Delta Assault
Member
Yeah, but he mostly draws superhero comics, and those mostly contain people. And he can't draw em worth a damn, according to my personal preferences.
Sorry. That work for ya?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Was Frank Miller always secretly shit?
- Thread starter foxtrot3d
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, but he mostly draws superhero comics, and those mostly contain people. And he can't draw em worth a damn, according to my personal preferences.
Sorry. That work for ya?
ThusZarathustra
Member
Actually yes. I'd prefer you elaborate a bit more, and you know, discuss the whys and wherefores so we could understand where you're coming from too, if you're amenable.
Is it just the facial proportions thing? Or is something about how he draws things more generally?
BobbyRobby
Member
I read TDKR, Year One, and all his work on Daredevil in the past few months. It all ranged from good to great.
I hope this thread encourages people to check out his older work.
I hope this thread encourages people to check out his older work.
Delta Assault
Member
I dunno. Do you want me to post the picture of the Asian Emma Frost? The lumpy-headed Superman? The lumpy-headed Lex Luthor? The Leno chins? The terrifying visage of...
I mean, there's so many to pick from.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
ThusZarathustra
Member
You don't have to post anything man, we've all read the work. Sounds to me like it's the facial proportions thing for you, which is cool. It must be said that his stuff varies widely with inker, schedule, and project, and that anatomically speaking, people do not have perfectly smooth heads or foreheads.
But yeah, I can see that being an impossible hump to get over.
^^^^^And yeah, that's faaarr from the best of his stuff, no doubt.
buhhhh
Morrison and Quitely are lucky they did that awesome telepathic head trip issue because that comic needed it to make up for how terrible the faces were.
Delta Assault
Member
I mean, if he wants to draw a comic about ugly, hideous people... hey, I say go for it. I think he'd be A+++ on that. Right in his wheelhouse. Or one about potato people.
But in a genre that's traditionally been about idealized features and proportions... that's a tough roe to hoe.
I worded that poorly. I meant that it's the same concept of separating someone's life from their work. Agreed that Moore and Morrisson being odd is not on the same scale as Polanski.
I think the basic premise of my point holds, however. I also think that much of Miller's work can be separated from his politics.
ThusZarathustra
Member
I dunno man, he draws a wide range of people and has done his fair share of handsome men and beautiful women, I feel. He gets shit when he rushes, mostly. All beside the point, I suppose.
As to the politics of these dudes, they've all their issues, but most of it is just being isolated for long, long periods and just basic getting old and being crankier.
beat
Member
I think Geof Darrow brought bullet time to comics.
Or more accurately, he collaborated with the Wachowskis on the Matrix, so in a sense they brought his frozen moments to film.
I think Year One is great. It's a fast read, has great art, and it executes a simple premise really well. It's a very logical character study on Jim Gordon and Bruce Wayne, and really sets the character tone for a lot that followed in the future of Batman. Without Year One there would be no Long Halloween, and probably a lot less of the crime focused stories to come in the decades after, including all the Gotham-centric stuff.
Miller and Mazzucchelli are fantastic collaborators. Wish they did more during that period. Something completely original would have been great. At least we'll always have Born Again and Year One.
Yeah, it's a pretty great release. Dark Horse knows how to do big books.
It's really made me appreciate Sin City a whole lot more since I had never read it all the way through before. Like I said in my previous post, it's definitely not perfect, but as a whole it's still a great read.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
He did Hardboiled, right?
Why aren't people talking about Pax more? The damn thing nearly broke my mind.
It easily has one of the most breath-taking opening sequences to a comic I've seen in a long time. Plus, it's clearly a huge "Fuck You" to Alan Moore.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
Yes.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Right! He's great. Katsuhiro Otomo levels of detail.
...I still think nobody does bullet-time in comics better than Quitely.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I've only read a short black and white special mini book included in 2000AD.
Skinny Pete
Banned
Don't bother. It's absolutely terrible. One of the worst Batman stories I have ever read.
Coriolanus
Banned
He was able to use the characters Alan Moore originally wanted, maybe? I dunno.
Because almost no one is reading floppies these days. It was a brillant piece of sequential art though.
Heeeh, really not. It's a critique and a love letter of Watchmen at the same time. You can read Morrison talking about it here.
