There were other topics I preferred to post to the last few days, Nowhereman, partly because I just don't know what else to say. I've already been abundantly clear in my examples.
As in many of these past topics by myself and others, of course what I think of a story is not fact. It's a story! You either have enthusiasm for it or you don't. I like WATCHMEN as much as the next guy. But who would deny that it's an Alan Moore show all the way?
Okay, sure, Moore included Gibbons in the plotting and used some of Gibbons' suggestions. But it is still completely an Alan Moore show, and another artist could have made a same or better contribution as Gibbons.
No one would hang Dave Gibbons pages on the wall the same way they would pages by Neal Adams, Berni Wrightson, Michael Kaluta, Alan Davis, Gary Leach, Bissette/Tottleben, or the other artists I listed. THESE artists manifest an innovative layout, design sense, and decorative linework that Dave Gibbons is never on the same level with.
Art functional to the WATCHMEN story (and also the same 9-panel per page formula as the 1985 previous SUPERMAN ANNUAL 11 by Moore/Gibbons) Gibbons is a competent storyteller. But he is not a master storyteller in the same class as Moore and these other artists.
I stand by my argument that however enjoyable, WATCHMEN could arguably have been even better with another artist.
I likewise wasn't overly impressed with Eddie Campbell illustrating Moore's FROM HELL. But in its quiet way, the linestyle seemed compatible and atmospheric to a story set in the late 19th century.
Likewise, I was not impressed at all with the art in LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN. Or with Moore's writing on the series either. I like the concept far more than the execution. And actually enjoyed the film version more.
