History YMMV / TheLeagueOfExtraordinaryGentlemen

* VindicatedByHistory: Moore's portrayal of Franchise/HarryPotter has since been looked on more favorably, in light of certain views expressed by the author of those novels.

*** [[spoiler:A villain with a military background transforms into a more grotesque large(r), super-strong and ferocious alter ego to fight Jekyll.[[note]]In case you can't guess, it's Abomination.[[/note]]]]

** In the Italian dub Skinner was voiced by Creator/MinoCaprio, who would go on to dub the Invisible Man in the ''WesternAnimation/HotelTransylvania'' films.

* AuthorsSavingThrow: Seemingly in response to the criticisms towards ''Century'''s Anglocentric setting (as described in TheyWastedAPerfectlyGoodPlot and CreatorProvincialism), press releases for ''The Tempest'' promised expansion of the story's setting to America.

** There's a question of whether Moore's ''really'' TruerToTheText than most other adaptations, or whether he's really just [[DarkerAndEdgier pushing for the darkest possible depictions]] [[AuthorAppeal for his private enjoyment]]. There is a lot of contention that Moore doesn't care about a lot of the characters' textual qualities as long as it fits what he felt the book was about. In the worst cases these can have some of Moore's attempts at SurprisinglyRealisticOutcome, such as Mina's scars, [[FridgeLogic retroactively cause massive plotholes]] if assumed to be true in the source material. The divisiveness isn't helped by the fact that Moore is evidentially easily angered by how adaptations of his work alter his characters, which, given the laundry list of examples people point out, makes this look pretty hypocritical. [[note]]A summary of some of these incldude but are far from limited to: Mina Murray being a divorced woman when she was HappilyMarried to Jonathan Harker in the original novel, Allan Quatermain becoming who took a drug for vision quests becoming an off the wagon louse, Captain Nemo working for the empire he spent his first book bad mouthing and wanting dead, Mr. Hyde raping the Invisible Man, James Bond as an incompetent misogynist psychopathic traitor instead of being a loyal, competent ProfessionalKiller, and Harry Potter as a whiny, self-pitying, school-shooting chav strung out on anti-depressants who becomes the Antichrist, which is pretty far off from his actual character, etc.[[/note]]

* TakeThatScrappy:
** People who disliked [[spoiler: Literature/HarryPotter]] or who liked it but felt it was overrated in esteem and especially found the title character less interesting than the supporting cast enjoyed Moore's takedown of it in Century Vol 3. These fans also point out that Moore's basic satirical message, i.e. a CharacterExaggeration of his IdiotHero tendencies and an attack on the stories' overall "trust-fund orphan" narrative of entitled heroism and luck-driven victories is in fact completely accurate and moreover echoed criticisms of the book made by its own fans and [[spoiler:by Severus Snape within the stories. They note that Snape is the only HP character who is treated positively by Moore]].
** The same applies for people who enjoyed the trolling of James Bond, even by Bond fans who felt the character was so overexposed they found this revisionist version entertaining. The fact that Jimmy is so hilariously bad at his job and a bungling wimp who can barely get laid makes him less of a TakeThat and more of a dark DeconstructiveParody for Bond fans.

* SpecialEffectsFailure: Due in part to the film's overall TroubledProduction, the VFX are not all that great.

* WhatAnIdiot: The police constable at the start of the movie who stands in the way of a speeding armored vehicle and thinks just shouting at it will make it stop.
** [[spoiler:The invisible assassin that Sawyer mistakes for Skinner (identified as Sanderson Reed in the script and the novelization, which matches the assassin's voice) throws away his chance to kill Sawyer silently. "What makes you think I'm Skinner?"]]
** The Big Bad constantly putting himself in direct danger by personally confronting the League by himself and a handful of goons, and only barely escaping with his life twice, with the second time revealing his identity as [[spoiler:Moriarty.]] for no particular reason.

* DeulingWorks: ''ComicBook/ScarletTraces'' came out the same year as Volume [=II=]. It's a sequel to ''Literature/TheWarOfTheWorlds'' with enough cameos from other fictional characters to count as a MassiveMultiplayerCrossover.

-->'' Willett/Manheim translation:''
-->What keeps mankind alive? The fact that millions\\

-->''Moore's translation:''
-->What keeps mankind alive’s the millions yearly\\

-->Willett/Manheim translation:
--->What keeps mankind alive? The fact that millions\\
Are daily tortured, stifled, punished, silenced and oppressed\\

-->Moore's translation:
--->What keeps mankind alive’s the millions yearly\\

* HarsherInHindsight:
** In ''Century: 2009'', Creator/JudiDench's M from the Franchise/JamesBond films, who in this universe is [[Series/TheAvengers1960s Emma Peel]], is made [[spoiler: immortal. A few months later, she was killed off in ''Film/{{Skyfall}}'']].

** Once ''Century: 2009'' finally revealed the Moonchild's identity, many fans of [[spoiler: Harry Potter]] objected to the entire storyline - not necessarily because of Moore's treatment of the character, but because it wasn't nearly as interesting as it could have been. If Moore had managed to rein in [[WriterOnBoard his hatred of today's pop culture]], and [[ShallowParody had actually familiarized himself with the character enough to make his portrayal feel authentic]], it ''could'' have been a genuinely fascinating look at youthful rebellion, the paranoia of the post-9/11 world, and [[BecauseDestinySaysSo the conflict between destiny and free will]]. Instead, [[spoiler: Harry]] is just portrayed as a one-note [[TeensAreMonsters foul-mouthed teen with an attitude problem]]. Regardless of how you might feel about the source material, that's hardly the basis for an interesting villain.

