Let’s break it down.

First, let’s look at past renditions of Mr. Moore’s work. More specifically “V for Vendetta” Moore wrote the character as purely an anarchist and a terrorist interested in little more then the destruction of society. But in the re-write the character was changed to represent a patriot of “American” ideals so that the movie was more suitable for the palate of the average American viewer. Which, in the end does make sense because if the movie hadn’t been written as such, it wouldn’t have made any money. Alan Moore said it himself, “America isn’t ready for a terrorist hero.” The average American viewer simply lacks the ability to step back from emotion and bias in order to view a piece of literature or art critically. Which is also how Dan Brown managed to make so much money off of his largely over-rated “The Davinci Code”, because it was controversial and played on the emotions of America, but I’m getting off topic here. When you think of “V” imagine a band like Fall Out Boy or Avenged Sevenfold doing a cover of “Hey Jude” and then you will possibly get an idea of how Alan Moore feels about the re-writing of his comic books.

I am personally both excited for the release of Watchmen, excited yet terrified at the same time. There are so many key elements to the story and over all theme of the book that I am almost certain will be edited out in order for the film to become more suitably viewed by America as a whole. And as Watchmen is such a monolith towards Graphic literature being, on the whole, viewed as a genre of literature to be respected in a semi-serious context, this is a very grim notion indeed.

I am amazed by how many studios by the rights to a book, and make a movie nothing like the book. Why?

While I generally agree with you, with a book you tend to have more characters, more side situations that weave into the bigger story, inner thoughts and the author can make some observations about a character. Most of this you can’t do in a film, where (the majority of the time) a filmmaker has 2 hours to “show” the story.

I am amazed by how many studios by the rights to a book, and make a movie nothing like the book. Why?

Rodney, is the concept of integrity really that alien to you? The guys wants to make his living creating great works not collecting residuals for intellectual property being watered down for focus groups.

And how can you not sympathize when someone says something like this:
“I love Alan Moore’s work but I still haven’t read V for the movie that was made.”

The unfortunate and frustrating fact is he’s more likely to be remembered for a movie he had nothing to do with and didn’t like than a book he wrote.

And for crying out loud the studio hired the team that brought us Transformers to do a pass on the script. I’m sure they’ll do a great job adapting Moore’s work, it’s a real mystery why he’s being so difficult.

He has NEVER liked any adaptation of his work and I can’t say as I blame him.

He has created some wonderful stories and some wonderful characters. It is very unfortunate that that most adaptations tank, but the fact of the matter is that the original stories are right there for the reading. Those characters never change. Those stories never change. A bad adaptation does not change the story at all. It stays just that.

A bad adaptation.

That doesn’t mean that it can’t be a good story on its own. How many times has Shakespeare been adapted, or Dracula, Frankenstein, or Eek! the Cat?

Ok maybe not so much Eek! The Cat but you get my drift.

He simply wants nothing to do with the movies, because they aren´t his work. The comics are his work. It really should be his choice. And if they ask him he will point out what he thinks is stupid.

He doesn´t really make much noise at all; to say that he whines and gripes is just not correct. And letting the movies get made for the artists´ sake is a gracious thing to do.