March 04, 2004
More on the Moore thing

Neil Gaiman, in his journal at says this about the report from AICN:

[...] Which is really interesting, except for it not being true.

Oh, it's true that Alan's rejected the money for CONSTANTINE and assigned it to his cocreators, but he's now done that for all films of his and things he's done that might one day be filmed. This was because he was deeply hurt and offended and irritated by being accused in the Larry Cohen lawsuit of having written League of Extraordinary Gentlemen as some kind of studio shill, and because Alan never does anything by halves. Up until the lawsuit his position was that he didn't care about the films people made from his work, but was happy to cash the cheques; after, he decided that he didn't even want to cash the cheques.

His share of Constantine was redistributed among his co-creators, John Totleben, Steve Bissette and Rick Veitch and to Jamie Delano and John Ridgway.

As far as I know, from having spoken to him, Alan's view on Constantine itself is the same as his view on From Hell and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which is that he'll probably rent the DVD one day, you never know, hell might freeze over, -- and that the important work is the comic -- the main difference being here that the film is, from what I understand, mostly based on the Garth Ennis and Jamie Delano issues of the Hellblazer comic.

(And, for whatever remains of the record, Alan hasn't seen anything of Constantine -- no scripts, no nothing. Nor has he had any contact with DC on it except for asking Karen Berger to redistribute the money and the credit.)

I tend to feel that the filmmakers started with two strikes against them, simply by casting Keanu Reeves instead of, say, Jude Law, but everything I've heard since has been encouraging, so while I'll be sitting in the cinema with my arms folded and an "okay, convince me" attitude, I'll at least be going to see it.

Emphasis mine.

I know I'm glad to hear this. I didn't think the "geek community" impact was much of a factor in the success of the movie, but I was previously concerned with the quality of the script and this whole thing brought up those concerns again. Nice to have it cleared up.

Thank you Mr. Gaiman...

I think I'm going to go out and buy Neverwhere on DVD this weekend. I'd start reading Sandman, but I'm already spending too much on comics these days.

(Thanks to some random guy at the Straight-to-Hell forums)

constantine | from inside the mind of krix at March 04, 2004 03:22 PM .

By the way, Neil Gaiman? Brilliant Author.
Also effing HOT.

Posted by: krix on March 4, 2004 03:59 PM

Um... Not my type, but I believe you when you say he's brilliant :-)

I wasn't so concerned with the 'geek' reaction, (besides, I *heart* geeks) and understood all the beautifuly put arguments that they are 'but a small market'.
I was concerned because of the way some journalists write. In my mind, it goes like this:
They need an article. They google for back-ground info. They pick the juiciest tid-bits, & combine them in a so called 'all new' article.
THIS will be quoted endlessly, even though it has been deemed false. It will pop up in the little 'intro's' they write before a so-called 'exclusive' interview. As in: Despite the fact that AM denounced it, bla, bla, Keanu Reeves feels confident that, etc, etc. You know these kind of stories, right?

Average movie-goers who are not so interested in Mr.Reeves as we are ;-) will be influenced by that, so whatever way you put it, it's bad press. In more ways then one.

I've made a blood-oath with some girls over at Nettie's that we shall all see it one more time then intended, to make up for the ticket-loss sales, LOL! Ha! That will teach them! ;-D

Posted by: Julie! on March 4, 2004 04:46 PM

"I'll be sitting in the cinema with my arms folded and an "okay, convince me" attitude."

GREAT. And it all will be blamed on Keanu if it's not a good movie. I'm afraid that a lot of people do that anyway (convince me) - and moreso if Keanu is attached. If they'd drop the attitude of having to be soooo convinced, they'd see that Keanu is a very gifted actor. Why can't it be a good, reasonably entertaining movie? Why does it have to blow everyone's socks off? They won't credit Keanu with the success anyway. SIGH.

But I AM happy to hear that this has been a pattern for the author and it's not because of this particular script, director, producer or star. Thanks for posting it, Krix. :)

And Julie, you're right. They will preface many of the reviews of this movie using the alleged controversy (that doesn't really exist).