** There's a question of whether Moore's ''really'' TruerToTheText than most other adaptations, or whether he's really just [[DarkerAndEdgier pushing for the darkest possible depictions]] [[AuthorAppeal for his private enjoyment]]. There is a lot of contention that Moore doesn't care about a lot of the characters' textual qualities as long as it fits what he felt the book was about. In the worst cases these can have some of Moore's attempts at SurprisinglyRealisticOutcome, such as Mina's scars, [[FridgeLogic retroactively cause massive plotholes]] if assumed to be true in the source material. The divisiveness isn't helped by the fact that Moore is evidentially easily angered by how adaptations of his work alter his characters, which, given all the examples below in ShallowParody, makes this look pretty hypocritical. [[note]]Particular sore spots include: Mina Murray being a divorced woman when she was HappilyMarried to Jonathan Harker in the original novel, Allan Quatermain becoming far worse of a hero and more of a loser than anything in the actual books, Captain Nemo working for the empire he spent his first book bad mouthing and wanting dead, Mr. Hyde raping the Invisible Man, James Bond as an incompetent misogynist psychopathic traitor instead of being a loyal, competent ProfessionalKiller, and Harry Potter as a whiny, self-pitying, school-shooting chav strung out on anti-depressants who becomes the Antichrist, which is pretty far off from his actual character, etc.[[/note]]

* AcceptableTargets: Moore’s dark parody of the widely beloved Franchise/HarryPotter series was polarizing, to say the least. As the readers have grown older and [[ValuesDissonance Rowling has alienated much of her audience]], it reads a bit differently. Though still Anvilicious.

* FranchiseOriginalSin:
** Alan Moore always tried to sell the series on the strength of its central MassiveMultiplayerCrossover, with an intricate universe that showed dozens of classic works of literature weaved together into a cohesive whole. In that regard, one element that got some buzz was his use of BroadStrokes to develop once-bland cyphers into interesting characters in their own right. In the first volume, these two elements perfectly complemented and spiced up a genuinely interesting adventure story. However, by the time of ''Black Dossier'' and especially ''Century'', they had become a major weakness. For the former, many scenes ended up being devoted to [[ContinuityPorn showing off Moore's education]] instead of advancing the plot, leaving a whole lot of interesting names scattered through a slow and boring narrative. As the series advanced into modern times, Moore also ran out of {{Public Domain Character}}s, forcing him to do a whole lot of obvious WritingAroundTrademarks. For the latter, Moore attempted to apply his broad-strokes reinvention technique to characters who were far more well-known and fleshed-out to readers than the likes of [[Literature/KingSolomonsMines Allan Quatermain]] (most infamously ''Franchise/JamesBond'' and ''Literature/HarryPotter''), leaving the impression that Moore either [[CriticalResearchFailure hadn't done any research]] or [[Administrivia/ComplainingAboutShowsYouDontLike was trying to fulfill some kind of vendetta]]. Other times, he botched the reinvention; one of his most ambitious creations, Orlando, earned a reputation as a CreatorsPet, and the general opinion of [[{{Blackface}} the Golliwog]] is that he was [[ValuesDissonance best left forgotten]].
** Moore has used the series as a means of [[TakeThat performing mean-spirited hatchet jobs on characters he doesn't like]] since the beginning. The very first volume featured [[Literature/TheInvisibleMan Griffin]] literally raping [[Literature/RebeccaOfSunnybrookFarm Becky Randall]] (including a rather insulting and out-of-character depiction of her as a [[{{Eagleland}} stereotypical "dumb American"]]) and attempting to rape [[{{Literature/Pollyanna}} Pollyanna Whittier]] (whose [[ThePollyanna lack of obvious trauma over the incident]] is PlayedForLaughs). It was relatively under control to start with; the works he was taking shots at were either obscure enough that readers might not recognize them or were targeted towards young teenage girls, and therefore fair game in the minds of both literary snobs and young men. But, as time passed, this treatment only escalated, and it stopped confining itself to stories whose fans had little overlap with the comics' intended audience: Oliver Haddo is presented as a failure in his plan for a new Aeon, Greyfriars and Cliff House schools being indoctrination centers for spies and villains, Tom Swift and the Edisonade kids as completely financially motivated amoral monsters, and, perhaps most infamously of all, [[spoiler: ''Franchise/HarryPotter'' and ''Franchise/JamesBond'']] left virtually unrecognizable as vessels for everything Moore hates about kids these days and conservative government securocracy, respectively. In the grand finale of the franchise, Moore went out dismissing the entire stable of Marvel and DC characters, shoving them into a nursing home where they're kept alive just for corporations to make money and indicating that all of their heroic adventures were lies and propaganda anyway. Note the purely British and obscure superheroes are not treated like this.

* NeverLiveItDown:
** One can see the League as this trope taken to its zenith. Basically, if a character's original books had elements of sexism, racism, and class-biases that the author dislikes, they will be brought in an subject to CharacterExaggeration to the extreme. For some younger readers to which Moore's version can serve as a GatewaySeries it could ensure these aspects get focused on to the exclusion of everything else about the works. Moore would contend many of these were LostInImitation while others would contend Moore has deconstructed many of them far beyond their breaking point where they no longer feel like the characters.
** It's true that Allan Quatermain did a drug within the context of his original stories. That was a fictional taduki leaves. Within the purpose of these stories these were specifically used for vision quests and past-life regression. League version of Allan has become and outright opium addict with Moore seeing such drug use as one of his most important characterizations.
** Moore's depiction of ''Literature/JamesBond'' as a rampant sexist is clearly derived from his attitude at the very beginning of the book series. However while Moore took this up to eleven and kept it there, literary Bond slowly did evolve beyond that towards the end of Fleming's novels.
** ''Literature/BulldogDrummond'' is another on this list who showed off values that at the time of his creation were acceptable, if at the bare edge of that category. (in his own time Drummond would have been considered radical) This seems to be the only focus of Moore's take on him; [[DumbMuscle a giant, hulking mass of muscle and prejudice]]. Nevermind that Drummond was more stocky and a completely capable detective and adventurer who was much smarter than people gave him credit for, which is a major element to his adventures.
** ''Literature/TomSwift''[='=]s stories were written in a way that is now seen as racist, but were not written as racial propaganda, nor were his racial attitudes a focal point. But Moore has clearly chosen to focus on a change in scientific ethos over the years and dialed up Tom's racism far beyond what the Creator/StratemeyerSyndicate ever intended.
** The comic's take on [[spoiler: ''Franchise/HarryPotter'']] has become rather infamous due to the franchise's popularity, with many considering Moore's interpretation to be rather [[ShallowParody shallow]], overly mean-spirited, and a little too indicative of Moore's NostalgiaFilter for children's literature from the public domain compared to the modern stuff. [[spoiler: Harry's most wangsty period is generally seen as ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheOrderOfThePhoenix'']]. But in Moore's version, again, this is turned up to eleven and made the brunt of his characterization.
** For a more humorous and less controversial example, it appears Frankenstein's Monster has never been able to live down the constant arguments of whether Frankenstein was the man or the monster, which the League version considers a constant struggle and his own personal existential crisis.

