Comic Books

> > 1-of-4
BEFORE WATCHMEN: SILK SPECTRE #1 (OF 4)

“Oh sweetie, you’re too young to hate. Wait until you’re older and the world gives you a good reason. Trust me, it won’t let you down.”

Plus: Don’t miss the CRIMSON CORSAIR backup story by writer LEN WEIN and artist JOHN HIGGINS!

Written by Darwyn Cooke & Amanda Conner
Backup Written by Len Wein
Art by Amanda Conner
Backup Art by John Higgins
Cover by Amanda Conner
Variant Cover by Dave Johnson & Jim Lee

Price: $3.99
iFanboy Community Pick of the Week Percentage: 1.9%
878
Pulls
Avg Rating: 4.4
 
Users who pulled this comic:
 

Comments

  1. Avatar photo colossusofrhodeisland says:
    June 11, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    Darwyn Cooke and Amanda Conner is one hell of a creative team.

  2. Avatar photo comicBOOKchris says:
    June 11, 2012 at 2:20 pm

    The only one of these Before Watchmen minis that I’m definitely buying. Only 4 issues, amazing artist (which is true for all of the minis) and hell of a writer (not so true for all of the minis).

  3. Avatar photo sitara119 says:
    June 11, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    love the quote.
    this is the only watchmen mini i’m not too sure of. the creative team is superb, but i’m not convinced the character is.
    hoping that cooke changes my mind.

  4. flapjaxx says:
    June 11, 2012 at 5:07 pm

    Yeah, this is the only Before Watchmen series I’m sort of interested in, because of the creative team.

    But… I’d literally rather see this creative team on ANY OTHER property than a Watchmen prequel, because the concept does zero for me.

    So… there’s no way I’m shelling out $3.99 an issue for this. If I find a heavily discounted collected edition, or when (not if) the issues are in dollar bins, I’ll possibly read it that way. Not trying to shame those who are eager to read this now… just saying.

    That’s a hell of a nice cover, though. I’d rather they tweaked the Silk Spectre to make a “new” character, and same way Moore tweaked Charlton characters to make innovative concepts. Because if this was a new series about an unheard of (but slightly familiar) female character, I’d buy that. So, really, the Watchmen tie puts me off buying this.

  5. pmallory says:
    June 11, 2012 at 9:12 pm

    Flapjaxx, I highly doubt this will be in the dollar bin. Just my opinion.

  6. Avatar photo TheNextChampion says:
    June 11, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    The preview for this blew me away. This could be Amanda Conner’s best work to date.

  7. butters169 says:
    June 11, 2012 at 10:06 pm

    its kind of disappointing that the best looking watchmen series debut back to back so now i have nothing to look forward to

    • Avatar photo ScorpionMasada says:
      June 11, 2012 at 10:10 pm

      hahaha

      I misread you at first and thought you wrote:

      its kind of disappointing that the best looking Watchmen series debuted way back so now i have nothing to look forward to

  8. kcekada says:
    June 11, 2012 at 11:08 pm

    I’ve always found Amanda Conner’s faces too cartoony, so I didn’t reserve this. I do like the modified outfit, but not sure why they didn’t use the classic threads.

  9. Avatar photo MattDoobie says:
    June 11, 2012 at 11:39 pm

    That beautiful cover’s making me regret I’m only getting the 1:25 variants for BW, almost feel like buying it twice!

  10. Avatar photo comicBOOKchris says:
    June 12, 2012 at 10:26 am

    Very happy to see that this BW series is in the Top 5 pulls. It makes me wish that Amanda Conner was a monthly artist so that DC would be compelled to give her a high profile monthly assignment.

    • Avatar photo defjuan says:
      June 13, 2012 at 2:36 pm

      Word is she can’t keep up with a monthly schedule. The 12 issues of Powergirl may have pushed her to her limit. Besides, she probably makes more doing less from other the other art jobs she’s always doing. Makes you appreciate the art she does get out from time to time.

  11. Avatar photo DikBallistik says:
    June 13, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    Just 12 comments. Guess the hate has already receded

  12. Avatar photo Agent Graves says:
    June 13, 2012 at 10:10 pm

    This was great.

  13. Avatar photo TheNextChampion says:
    June 13, 2012 at 10:11 pm

    Guys…..GUYS!

    I’m not doing a full review of this issue but let me sum it up in one sentence:

    “Sweet holy Jesus this might be one of the best looking series I’ve laid eyes on” (Hyperbole noted)

  14. Avatar photo Nick Fovargue says:
    June 13, 2012 at 10:42 pm

    If I leave all the baggage of these titles out of it and take this book on its own merits, rather than as a continuation of the source material, it really is a wonderful issue. It captures the essence of the characters and tells an empathetic story of adolescence with an impressive performance from Amanda Conner.

