Peter Cannon: Thunderbolt

Is anyone else following this? Bizarre homo-eroticism aside, I'm kind of enjoying the "we don't have the rights to make a sequel to Watchmen but we're gonna do it anyway" thing they've got going on.

Attached: 733898._SX1280_QL80_TTD_.jpg (1280x1969, 345K)

Probably has Moore's blessing since I think Gillen talks to him sometimes

Attached: nov181060__78757.1541789015.jpg (800x1200, 164K)

What are you talking about, sequel to Watchmen?
>35 minutes into the future
Ooohokay.

Peter Cannon was Ozymandius' inspiration, and the first issue ends with him fending off an alien invasion that puts an end to rising, potentially nuclear tensions between the US, China, and Russia.

Attached: nov181062__99366.1541789097.jpg (800x1200, 190K)

This was one of the covers. As Rorschach surmised, Peter Cannon/Adrian Veidt is homosexual.

Attached: aHR0cDovL3d3dy5uZXdzYXJhbWEuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9pLzAwMC8yNDMvMjQyL2kwMi9QQ1RfVmFyX1BhdWxpbmEtR2FudWNoZWF1 (575x368, 266K)

The current villain is a man, with seemingly godlike powers, who has a circular symbol carved into his forehead.

Attached: STL114945-800x1200.jpg (800x1200, 156K)

In the 4th issue, Peter meets a therapist named Dr. K, and his friends Dan, Eddy, Lauren, and John.

Attached: STL109188.jpg (1200x1800, 114K)

I knew Cannon was the Ozymandius Charlton character. I know once in a real long while somebody or other trots that kind of old stuff out. Didn't know all of this was going on too.


Just one question, how did DC not get Cannon when they got the rest? I thought they just grabbed the whole company? Is this one of those weird times DC lets some golden or silver age nobody get licensed out to Dynamite?

Cannon was published by Charlton Comics, but the character is owned by the estate of his creator, Pete Morisi.

this comic feels like pretentious schlock that is relying too heavily on Watchmen

Charlton sold DC stolen goods.

I'd put it better if I could be bothered, but that's more or less my reason for disinterest.
While a lot of Watchmen imitations feel like shallow copies of its commentary, this feels like commentary on commentary based on something else, which in turn feels even more circular.

When I read the elaborations on how the characters reference the Avengers too it just cemented the impression this was full steam derivative. Maybe I'm wrong and it's secretly genius, but I'll pass for something with its own voice.

He did appear in some 90s DC books, and had a brief solo.
But he's actually owned by the estate

I'm in love with the current series but Thunderbolt isn't a new character, right? I have to get into the older stuff.

Attached: 1415055844813.jpg (400x347, 31K)

I get that the bug-guy is the Iron Man knockoff, but I don't know who he's based on from the classic comics. Blue Beetle?

Yeah, Thunderbolt goes way back. He only exists because his creator was unable to purchase the rights to Daredevil (mute, with a boomerang). That's why they share similar costumes.

Attached: 250px-DDGoldenAge5.jpg (250x242, 30K)

More like partially uncopyrighted goods. The issues published in the 60's supposedly had the wrong copyrights, but 70's/80's stuff had accurate copyrights.

It's sort of a mix of stuff, the team is part Avengers/Ultimates influence, and part Watchmen/Charlton influence, and part some other stuff.

>Gillen
Nope

Now that's interesting
Do I have to read the original Daredevil to get a complete picture?

Definitely has Moore's blessing. I'll try to find a source later. Gillen is one of the few modern writers Moore likes

Storytime?

Not really; Thunderbolt is its own thing, and I don't know if Gillen knows about Thunderbolt having Daredevil's costume and sort of has Amazing-Man's origin.

The story's not nearly done yet, but maybe I'll storytime it tomorrow. Keep your eyes out for it.

Sweet.

I asked Gillen at a signing recently what Moore thought of it and he said that he'd mentioned that he'd mentioned it in a letter to Moore and that Moore sounded amused about it

whoopdie fucking do. Let me know when the full trade is complete and reviewed highly

I have, and it's great.
Watchmen by the way of Nextwave.

minutes into the future
Maybe laying it on a bit thick.

>Dynamite
Isn't he owned by DC?

Oh.


So then this is clearly why people fawn over it on social media. It's about faggots.

Much like they claim Fury Road is the pinnacle of action flicks because "muh women".

I think DC just licenced the character.