* ShallowParody: Alan Moore and O'Neill claim that their DeconstructiveParody of older works is based on being TruerToTheText, and while that claim is valid to an extent that the UnbuiltTrope of many of their sources and targets are either forgotten or mentioned in OlderThanTheyThink, many of their targets and satires seem to be based on shallow impressions, strawman arguments, inconsistent standards, and poor premises:
** Series lead Mina Harker is one who attracts a lot of this criticism. There are some implications in [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ this interview]] that Moore saw Mina Harker as a token stock badass female to add to the cast and doesn't understand the themes of ''Literature/{{Dracula}}'' at all. For all the issues that made it FairForItsDay, ''Dracula'' is about a monster that "can't love" trying to destroy a group of TrueCompanions who are unquestionably loyal and devoted to each other--in particular the uncompromisingly devoted Harker couple, who are utterly in love with and admiring of each other and work hard to be mutually supportive in each's various individual endeavors as well as be strong for each other in all their traumas throughout the novel, both as lovers and as life partners. That Moore's take on a supposed TruerToTheText DeconstructiveParody of ''Dracula'''s characters results in Moore's Mina having such a derogatory attitude towards (and negative history with) Moore's Jonathan shows either that Moore doesn't value the optimistic themes of ''Dracula'' about love and companionship or that he didn't understand them well enough to deconstruct what was actually in the text and, far from making his usage of them TruerToTheText, instead just painted his own AuthorTract over the characters. The only other options are that he didn't actually read the novel or was biased by other adaptations that also drop much of these original themes in favor of adding themes about sexual liberation vs. conformity; Moore seems to understand Mina and Jonathan only as "assertive female with Victorian husband" and made his own assumptions about their characters from that stereotype. In [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ the interview]], Moore seems to have accidentally reinforced the idea that Mina in ''particular'' is a ShallowParody of the character from ''Dracula,'' as he talks about her as if she was a generic female character interchangeable with ''[[Literature/SherlockHolmes Irene Adler,]]'' whose name he can't even remember, and openly says his decision to consider including either character was based on the team needing ''[[TheSmurfettePrinciple "a]]'' woman." Moore claims to have chosen Mina instead of Irene because he thought [[EnsembleDarkHorse Irene Adler]] was ''too obscure,'' but for all the personality traits Moore's Mina has in common with Creator/BramStoker's, some think Moore might as well have picked Irene anyways.
** When it comes to Allan Quartermain there is criticism too. In his original form he was a GreatWhiteHunter who used drugs for the purpose of vision quests, and wasn't always a straight and confident hero, especially after certain tragic events that shook him (namely the deaths of his family and allies). Here in this comic the barely functional on-and-off-the-wagon Quatermain is just as much Moore's invention as everything he accuses Hollywood of doing to soften him and others of his kind up.
** Captain Nemo, despite playing some cool parts to the story, has quite a lot of qualities that don't fit the way Creator/JulesVerne wrote him. Needless to say while it was true Verne made him Indian, Nemo's design and gimmick of the ''Nautilus'' was never supposed to be Indian-themed. It was an entire plot point that Nemo wanted to break away from the nations of the land. His captives aren't able to tell for sure what nationality Nemo is because it's all a unique design and everyone on this ship speaks their own {{Conlang}}. On top of that, Nemo was very clearly anti-British Empire. The idea that he would bother to assist them on something that at best was a local London dispute seems rapidly out of character. Even after his VillainousBreakdown Nemo still wanted out of normal humanity on ''Literature/TheMysteriousIsland''. Nemo in this comic also seems to very much dislike collateral damage from the British government's plan to end the Martian invasion, which is also rather odd given that in ''Literature/TwentyThousandLeaguesUnderTheSea'', he found no problem sinking any ships with the flag on it, regardless of who was on board. His VillainousBreakdown wasn't even over that, as much as the fact he wasn't that much different from the Empire. Moore seems to have him leave out of disgust for the Empire. Though book Nemo doesn't really seem like he would have even gotten involved in such a plot.
** As a minor example ''Literature/{{Pollyanna}}'' gets used for a joke based on [[ThePollyanna the very trope named after her]]. Here, even being raped by an invisible man is not enough to rock Pollyanna's glad game. Per the original book, Pollyanna has some StepfordSmiler elements which, while making her still an optimist, can break in really traumatic situations, making it rather out of character that she'd keep it up after Griffin's attack.
** Another student at Miss Coote's, Becky Randall from Literature/RebeccaOfSunnybrookFarm also presented for a quick throwaway reference to having been knocked up the Invisible Man. League!Rebecca is written as a blonde hick in steep contrast to the BrainyBrunette of her source material.
** We can also talk about ''Literature/TheIslandOfDoctorMoreau''. Doctor Moreau of the book was not a geneticist, a field that wasn't even recognized back then. Moreau's beast men were merely given proto-plastic surgery. Moore's version seems to be able to splice two microscopic pathogens together, something someone of the book!Moreau's abilities couldn't do. As well, the Beast men of Moore's work are loaded with parodies of various comic characters, but none of them really resemble book!Moreau's process, and Moreau's actual book creatures are AdaptedOut.
** Likewise the boys from Literature/{{Greyfriars}} we see in the League pages are far removed from their heroic sources. [[Literature/NineteenEightyFour Big Brother]]'s government and [[Film/TheThirdMan Harry Lime]]'s M are shown to have way more prejudices than their childhood selves. Moore seems to miss the fact that the Famous Five were written as being rather against racism and sometimes willingly defending minorities, even if some ValuesDissonance went into how they said it. Perhaps most confusingly one of the Famous Five was a minority character himself. While portrayed with broken English, none of the other four ever thought any less of him for it. This character doesn't appear in the League books at all. Some would contend linking Greyfriars to ''1984'' is appropriate due to Orwell's concern over the popularity of their stories, but even then there seems to be a disconnect, as a lot of his concern was over Billy Bunter, who was a SpotlightStealingSquad to the Famous Five who was the major attraction of the series for most of its run. It was Bunter who showed much more prejudicial attitudes and DirtyCoward backstabbing. Had Moore written Billy Bunter becoming Big Brother and forming his own inner circle that lead to Ingsoc, a lot more people would have followed along rather than what can't be seen as anything but major changes to Wharton and Cherry.
** Ayesha from ''Literature/{{She}}'' gets her cruelty taken up to eleven like many characters here, but in a way that outright breaks her characterization. In ''She'' it is her genuine love for Leo Vincey that drives her CharacterDevelopment, especially within the sequel. Moore has Ayesha dispose of Vincey without any care at all for both him and the book's sequel.
*** In ''River of Ghosts'' we get several parodies that make some sense on their own but make little sense when added together. In Haggard's ''She'' series, reincarnation is a heavily relied-on plot device. Moore chose to connect her supposed reincarnation to the plot of ''Literature/TheBoysFromBrazil'', which was instead about clones. As if this wasn't already a problem, Moore connected both of these to ''Literature/TheStepfordWives'', which is probably an even more confusing fit given that in that novel it's a major point that Stepford attracts men with the specific skills needed to create their robots and everyone in town is directly involved. In the League universe they seemingly just get their robot wives from this same conspiracy that created clones of Hynkel and Ayesha, which somehow aren't robots?