    • Avatar photo mgriffith says:
      June 14, 2012 at 12:08 am

      NICE mini-review!

    • Avatar photo Jr. Wormwood says:
      June 14, 2012 at 12:20 am

      Yep, exactly. Leave your baggage at the door, folks. Can’t we just enjoy something for what it is? Hell, I LOVE the original Watchmen, but the planet keeps turning and life goes on. I’m gonna read all of these, and I’m gonna enjoy them and take them for what they are. The human brain is an amazing thing. I think I can compartmentalize the original story from these and appreciate where they diverge.

      I think it’s a bit odd that people are willing to let Morrison have his “own little corner of the Batman mythos”, but we can’t do the same thing here? It’s really not that big of a deal…

    • Avatar photo biftec says:
      June 14, 2012 at 2:21 pm

      I’ll defend Morrison. Between Kane and Finger and Morrison, many, many people wrote Batman comics. The circumstances surrounded Finger’s treatment by DC and Kane are outrageous, but Moore’s situation isn’t completely analogous. Neither Finger or Kane ever said they didn’t want anyone else to write Batman. Their comics were serial stories, not a narrative with a beginning, a middle, and an end. hundreds of creators since have offered their own interpretations, their own mythoi. I don’t think the claim that creators who work on company-owned properties are sell-outs or hypocrites is valid. But In watchmen, we have a company trying to squeeze money out of a twenty-five year old story against the wishes of its primary authors, who insist that the work stands on its own merits, and who have been locked in a battle for control of the story for decades. I think those circumstances are qualitatively different than Morrison writing batman or even writing Superman, where the ownership issues have been much more charged.

  15. Avatar photo biftec says:
    June 13, 2012 at 11:42 pm

    I read, but did not purchase this book. Like last week’s minutemen comic I found it I’ll-conceived, poorly written, mawkish, and blatantly derivative. The writing is cliched, banal, and unoriginal. The art is nice, but calling it lipstick on a pig would do a disservice to pigs. Let me be clear – this comic fails on its own merits – or lack thereof. These would be bad comics even if there were no controversy, even if the creators were not making a few quick bucks on DC’s grotesque act of creative necrophilia. But they are, and we should have the respect for ourselves and for comic creators to just stop buying this shit. Shame on Cooke and Conner, shame on Jim Lee and his awful softcore variant covers. Shame on the Geoff Johns era of comic book necrophilia, shame on DC, and shame on ifanboy for riding the gravy train with that abomination of a banner ad.

    • Avatar photo Jr. Wormwood says:
      June 14, 2012 at 12:03 am

      Seriously? Wow… Let me be clear, if there were no controversy you wouldn’t even have bothered writing that . This would have just been another comic book that you wouldn’t have bothered to pick up or invest such a heavy opinion in.

    • Avatar photo mgriffith says:
      June 14, 2012 at 12:06 am

      +1 to Jr. Wormwood

    • Avatar photo biftec says:
      June 14, 2012 at 12:26 am

      Had this not been a watchmen prequel, I probably would have bought it. I like Conner’s art. I didn’t buy this comic because I think it’s ethically abhorrent. That’s where I’m coming from, and I don’t really think Jr. Wormwood’s retort actually speaks to why this is or is not a fucked-up comic on artistic and/or ethical grounds. This is a badly written comic with no reason to exist other than DC trying to cash in on its failure to pacify Alan Moore. I find particular irony in Jim Lee’s role given that he led a creator-owned revolt two decades ago and owes Moore a great deal for reviving his own uninspired creator-owned properties in WIldC.A.T.S.

    • Avatar photo Jr. Wormwood says:
      June 14, 2012 at 1:02 am

      I don’t think this was a badly written comic when held up to many other comics that are out there. Hell, I think the new Justice League book is a steaming pile, but I don’t waste my time bashing it. I thought this was rather enjoyable on its own merits, and its clearly a “set up” issue. I kept thinking, “I bet my girlfriend might read this”. I understand being upset on ethical grounds, but in my mind that’s a go-nowhere argument. These exist, they’re out there, and you can either read them (or not) with a grain of salt or pretend they don’t exist. The original source material isn’t being tampered with, so why not just treat these as a sort of Elseworld’s type of story? Plenty of creators have been screwed over plenty of times, myself included. I see your point, though. Think of Watchmen as HP Lovecraft, and these books as all the other Cthulhu mythos that have come since. It doesn’t take away from the fact that the original is far superior and the only one that really matters. I don’t think anyone is going to look back at these and lump them in with the original Watchmen. I know that I won’t. Live and let live, I suppose. I have more important things to worry about. *shrug*

    • Avatar photo Nick Fovargue says:
      June 14, 2012 at 1:42 am

      I get objections to the existence of these books, I really do. I respect that someone may not like it on its merit but some extreme options make it hard not suspect some measure of bias. The one thing I do have to say though is that I believe that if you read a book (especially the whole thing) you should really pay for it. If only out of consideration for the retailer, if no one else.

