doesn't help that the only woman with a voice in this section, Twilight Lady, is introduced to us naked and throws out such inspired gems as "When women do it for free, they're called sluts. When they do it for money, they're called whores."
There are so many other things that are wrong with Before Watchmen, but it seems silly to waste my time talking about all of it. The creators insert klutzy plot points to the story we already know, the art sometimes verges on cartoony (check out the page where the Nite Owl is recognized by Twilight Lady), the dialogue is repetitive (humph) and "self-aware" in completely ridiculous moments (why does Ozymandias criticize his own use of intelligent sounding words?), they completely hijack successful scenes from Watchmen (Dr. Manhattan experiencing time with his old photo on Mars, for instance) and, worst of all, their super clumsy use of Schrodinger's cat leading to Dr. Manhattan destroying hundreds if not thousands if not MILLIONS of other realities. I'm sorry. Dude would impassively think that was an interesting phenomenon, and be intrigued by his sudden access to new viewpoints. FOR SERIOUS.
I honestly have a hard time believing that the people who made Before Watchmen even LIKED Watchmen.
Edit(Oh, also, from a nitpicky and aesthetic point of view, I really missed the gorgeous scene changes and the way that the text would line up perfectly with the images in the original. That was breathtaking.)
Before Watchmen, like many prequels or sequels, especially those that are only related to their inspiration by brand rather than creators, sucked. And I hate to use such a boring, overused word for how awful this book is, but that's all it deserves.
Watchmen ushered in a new kind of comics. It was serious, political, and very adult. Before Watchmen took memorable images and events from Watchmen and explained them with stories that we have seen many, many times before. And have seen done better before. Rorschach, for instance, evidently got is "The End is Nigh" sign from his maniac preacher who was trying to "cleanse the city" by sleeping with, killing and then stockpiling prostitutes in his church's basement, with the plan of burning the pile of corpses (and his church with it) once the pile got big enough. I mean seriously, how many TIMES have we seen the corrupt preacher trope at this point? And how many times has it been at least a little bit more elegant than "homophobe preacher who likes paying cheap prostitutes for sex kills one, finds out he likes it and then FILLS HIS BASEMENT WITH PROSTITUTES WITH THE INTENTION OF BURNING HIS CHURCH DOWN FOR THE GOOD OF THE CITY?!?! Rorschach did not need that back story.
Watchmen did not shy away from adult themes, but Before Watchmen relied on them. Moore and Gibbons made superheroes people by showing us every facet of their lives, including their awkward or violent sex lives. The crew of idiots (sorry, but seriously) who who put together Before Watchmen fanboyed their way through every scene that involved a female, even if only peripherally, by drawing the biggest boobs and most scanty, tight or see-through clothing. Sex and nudity is a thing in graphic novels, I get that. Everyone who reads graphic novels gets that. But there is sex and nudity that makes sense and there is sex and nudity that is there because either the artist feels like drawing a naked woman or because DC decided that the comic will sell better if there are lots and lots of naked ladies in it.
Now, I understand that the exploration of the Rorschach/Nite Owl partnership was also supposed to be used as a vehicle to discuss violence against women. But it was so clumsily done (the discussion essentially boiled down to the very offensive questions of 1) if crimes against prostitutes should even be investigated because they're "just whores" and 2) if, indeed, "real men" beat women. (Spoiler, our heroes don't think so, but everyone else does.) Rather than pointing out that women have independent worth as human beings, the story focuses on how different men see women. Not only that, but that section in particular was so full of picture after picture of objectified women that any pro-woman message was swallowed up by very objectified bodies. It also doesn't help that the only woman with a voice in this section, Twilight Lady, is introduced to us naked and throws out such inspired gems as "When women do it for free, they're called sluts. When they do it for money, they're called whores."
There are so many other things that are wrong with Before Watchmen, but it seems silly to waste my time talking about all of it. The creators insert klutzy plot points to the story we already know, the art sometimes verges on cartoony (check out the page where the Nite Owl is recognized by Twilight Lady), the dialogue is repetitive (humph) and "self-aware" in completely ridiculous moments (why does Ozymandias criticize his own use of intelligent sounding words?), they completely hijack successful scenes from Watchmen (Dr. Manhattan experiencing time with his old photo on Mars, for instance) and, worst of all, their super clumsy use of Schrodinger's cat leading to Dr. Manhattan destroying hundreds if not thousands if not MILLIONS of other realities. I'm sorry. Dude would impassively think that was an interesting phenomenon, and be intrigued by his sudden access to new viewpoints. FOR SERIOUS.
I honestly have a hard time believing that the people who made Before Watchmen even LIKED Watchmen.
Edit(Oh, also, from a nitpicky and aesthetic point of view, I really missed the gorgeous scene changes and the way that the text would line up perfectly with the images in the original. That was breathtaking.)
darylnash's review against another edition
3.0
If "Watchmen" hadn't been on the cover, I might have rated this four stars. As is, it's not bad.
Nite Owl mostly fills in spaces in the Watchmen timeline that didn't need to be, and does so with rather cliche offerings. It is the weakest of the bunch. Dr. Manhattan imagines that the titular (why does that word seem obscene in this context?) character actually lives in a quantum mechanical universe rather than the more strictly Newtonian universe of the original graphic novel. It's an interesting slantwise look at the science and philosophy of the original Watchmen, although the plot and art are less daring than the notion. Moloch, like Nite Owl, didn't need his backstory detailed, but it's a better opportunity to do something interesting with the material, and Straczynski takes it.
The first of the complete "Before Watchmen" series that I've read were not bad, but also did not convince me that they were necessary. (Although Dr. Manhattan comes closest to being that rare animal.)
Nite Owl mostly fills in spaces in the Watchmen timeline that didn't need to be, and does so with rather cliche offerings. It is the weakest of the bunch. Dr. Manhattan imagines that the titular (why does that word seem obscene in this context?) character actually lives in a quantum mechanical universe rather than the more strictly Newtonian universe of the original graphic novel. It's an interesting slantwise look at the science and philosophy of the original Watchmen, although the plot and art are less daring than the notion. Moloch, like Nite Owl, didn't need his backstory detailed, but it's a better opportunity to do something interesting with the material, and Straczynski takes it.
The first of the complete "Before Watchmen" series that I've read were not bad, but also did not convince me that they were necessary. (Although Dr. Manhattan comes closest to being that rare animal.)
gohawks's review against another edition
4.0
I didn't expect to like this one because I hadn't read Straczynski in a long time, and I wrongly assumed he was kind of finished. But I loved the Dr. Manhattan story and the art by Kubert didn't hurt either. I also enjoyed the idea of the two Nite Owls being really close and in a mentor/apprentice relationship.
brian_finch's review against another edition
1.0
Complete unnecessary. This adds nothing to the greatness that Moore create. If you want something that explores the universe of Watchmen, I suggest you watch the HBO show. That at least brings something new to the table.