*** Notwithstanding Moore's handling of the Flame of Kor, which in the source was a [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin flame]] that one was only allowed into once it made them immortal and free of aging of the flesh. But Harry Potter's lower ''wand'' or Janni's sword somehow defeat those immortals, when in the books the only thing that could kill Ayesha was stepping into the flame for a second time.
** Can one take Franchise/JamesBond and give it some deconstruction? Absolutely. Could there be humor in Moore's take? Yes. But does that mean there's nothing compelling about his films or the original book or espionage fiction which Moore sees as possessing disagreeable political subtext? That last part is dubious, especially since Moore's focus on his Bond satire is Fleming!Bond, with Creator/RogerMoore and Creator/DanielCraig as minor characters. Missing is ''Film/OnHerMajestysSecretService'' which many consider an excellent film, and a very successful and convincing attempt at humanizing Bond. Let alone remembering how Creator/IanFleming's Bond himself grew as the book series continued. There is also the other aesthetic qualities such as the action, gadgets, and set design which Moore mocks as impractical, but which others would see as NarmCharm of the kind Moore celebrates elsewhere and is surely no less practical than the ScienceHero set-up of Captain Nemo and others, which Moore plays straight and seems to romanticize by comparison.
** ''Literature/BulldogDrummond'' in this issue ties into the NeverLiveItDown example above. One major thing the League version of him gets rather confused on lies in the name. Book Drummond is ex-military with a six-foot frame and a stocky build, making the Bulldog comparison accurate to both his attitude and look. The version in the League has seemingly picked up a much more exaggerated muscle-man look than his original version that wrecks half of the original joke. Ironically Drummond had been given AdaptationalAttractiveness in film before to be played by Creator/RonaldColman. Neither Colman or O'Neill's artwork would lead you to read "bulldog" as well as H. C. [=McNeile=]'s writing.
** Then there's the Golliwog. Moore had originally defended his inclusion by stating he was going to pull him from Florence Kate Upton's source book rather than the more-remembered UncleTomfoolery minstrel use of the character, which seemed divisive but somewhat understandable for deconstruction. But Moore then proceeded to graft an origin story onto him that was practically a slave narrative, thus making Moore's original point seem rather shallow in itself. As it turns out, people upset with him as a caricature of a black person were just as upset with Moore's transformation of him into a space version of a black person.[[note]]To say this character's history is debated is an understatement. Moore, according to his interview, is clearly of the position that Upton is the full-on creator of the Golliwog and the manufacture of toys of him only comes after Upton's books. Others frame that Upton had found a minstrel toy to use as the base for her fictional character without knowing anything more about said toy. See the Headscratchers page if primary sourcing can clarify.[[/note]]
** Moore's attack on [[spoiler: Harry Potter]] hits on a lot of points to look at separately.
*** In the first there's the treatment of the character Harry Potter himself. Moore used the few elements that his version was TruerToTheText than the film franchise, but given how much Moore has added CharacterExaggeration to Harry, it seems rather moot. Harry had issues he had to address over his own fame and whether he was nothing more than a pawn, but within the source he used that to grow. In ''League,'' Harry simply became a magical school shooter.
*** The very basis of Haddo's plan within the League narrative also requires heavy AdaptationDeviation to Harry Potter. What's even more problematic is that it requires similar deviation to Aleister Crowley's ''Moonchild''. Moore uses the comic to weld the two narratives in ways that don't really make any sense in either source. Given that the Moonchild is supposed to be purposefully conceived in a certain way, which would require his book backstory to have all been an elaborate ruse, making the wizarding war of Harry Potter's story not real. Yet what exactly happened to the magician's war from the plot on ''Moonchild''? Moore makes no attempt to conflate those plot points even when it seems the easiest thing to connect Moonchild to Harry Potter.
*** There is also contention because book!Harry does worry that he is just a pawn in someone else's chess game. But Alan Moore chose to make the person setting this up Voldemort (possessed by Oliver Haddo). Many have pointed out that Albus Dumbledore would have actually made more sense in this role given that in the source he was TheChessmaster who used Harry Potter as a part of his own grand plan. This is made even worse when Moore made Voldemort a teacher and then headmaster, which never happened in the books but was true for Dumbledore.
*** Next there's the outside criticism of Harry Potter's franchise. Firstly Moore seems to have based criticism on seeing Harry Potter as representing the summit of modern franchise blockbusters and a stagnant culture that creates nothing new but merely keeps regurgitating and extending stories indefinitely. Many point out that [[spoiler:''Harry Potter'']] is an original creation developed by an individual rather than a huge publishing corporation in the late-nineties with a set number of installments from the first novel which was made into a series of films that hadn't been remade or had artificial sequel/prequels attached at the time of Moore's writing. Thus, it seems to be stretching things to make him somehow the embodiment of everything wrong with modern franchise culture.
*** The argument in ''Century'' that the 21st Century is culturally stagnant or in decline since TheSeventies ruffled many feathers because it basically comes across as the view of someone writing off the entire millennial generation in comparison to the '60s and the Victorian Era. The criticism of 21st-century popular culture is undercut by the fact that in setting up [[spoiler:''Franchise/HarryPotter'']] as a strawman villain, the heroes Moore chooses to oppose him [[spoiler:are Mina, Orlando, Alan Quatermain, and Mary Poppins, all from an older era]] rather than say another figure from contemporary times that Moore might favor. Literary heroes and villains from this period were rather few and far between in the Century volume, when by comparison his Victorian-era volumes were loaded with major players and smaller names for added background.
** ''Literature/TomSwift'' is yet another example to appear in both lists because as mentioned in NeverLiveItDown, Moore clearly personified him as a greedy American concept of using super-cool technology for his own selfish desires. As witnessed in his Dodgem Logic essay he finds that real-life company Axon drawing inspiration for the taser from Tom Swift as evidence of this. Tom's heroic tendencies are pretty much tasered out of him to make this new characterization work. It feels like Moore has painted Tom Swift into a corner based on Moore's own opinions rather than anything in the character's books.
*** There were also complaints about Moore's handling of Nemo versus Edisonade kids like Tom Swift. Nemo does spout racial prejudices as much as them but is still presented as very heroic, and the termination of his involvement with the British Empire as a moral choice, as detailed above, whereas the Edisonade heroes are handled with a more outright amoral slant. Moore has seemingly assumed that Nemo deserved a kid-gloves treatment because Creator/JulesVerne was giving us an example of DontDoThisCoolThing with Nemo, while the Edisonade kids were being treated as outright heroic, which can come off as hypocritical because on their inventions alone many real-life inventors found inspiration in the stories of Captain Nemo and Tom Swift alike, regardless how their narratives positioned them.
** Moore also took Olimpia from Creator/ETAHoffmann's story ''Literature/TheSandman1816'' and is characterized as something far off from Hoffmann's story. Olimpia in the original tale was a barely-passable doll that could only say "Ah Ah" and was destroyed in the end. Moore's version practically makes her a fully-functional robot capable of thoughts and living a romantic life with Frankenstein's Monster, even helping make other monsters. Moore also tries to rationalize Victor Frankenstein as somehow being inspired by Spallanzani's work, despite the creations of Frankenstein's monster and Olimpia having literally nothing in common other than making some kind of new person.