    • Avatar photo Jr. Wormwood says:
      June 14, 2012 at 1:57 am

      “I don’t want to purchase this book because I’m ethically opposed to it, but I’ll read it for free so I can complain about it online.”

    • Avatar photo Jr. Wormwood says:
      June 14, 2012 at 2:02 am

      Sorry, perhaps that was uncalled for. I don’t mean to fan the flames. Now where’s that “delete” button?

    • Avatar photo biftec says:
      June 14, 2012 at 8:07 am

      I don’t really accept the argument that these books don’t affect the source material – they do. More troubling is the way they shamelessly rip it – the excerpts from Under the Hood in last week’s minutemen issue, for instance. The problem with the lovecraft analogy is the difference between homage and crass exploitation. I am fine with the former. Had more comics of the eighties and nineties taken the good lessons watchmen offered (complex intertextuality, careful deconstruction of the superhero as fascist myth, etc) instead of taking the blood and sex as an invitation to “go dark” in the stupidest of possible ways (a fault which can be attributed to several of the creators DC has now inexplicably rehired on several of its flagship books) then comics might be in a better place. But this isn’t homage. This is DC rubbing its dubious copyright ownership in the face of Watchmen’s creators and trying to pretend it’s honoring them. H.P. Lovecraft died in 1937 (and was a pretty awful racist.) Alan Moore lives in Northampton, right now, and doesn’t like being screwed over and has said many times in no uncertain terms that he thinks these books are an abomination. Maybe comics fans -and creators- have a responsibility to Moore to take his objections seriously – moreso, I’d argue, than we do to buy a shitty comic to support a retailer at the creator’s expense. (I buy a lot of comics. I feel no need to buy this one. I think there is an ethical imperative to read a book if you’re going to critique it. I don’t think there’s any similar imperative to spend money on it, especially in circumstances like this.) Anyway, not only does BW have no reason to exist, judging by the quality of these two issues, it has every reason not to exist.

    • a.j.howard09 says:
      June 14, 2012 at 12:55 pm

      What’s going on in Syria is ethically abhorrent. Denying people rights based on race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation is ethically abhorrent. DC publishing comics that they have every legal right to publish despite one of the original creators objections is at the very worst ethically questionable. Hyperbole is lazy.

      Look, I sympathize with Alan Moore, I really do. But your operating under the assumption that DC screwed over Moore somehow, which they really didn’t. Sure, they reaped a probably unanticipated windfall, allowing them to keep the rights to Moore’s creation. But you’d be hard pressed to find any party, be it a company or an individual, who turns down a benefit accruing from a contract just because they didn’t see it coming. DC didn’t screw over Alan Moore (at least in this instance). Fate (or history, or the gods, or the roll of the dice, or the breaks) screwed Alan Moore.

      As far as having no reason to exist. I bet these comics make DC a decent amount of money. This doesn’t mean anything to most of us, but for any corporation, turning a decent profit gives plenty of reason for something to exist. Apart from that I thought this issue told a fairly compelling (if not unprecedentedly unique) story about mothers and daughters with some absolutely gorgeous art. Yeah, it’s not Watchmen, but I think it’s pretty clear that this project is not even attempting to be Watchmen. It’s just telling stories with characters in the Watchmen universe.

      Is it essential? Probably not. Is it compelling? It certainly can be if you get over certain preconceived objections and take the work for what it is. Is it ethically abhorrent and/or an abomination. Definitely not.

    • Avatar photo biftec says:
      June 14, 2012 at 1:49 pm

      Thanks for the lesson in moral relativism. If my rhetoric is overblown, i’ll apologize but I don’t think the slaughter of protesters in Syria or the racialized division of labor in contemporary capitalism have much to do with whether or not DC should be publishing these comics. Your fetishization of the contract as the arbiter of what is just/right seems to me symptomatic of rather than any kind of solution to the issue, which is how comics should value creative labor and creative control. I think those are important questions, questions about work and power, normative questions rather than legal ones.

