So many people say you shouldn’t do it, but there’s something to saying ‘Why not?” and proving everyone wrong.” – Dan DiDio, DC Comics co-publisher. ]
Why not indeed? Watchmen, although very good, isn't perfect and Moore - it'll be a shock to him - isn't God. It is an ambitious if flawed tale, and yeah a landmark one. There have been better epic stories since then, though Moore thinks he has yet to be topped.
But not untouchable. The movie was hit and miss but it did a good job of translating the story to screen, and , I was in favor of dumping the squid. It would not work on film and barely worked in the comic.
Dunno how many of youse DeeCee historianss are aware of this noteworthy compendium, but if'n ya still got some Swiss and Canadian sheckels to spare, this might be a really neat archival companion piece for pleasurable eons to come ...
We profoundly pity those Know-It-All's-Without-a-Cosmic-Clue, Phelpsie, 'cause - whilst his professional personality might not have endeared him to many behind the scenes -
Mr. Infantino's earlier distinctive style was every bit as transformative as Curt Swan & Murphy Anderson for those weened on late 50s/early 60s D.C. comics pre-Stan, Jack and Steve's Marvel Age revolutionary magik.
Infantino's art was greatly dependent on his inker, compare his work inked by Murphy Anderson with the work he did on Star Wars.
You most likely know Infantino's work better than I do, Gary, but in the Star Wars comics I mentioned, Bob Wiacek, Terry Austin, and Gene Day all inked Infantino's work but his individuality came through regardless of who assisted in the art chores. Maybe Anderson's inking softened the rather angular look of Infantino's art?