* TookTheBadFilmSeriously: Half of the cast definitely put up a valiant effort into their performances, though the standout seems to be Creator/JasonFlemyng as both Jekyll and Hyde.

** When he's captured in Paris, Hyde is wearing a torn suit and shirt (with the standard MagicPants)...and a fully intact ''giant top hat''. Sawyer then channels the audience by picking up the hat while making a face that just screams, "Where the hell did he ''get'' this?"

*** Notwithstaning Moore's handling of the Flame of Kor, which in the source was a [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin flame]] that one was only allowed into once it made them immortal and free of aging of the flesh. But Harry Potter's lower ''wand'' or Janni's sword somehow defeat those immortals, when in the books the only thing that could kill Ayesha was stepping into the flame for a second time.

** Moore's depiction of ''Literature/JamesBond'' as a rampant sexist is clearly derived from his attitude at the very beginning of the book series. However while Moore took this UpToEleven and kept it there, literary Bond slowly did evolve beyond that towards the end of Fleming's novels.

** The comic's take on [[spoiler: ''Franchise/HarryPotter'']] has become rather infamous due to the franchise's popularity, with many considering Moore's interpretation to be rather [[ShallowParody shallow]], overly mean-spirited, and a little too indicative of Moore's NostalgiaFilter for children's literature from the public domain compared to the modern stuff. [[spoiler: Harry's most wangsty period is generally seen as ''Literature/HarryPotterAndTheOrderOfThePhoenix'']]. But in Moore's version, again, this is turned UpToEleven and made the brunt of his characterization.

** Ayesha from ''Literature/{{She}}'' gets her cruelty taken UpToEleven like many characters here, but in a way that outright breaks her characterization. In ''She'' it is her genuine love for Leo Vincey that drives her CharacterDevelopment, especially within the sequel. Moore has Ayesha dispose of Vincey without any care at all for both him and the book's sequel.

* GeniusBonus: If you got every single reference in this series without help... you need to make ''a lot'' more pages here at Wiki/TVTropes.

** We can also talk about ''Literature/TheIslandOfDoctorMoreau''. Doctor Moreau of the book was not a geneticist, a field that didn't even get recognized back then. Moreau's beast men were merely given proto-plastic surgery. Moore's version seems to be able to splice two microscopic pathogens together, something someone of the book!Moreau's abilities couldn't do. As well, the Beast men of Moore's work are loaded with parodies of various comic characters, but none of them really resemble book!Moreau's process, and Moreau's actual book creatures are AdaptedOut.
** Likewise the boys from Literature/{{Greyfriars}} we see in the League pages are far removed from their heroic sources. [[Literature/NineteenEightyFour Big Brother]]'s government and [[Film/TheThirdMan Harry Lime]]'s M are shown to have way more prejudices than their childhood selves. Moore seems to miss the fact that the Famous Five were written as being rather against some thoughts willingly defending minorities, even if some ValuesDissonance went into how they said it. Perhaps most confusingly one of the Famous Five was a minority character himself. While portrayed with broken English, none of the other four ever thought any less of him for it. This character doesn't appear in the League books at all. Some would contend linking Greyfriars to ''1984'' is appropriate due to Orwell's concern over the popularity of their stories, but even then there seems to be a disconnect, as a lot of his concern was over Billy Bunter, who was a SpotlightStealingSquad to the Famous Five who was the major attraction to the series for most of the run. It was Bunter who showed much more prejudicial attitudes and DirtyCoward backstabbing. Had Moore made it Billy Bunter who became Big Brother and formed his own inner circle that lead to Ingsoc, a lot more people would have followed along rather than what can't be seen as anything but major changes to Wharton and Cherry.

*** Notwithstaning Moore's handling of the Flame of Kor, which in the source was a [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin flame]] that one was only allowed into once it made you immortal and free of aging of the flesh. But Harry Potter's lower ''wand'' or Janni's sword somehow defeat, when in the books the only thing that could kill Ayesha was stepping into the flame for a second time.