Posted by: MC from RD on March 4, 2004 04:50 PM

I may have to check out Gaiman's books just to own the back cover photo. I am glad that someone is speaking up to refute the heinous story at AICN and elsewhere.

After all the years of reading the preconceived notions of Keanu by the critics and public, I've taught myself to tune out the Keanu nay sayers. I for one will just have to accept the fact that after 20+ years as an actor, he will never get the respect he deserves. Over the years it became de rigeur to diss him; now it seems to be politically incorrect to admit when he turns in a good performance. There are very few actors who are more pre-judged before a film even leaves the editing room. I admire him for forging ahead with his craft. I have to wonder just how thick his skin really is. It pains me to think how such criticism sometimes may have really hurt him. He is human after all.

I canít wait for this movie. He seems to be really excited about it, and that makes me want to see what great a job he did. I hope itís rated R so the geeks canít get in.

Posted by: Chianti on March 4, 2004 05:14 PM

Thanks, krix. As I Suspected. However, Julie! may be right in the fact that now this is out there...

Well, I'll probably see it twice in the theater, but I can't imagine any Keanu film I wouldn't want to see at least twice on the big screen. And this really does look good. Maybe since it has Djimon "Academy Award Nominee" Honsou in it, they'll have to cut it some slack. But Chianti is soooo right. In everything she says. I hope his skin is thick. It just irks me that so many (including Neil Gaiman) immediately pick out Keanu as their source of irritation.

Posted by: bakednudel on March 4, 2004 05:57 PM

Gaiman MUST be Brilliant ... he has tales of Morpheus! Coincidence? I think not. *twilight zone music plays* :)

And, at least he's going to see it, even if he does have his arms crossed.

Moore sounds like a movie studio dissident. No studio could ever do his creations justice. He makes no bones about it. He's just stopped the hypocracy of taking money for something he's washed his hands of all along.

Posted by: sta-cie on March 5, 2004 01:26 AM

That was a truly obnoxious article from AICN, considering they stretched the truth to make it attract readers. But as they say, there is no such thing as "bad" press...only press. Although "they" never said anything about painful press now did they? I agree, Keanu is very much prejudged by Hollywood media. But how can you expect people that choose a career as a Hollywood journalist to grasp the depth of content in a Keanu Reeves film, or look beyond his visage to see his talent in a romance? They haven't got enough depth themselves, they don't know what to write so they bash or swoon. It is really all they know. Most who write are also jealous men, is a big factor I think. Where some other actors face this, they are not the box office draw that is Keanu. It sells papers to more of the same public that "don't get stuff" either. The rest of us don't read that kind of media much because we are too smart for it and see right through what they say. Brad Pitt would never face this because he doesn't choose deep content, so they "get" him. But then I hardly see his stuff either. If you recall, he was bashed for "Joe Black." Too out of the ordinary.

Myself, I like the Sandman is in fact the only adult comic I've actually read. But where I don't read comics, I've seen almost all movies made from comic books because I like them. It is the only way I would otherwise experience these stories. As for me, if they would have cast Jude Law I would avoid the film...I don't like his stuff, and I don't like him. I think this is why they chose Keanu even though he has dark hair and they know they going to piss off the "geeks." Keanu is a stronger draw to fill a theater with a broader audience (especially after the Matrix movies. The broad audience does not know who Alan Moore is so they don't care about his opinion. I don't know many people who like Jude Law either, and in my personal opinion he is too superficial in real life to grasp how to bring the role to life (sorry, I have a difference of opion with you on this).

But h*** what do I know about makin' movies! Blah...just my opinion

Posted by: shelz on March 5, 2004 11:30 PM
What's on your mind?.....
(new here? please read this before commenting)
Remember, this is a fan site.
Keanu Reeves is in no way connnected to this website.
Please do not make a comment thinking he will read it.
Comments are for discussion with other fans.
Thank you.
Name: (required)

Email: (required - feel free to use a spamblock)

URL: (optional - put something here to keep your email private)


(please note, there is no need to sign your name at the end of your comment)
Here, take a cookie.