      I do not think Alan Moore is some amazingly wonderful unreproachable person – some of his own work has really bad race and gender politics and his relationships with his artists are pretty tragic and incomprehensible. But he is right that this is crap.

    • Avatar photo Jr. Wormwood says:
      June 14, 2012 at 1:52 pm

      I think a.j.’s closing few sentences summed it up better than I could. And there’s no “honoring” when it comes to the later Cthulhu mythos. Those writers are doing the same thing to Lovecraft (who I doubt was even approached about copyrights or contracts) that you perceive these current creators are doing to Moore. For shit’s sake, these are COMICS. For all of Moore’s genius, he wasn’t thinking too clearly the day he thought these characters (which he didn’t even create) would be left alone forever after. And let’s be honest, Alan Moore doesn’t like ANYTHING. He bitches every time a butterfly flaps its wings. I think a good human being would be proud and honored to be behind such amazing work, renowned the world over as an amazing artist. But no, he just wants to wallow in self pity.

    • a.j.howard09 says:
      June 14, 2012 at 3:02 pm

      @biftec

      I may have taken a cheap shots at your essential argument just by criticizing your hyperbole. But it seems like your substituting hyperbole for actual substance. You talk about ethics, but you don’t seem to understand that ethics are subjective. The slaughter of innocent civilians in Syria is clearly ethically wrong and is widely accepted as being so. The two situations don’t even belong in the same conversation. But I brought it up because the question of ethics is clearly not as clear cut here. There are reasonable points to be made on both sides of this argument and people who are taking the extreme positions on both sides are showing a lack of appreciation of nuance.

      As far as my supposed ‘fetishization of the contract,” I agree that it’s not always the arbitrer of what is just/right. But in the absence of a neutral, infallible arbitrer, a written agreement freely entered into by all parties involved is not necessarily a bad place to start.

      Moore has a right to feel aggrieved. I sympathize with those who are avoiding this in solidarity with Moore. But there’s no need to spew venom all over the work just because you disagree with value of the overall project. In fact, wouldn’t it be more insulting to Moore to attempt a true sequel, touching on the same themes the original did? There are plenty of crappy attempted Watchmen clones out there. This is much more of an homage than a sequel. It’s not intended to be a follow-up or build upon Moore’s work. Look, criticism is subjective, but this comic doesn’t deserve the scorn you heaped on it. I mean, sure it’s not Watchmen, nothing is Watchmen, but there is some value in it that you seem hell-bent on ignoring.

    • Avatar photo sitara119 says:
      June 14, 2012 at 8:17 pm

      @biftec
      give it a rest, man. you’re singing a song that’s been sung quite a few times in the last few months and you’re not adding any new lyrics. in fact, the record is officially broken.
      your argument rests on the laurels of other’s comprised bitching.

      2 things:
      1) if you’re going to come in here and bitch to all who are enjoying this book, have the decency to say something fresh and interesting.
      2) if you’re going to attempt to take high moral ground, resist the urge to tell everyone you pirated the book. got nothing against pirates, but one taking high moral ground….HUH?! that dog don’t hunt.

    • Avatar photo g0ofgnewt says:
      June 14, 2012 at 8:35 pm

      I’ve got nothing against pirates. That’s why Im reading the back up story. See what I did there

  16. Avatar photo Neeks says:
    June 13, 2012 at 11:45 pm

    I loved this it was a great combination of story and art 5 stars and definitely picking up the rest of this mini

  17. Avatar photo mgriffith says:
    June 14, 2012 at 12:06 am

    Trade-wait for me.

  18. lcarrero89 says:
    June 14, 2012 at 9:09 am

    So I’m probably gonna get flack for this but I maybe one of the few people that really didn’t enjoy Watchmen. While I have a great amount of respect for it and the impact that it has had on the industry, it didn’t do anything for me. I prefer Moores Swamp Thing and V for Vendetta, that being said I really am enjoying these minis, maybe ill go back for the umpteenth time and give Watchmen another shot.

  19. Avatar photo Urthona says:
    June 14, 2012 at 10:27 am

    Wow, this was a really great read!

  20. Avatar photo picture_boy (@AzGaunt) says:
    June 14, 2012 at 10:51 am

    i feel like this book cant be bothered !!!!!!!!!!!!!

  21. Avatar photo ghostmann says:
    June 14, 2012 at 11:07 am

    beautiful

  22. Avatar photo GunnerAsh says:
    June 14, 2012 at 2:42 pm

    This is my first experience of Amanda Connors and I gotta admit I like what I see. She has such a gift when it comes to facial expressions. This was one of BW books I was looking forward to the most and it lived up to my expectations. Good stuff.

Leave a Comment