** Series lead Mina Harker is one who attracts a lot of this criticism. There are some implications in [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ this interview]] that Moore saw Mina Harker as a token stock badass female to add to the cast and doesn't understand the themes of ''Literature/{{Dracula}}'' at all. ''Dracula'' is, for all its FairForItsDay issues, about a monster that "can't love" trying to destroy a group of TrueCompanions who are unquestionably loyal and devoted to each other--in particular the uncompromisingly devoted Harker couple, who are utterly in love with and admiring of each other and work hard to be mutually supportive in each's various individual endeavors as well as be strong for each other in all their traumas throughout the novel, both as lovers and as life partners. That Moore's take on a supposed TruerToTheText DeconstructiveParody of ''Dracula'''s characters results in Moore's Mina having such a derogatory attitude towards (and negative history with) Moore's Jonathan shows either that Moore doesn't value the optimistic themes of ''Dracula'' about love and companionship or that he didn't understand them well enough to deconstruct what was actually in the text and, far from making his usage of them TruerToTheText, instead just painted his own AuthorTract over the characters. The only other options are that he didn't actually read the novel or was biased by other adaptations that also drop much of these original themes in favor of adding themes about sexual liberation vs. conformity; Moore seems to understand Mina and Jonathan only as "assertive female with Victorian husband" and made his own assumptions about their characters from that stereotype. In [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ the interview]], Moore seems to have accidentally reinforced the idea that Mina in ''particular'' is a ShallowParody of the character from ''Dracula,'' as he talks about her as if she was a generic female character interchangeable with ''[[Literature/SherlockHolmes Irene Adler,]]'' whose name he can't even remember, and openly says his decision to consider including either character was based on the team needing ''[[TheSmurfettePrinciple "a]]'' woman." Moore claims to have chosen Mina instead of Irene because he thought [[EnsembleDarkHorse Irene Adler]] was ''too obscure,'' but for all the personality traits Moore's Mina has in common with Creator/BramStoker's, some think Moore might as well have picked Irene anyways.
** When it comes to Allan Quartermain there is criticism too. In his original form he was a GreatWhiteHunter, drug user for the purpose of vision quests, and wasn't always a straight and confident hero especially after certain tragic events that shook him (namely deaths of his family and allies). Here in this comic the barely functional on-and-off-the-wagon Quatermain is just as much Moore's invention as everything he accuses Hollywood of doing to soften him and others of his kind up.
** Captain Nemo despite playing some cool parts to the story has quite a lot of qualities that don't fit the way Creator/JulesVerne wrote him. Needless to say while it was true Verne made him Indian, Nemo's design and gimmick of the Nautilus was never supposed to be Indian themed. It was an entire plot point that Nemo wanted to break away from the nations of the land. His captives aren't able to tell for sure what nationality Nemo is because it's all a unique design and everyone on this ship speaks their own {{Conlang}}. On top of that Nemo was very clearly anti the British Empire. The idea that he would bother to assist the British Empire on something that at best was a local London dispute seems rapidly out of character. Even after his VillainousBreakdown Nemo still wanted away from normal humanity on ''Literature/TheMysteriousIsland''. Nemo in this comic also seems to very much dislike collateral damage from the British government's plan to end the Martian invasion, which is also rather odd given Nemo in ''Literature/TwentyThousandLeaguesUnderTheSea'' found no problem sinking any ships with the flag on it, regardless who was on it. His VillainousBreakdown wasn't even over that as much as the fact he wasn't that much different from the Empire. Moore seems to have him leave out of disgust for the Empire. Though book Nemo doesn't really seem like he would have even gotten involved in such a plot.
** As a minor example ''Literature/{{Pollyanna}}'' gets used for a comedy joke based on [[ThePollyanna the very trope named after her]]. Here, even being raped by an invisible man is not enough to rock Pollyanna's glad game. Per the original book, Pollyanna has some StepfordSmiler elements which, while making her still an optimist, can break in really traumatic situations, making it rather out of character that she'd keep it up after Griffin's attack.
** Another student at Miss Coote's, Becky Randall from Literature/RebeccaOfSunnybrookFarm also presented for a quick throwaway reference to having been knocked up the Invisible Man. League Rebecca is written as a blonde hick in steep contrast from the BrainyBrunette of her source material.
** We can also talk about ''Literature/TheIslandOfDoctorMoreau''. Doctor Moreau of the book was not a geneticist which didn't even get recognized back then. Moreau's beast men, were merely given proto plastic surgery. Moore's version seems to be able to splice two microscopic pathogens together. Which is something someone of the book Moreau's abilities couldn't do. Let alone the Beast men of Moore's work are loaded with parodies of various comic characters but none of them really resemble book Moreau's process, and Moreau's actual book creatures are AdaptedOut.
** Likewise the boys from Literature/{{Greyfriars}} we see in the League pages are far removed from their heroic sources. Big Brother's government and [[Film/TheThirdMan Harry Lime]]'s M are shown to have way more prejudices than their kid versions. Moore seems to miss the fact that The Famous Five were written as being rather against some thoughts willingly defending minorities, even if some ValuesDissonance went into how they said it. Perhaps most confusingly one of the Famous Five was a minority character himself. While portrayed with broken English, none of the other four ever thought any less of him for it. This character doesn't appear in the League books at all. Some would contend linking Greyfriars to 1984 is appropriate due to Orwell's concern over the popularity of their stories. But even then there seems to be a disconnect as a lot of that concern was over Billy Bunter who was a SpotlightStealingSquad to the Famous Five who was the major attraction to the series for most of the run. It was Bunter who showed off much more prejudicial attitudes and DirtyCoward backstabbing. Had Moore have made it Billy Bunter who became Big Brother and formed his own inner circle that lead to 1984, a lot more people would have followed along rather than what can't be seen as anything but major changes to Wharton and Cherry.
** Ayesha from ''Literature/{{She}}'' gets her cruelty taken UpToEleven like many characters here but in one way that outright breaks her characterization. In ''She'' it is her genuine love for Leo Vincey that drives her CharacterDevelopment especially within the sequel. Moore has Ayesha dispose of Vincey without any care at all for both him and the book's sequel.
*** In ''River of Ghosts'' we get several together parodies that on their own make some sense but when added together just make little sense. In Haggard's She books reincarnation is a heavily relied on plot device. Moore chose to connect her supposed reincarnation as actually being connected to the plot of ''Literature/TheBoysFromBrazil'' which was instead about clones. As if this wasn't already a problem Moore connected both of these to ''Literature/TheStepfordWives''. Which is probably even more a confusing fit given in that source it's a major point that Stepford attracts men who have the specific skills they need to create their robots and everyone in town is directly involved. In League world they seemingly just get their robot wives from this same conspiracy that created clones of Hynkel and Ayesha. Which somehow aren't robots?
*** Notwithstaning Moore's handling of the Flame of Kor, which in the source was a [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin flame]] that you were only allowed to go into once that made you immortal and free of aging of the flesh. But Harry Potter's lower ''wand'' or Janni's sword somehow defeat, when in the book the only thing that killed Ayesha, was stepping into the flame for a second time.
** Can one take Franchise/JamesBond and give it some deconstruction? Absolutely. Could there be humor in Moore's take? Yes. But does that mean there's nothing compelling about his films or the original book or espionage fiction which Moore sees as possessing disagreeable political subtext. That last part is dubious, especially since Moore's focus on his Bond satire is Fleming!Bond, and Creator/RogerMoore and Creator/DanielCraig. Missing is ''Film/OnHerMajestysSecretService'' which many consider an excellent film, and a very successful and convincing attempt at humanizing Bond. Let alone remembering how Creator/IanFleming's Bond himself grew as the book series continued. There is also the other aesthetic qualities such as the action, gadgets, and set design which Moore mocks as impractical, but which others would see as NarmCharm of the kind Moore celebrates elsewhere and is surely no less practical than the ScienceHero set-up of Captain Nemo and others, which Moore plays straight and seems to romanticize by comparison.
** ''Literature/BulldogDrummond'' in this issue ties into the NeverLiveItDown example above. One major thing the League version of him gets rather confused on lies in the name. Book Drummond is ex military with a six foot frame with a stocky build. Making the Bulldog comparison accurate to both his attitude and look. The version in the League has seemingly picked up a much more exaggerated muscle man look than his original version that wrecks half the original joke. Ironically Drummond had been given AdaptationalAttractiveness in film before to be played by Creator/RonaldColman. Neither Colman or O'Neill's artwork would lead you to read "bulldog" as well as H. C. [=McNeile=]'s writing.
** Then there's the Golliwog. Moore had originally defended his inclusion by stating he was going to pull him from Florence Kate Upton's source book rather than the more remembered UncleTomfoolery minstrel use of the character. Which seemed divisive but somewhat understandable for deconstruction, but Moore then proceeded to graft an origin story on him that was practically a slave narrative, thus making Moore's original point seem rather shallow in itself. As it turns out, people upset with him as a caricature of a black person were just as upset with Moore's transformation of him into a space version of a black person.[[note]]To say this character's history is debated is an understatement. Moore, according to his interview, is clearly of the position that Upton is the full-on creator of the Golliwog and the manufacture of toys of him only comes after Upton's books. Others frame that Upton had found a minstrel toy to use as the base for her fictional character without knowing anything more about said toy. See the Headscratchers page if primary sourcing can clarify.[[/note]]

