I agree with Richard that the original is perfectly balanced in terms of being self contained with proper beginning, middle and end and to be honest I don’t think you can properly compare it against Spider-Man: Watchmen was a single tale, Spider-Man is open ended and continually ongoing; in story telling structure it has more in common with the soap opera open ended narrative in that respect, designed to continually change to new characters and creators for as long as it has legs. That’s the normal mode for many mainstream comics works, especially superhero titles and there’s nothing wrong with it, it keeps beloved characters with us and allows them to be refreshed regularly. But the fact that is the normal mode of production means the occassional mainstream self contained work seems all the more special.

Part of me would like to see a few more tales spun from that one-off world but another thinks it simply wouldn’t be the same and would largely be a money making franchise to milk (although as a retailer I think of the sales potential and that’s not something to sneeze at). I don’t think it would dilute the original though – Alan is fond of referring to the Chandler when asked if film versions ruin his original, he points to the books on his shelves and explains they are still there, still the same, anything that comes after by someone else is its own thing and doesn’t affect the original book.

As for the Watchmen thing I disagree, although I do realise this one’s more opinion, and each to their own. Personally I like my stories with a beginning, middle and end and part of the appeal of Watchmen is that it’s all there, everything that was ever needed, within the pages of the one book. I don’t believe stories like this need diluting with prequels, sequels and the rest. It’s not fear or nostalgia, just a feeling that it would be pointless.