*** In the first there's the treatment of the character Harry Potter himself. Moore used the few elements that his version was TruerToTheText than the film franchise but given how much Moore has added CharacterExaggeration to Harry, it seems rather moot. Harry had issues he had to address over his own fame and if he was nothing more than a pawn, but within the source he used that to grow. In League, Harry simply became a wizard school shooter.
*** The very basis of Haddo's plan within the League narrative also requires heavily AdaptationDeviation to Harry Potter. What's even more problematic is it requires similar deviation to Aleister Crowley's ''Moonchild''. Moore uses this comic to weld Moonchild to Harry Potter in ways that don't really make any sense in both sources. Given that the Moonchild is supposed to be on purpose conceived in a certain way, which would require his book backstory to all have been an elaborate ruse. Making the wizarding war of Harry Potter's story not real, yet what exactly happened to the magician's war from the plot on ''Moonchild''? Moore makes no attempt to conflate those plot points even when it seems the easiest thing to connect Moonchild to Harry Potter.
*** There is also contention because source Harry does worry he is just a pawn in someone else's chess game. But Alan Moore chose to make the person setting this up be Voldemort (as possessed by Oliver Haddo). Many have pointed out that Albus Dumbledore would have actually made more sense in this role given that in the source he was TheChessmaster who used Harry Potter as a part of his own grand plan. This is made even worse where Moore made Voldemort a teacher and then head master, which never happened in the books but was true for Dumbledore.
*** Next there's the outside criticism of Harry Potter's franchise. Firstly Moore seems to have based criticism on seeing Harry Potter as representing the summit of modern franchise blockbusters and a stagnant culture that creates nothing new but merely keeps regurgitating and extending stories indefinitely. Many point out that [[spoiler:''Harry Potter'']] is an original creation developed by an individual rather than a huge publishing corporation in the late-nineties, had a set number of installments from the first novel, and was made into a series of films that hadn't been remade or had artificial sequel/prequels attached at the time Moore was writing. Thus, it seems to be stretching things to make him some the embodiment of everything wrong with modern franchise culture.
*** The argument in ''Century'' that the 21st Century is culturally stagnant or a decline since TheSeventies, ruffled many feathers because it basically comes across as the view of someone writing off the entire millennial generation in comparison to the '60s and the Victorian Era. The criticism of twenty-first century popular culture is undercut by the fact that in setting up [[spoiler:''Franchise/HarryPotter'']] as a strawman villain, the heroes Moore chooses to oppose him [[spoiler:are Mina, Orlando, Alan Quatermain, and Mary Poppins, all from an older era]] rather than say another figure from the contemporary era that Moore might favor. Literary heroes and villains from this period were rather few and far between in the Century volume which by comparison his Victorian era versions were loaded with major players and smaller names for added background.
** ''Literature/TomSwift'' is yet another example to appear in both lists because as mentioned in NeverLiveItDown, Moore clearly personified Tom Swift as a greedy American concept to use super cool technology for his own selfish desires. As witnessed in his Dodgem Logic essay he finds as he finds that real life company Axon finding inspiration for the taser from Tom Swift as evidence of this. Tom's heroic tendencies are pretty much tasered out of him to make this new characterization work. It feels like Moore has painted Tom Swift into a corner based on Moore's own opinions rather than anything on a Tom Swift page.
*** There were also complaints about Moore's handling of Nemo versus the Edisonaide kids like Tom Swift. Nemo does spout racial prejudices as much as them but is still presented very heroic and his termination of being involved with British Empire is a moral choice as detailed above. While the Edisonaide kids are handled with a more outright amoral slant. Moore has seemingly assumed that Nemo deserved kid gloves treatment because Creator/JulesVerne was giving us an example of DontDoThisCoolThing with Nemo, while the Edisonaide kids were being treated as outright heroes. Which can come off as hypocritical because on their inventions alone many real-life inventors found inspiration in the stories of Captain Nemo and Tom Swift alike, regardless how their narratives positioned them.
** Moore also took Olimpia from Creator/ETAHoffmann's story ''Literature/TheSandman1816'' and is characterized as something far off from Hoffmann's story. Olimpia in the original story was a barely passable doll. She only could say "Ah Ah" and was destroyed. Moore's version practically makes her a fully functional robot capable of thoughts and living a romantic life with Frankenstein's Monster even helping make other monsters. Moore also tries to rationalize Victor Frankenstein was somehow inspired by Spallanzani's creation of Olimpia, despite there literally being nothing in common between Frankenstein's monster's creation and Olimpia's creation other than making some kind of person.

* CanonDefilement: When you portray [[spoiler:Franchise/HarryPotter]] as committing the magical equivalent of a school shooting, you are ''not'' going to earn brownie points with the people who like the original work.

** Moore has used the series as a means of [[TakeThat performing mean-spirited hatchet jobs on characters he doesn't like]] since the beginning. The very first volume featured [[Literature/TheInvisibleMan Griffin]] literally raping [[Literature/RebeccaOfSunnybrookFarm Becky Randall]] (including a rather insulting and out-of-character depiction of her as a [[{{Eagleland}} stereotypical "dumb American"]]) and attempting to rape [[{{Literature/Pollyanna}} Pollyanna Whittier]] (whose [[ThePollyanna lack of obvious trauma over the incident]] is PlayedForLaughs). It was relatively under control to start with; the works he was taking shots at were either obscure enough that readers might not recognize them or were targeted towards young teenage girls, and therefore fair game for both literary snobs and young boys and men. But, as time passed, this treatment only escalated, and it stopped confining itself to stories whose fans had little overlap with the comics' intended audience: Oliver Haddo is presented as a failure in his plan for a new Aeon, Greyfriars and Cliff House schools being indoctrination centers for spies and villains, Tom Swift and the Edisonade kids as completely financial motivated monsters, and, perhaps most infamously of all, [[spoiler: ''Franchise/HarryPotter'' and ''Franchise/JamesBond'']] left virtually unrecognizable as vessels for everything Moore hates about kids these days and conservative government securocracy, respectively. In the grand finale of the franchise, Moore went out dismissing the entire stable of Marvel and DC characters, shoving them into a nursing home where they're kept alive just for corporations to make money and indicating that all of their heroic adventures were lies and propaganda anyway. Note the purely British and obscure superheroes are not treated like this.

** Moore's stance that art had higher expectations in the Victorian era compared to the modern stuff he's apathetic towards at best and utterly hates at worst is debated heavily by fans ''and'' academia. There are examples of many of the things Moore decries about modern fiction (LongRunner series, [[MoneyDearBoy low-effort cash-grab sequels]], fiction without higher themes intended purely for entertainment) in that time, much of which had to be rehabilitated via DeathOfTheAuthor, or deliberately steering counter examples to be less focused on. Victorian authors were also no less prone to [[TrollingCreator baiting their audiences]], [[HePannedItNowHeSucks getting into feuds with critics, academics, and each other]], or questioning their younger works as they got older and more thoughtful. Moore portrays all of which as worrying new trends and/or symptoms of something deeply diseased about the process of writing modern fiction. Some see this as Moore essentially siding with academic consensus, at least to the extent Moore can see himself as an intellectual for doing so. Moore's social anarchist cues may also play into this worldview. Others are more prone to call this as age old academic snobbery, arguing that OlderIsBetter and [[NoTrueScotsman arbitrarily excluding older works from the same criteria used to judge modern ones]]. In the very process Moore seems to uphold obstacles to a wider literary acceptance, and which, ironically, has led to academia pushing away many of the fictional works used to build the comic's world in the first place.

** Moore has used the series as a means of [[TakeThat performing mean-spirited hatchet jobs on characters he doesn't like]] since the beginning. The very first volume featured [[Literature/TheInvisibleMan Griffin]] literally raping [[Literature/RebeccaOfSunnybrookFarm Becky Randall]] (including a rather insulting and out-of-character depiction of her as a [[{{Eagleland}} stereotypical "dumb American"]]) and attempting to rape [[{{Literature/Pollyanna}} Pollyanna Whittier]] (whose [[ThePollyanna lack of obvious trauma over the incident]] is PlayedForLaughs). It was relatively under control to start with; the works he was taking shots at were either obscure enough that readers might not recognize them or were targeted towards young teenage girls, and therefore fair game for both literary snobs and young boys and men. But, as time passed, this treatment only escalated, and it stopped confining itself to stories whose fans had little overlap with the comics' intended audience: Oliver Haddo is presented as a failure in his plan for a new Aeon, Greyfriars and Cliff House schools being indoctrination centers for spies and villains, Tom Swift and the Edisonade kids as completely financial motivated monsters, and, perhaps most infamously of all, [[spoiler: ''Franchise/HarryPotter'' and ''Franchise/JamesBond'']] left virtually unrecognizable as vessels for everything Moore hates about kids these days and conservative government securocracy, respectively. In the grand finale of the franchise, Moore went out dismissing the entire stable of Marvel and DC characters, shoving them into a nursing home where they're kept alive just for corporations to make money and indicating that all of their heroic adventures were lies and propaganda anyway.

** Moore also took Olimpia from Creator/ETAHoffmann's story ''Literature/TheSandman'' and is characterized as something far off from Hoffmann's story. Olimpia in the original story was a barely passable doll. She only could say "Ah Ah" and was destroyed. Moore's version practically makes her a fully functional robot capable of thoughts and living a romantic life with Frankenstein's Monster even helping make other monsters. Moore also tries to rationalize Victor Frankenstein was somehow inspired by Spallanzani's creation of Olimpia, despite there literally being nothing in common between Frankenstein's monster's creation and Olimpia's creation other than making some kind of person.