No and Morrison really needs to get over Moore or rather his fans needs to get over the two of them existing in the same medium. I feel like Morrison is constantly "attacking" Alan Moore according to comic fans.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I mean, that’s what I got from it. There is a lot more going on but there is a definite thread of “fuck you, Moore” in there. It comes across as Watchmen being Moore riding a unicycle and Morrison coming along and going “Yeah, but can you do this?” and riding a unicycle using one leg whilst spinning plates and blowing raspberries at him the whole time.
I wouldnÂ’t say it was a love letter, thatÂ’s putting it too strongly. Even in the link you provided, he said that he thought it was an achievement, but he didnÂ’t outright say he liked it. HeÂ’s never liked it from what I can tell.
As much as Morrison openly admires the craftsmanship and respects it place in comic history, it’s very clear from Supergods that he thinks the characters are utterly generic, that Adrian is “the stupidest cleverest man in the world” for the whole Squid deal, and that the book is, simply put, really mean-hearted. Even when he was being nice about Watchmen, most of the compliments were backhanded. I’d dig out some Supergods quotes but I’m at work.
I was going to make a thread about it, but I was worried no one would bother reading it. IÂ’ll (try to) keep this short though.
So, yeah; on the surface he gets to use the original Charlton characters but there is more. I think Morrison took great pains to make sure Pax was said in the same breath as Watchmen; he mentioned it at every opportunity as I recall. He also hinted in Supergods that he wanted to take on something that focuses heavily on structure. Well, actually, he said something like (I’m massively paraphrasing) “the thing that put me off Watchmen originally is the thing I find most interesting as I get older: Structure” and then I put two and two together.
Morrison uses structural techniques that Moore/Gibbons used in Watchmen (the juxtaposition of words and images that Alan Moore called ‘the under-language of comics’, the cover as the first frame, symmetry, repeated and inverted motifs, non-linear story telling etc.) and then expands on them (the garden chat between Harley and Atom), parodies/subverts them (The Blue Beetle vs. The Question seems to me to pair Moore’s oft-used ‘under-language’, the juxtaposition of image and word, with ‘60s Batman-style puns), and in some cases, even betters them (the scene where The Question investigates a murder); all while referring directly back to Watchmen (background posters and details).
The key thing is, that one of the points the comic makes is a direct criticism of a trend that Watchmen helped facilitate: deconstruction in comics. Captain Atom spends most of the comic talking more to the audience than other characters. This is the key for me:
The ending
where young Harley murders his dad, Yellowjacket is the chronological start of the story, which looks to me like a symbolic murder of a more innocent age of superheroes. This ushers in the militant superheroes that have become predominant in the 21st Century, represented by Pax Americana. That symbolic murder is committed by the ultimate deconstructionist, Harley himself, who later learns of ‘Algorithm 8’, the realisation (granted by Atom) that he is in a comic book structure. His awareness allows him to (believe that he can) predict and manipulate events, but it is heavily hinted that it doesn’t quite work out.
I could go on, but that's the gist. Like I said, IÂ’ve been cheekily writing this at work and I'm not sure I can get away with much more
Pretty difficult to do with this book given Morrison described it as "if Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons had pitched the Watchmen now, rooted in a contemporary political landscape" and that it's clearly critiquing deconstructionist comics of which Watchmen co-led the charge.
I don't think I've ever suggested that any other work Morrison has done has been an attack on Moore, have I...?
Coriolanus
Banned
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
It cracked me up when Moore called Morrison a "Scottish Tribute Band".
It's probably the best four panels that anyone has ever done. It tells all of the essentials of Superman in one page:
Perfection.
Alan Moore is a really good comic book writer, but he's also a gigantic asshole and a hypocrite. A few years ago, he was whining about the comic industry being unoriginal and incapable of coming up with new ideas because Geoff Johns took inspiration for the Blackest Night storyline from a Green Lantern story he did back in the 80s. James Robinson torched him on Twitter, pointing out that much of Moore's work was taken from earlier creators: Miracleman (Captain Marvel), Watchmen (Charlton characters), Supreme (Superman), Tom Strong (Doc Savage), Swamp Thing, and the entire cast of the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Moore is fantastic at making existing concepts and characters better, but he's full of shit when he accuses anyone else of riding coattails. Everyone builds on what came before them.
Also, Frank Miller was fantastic back in the 80s and early 90s. He started getting into some bad habits in the late 90s and he had a complete breakdown after the September 11th attacks, but his earlier work was absolutely groundbreaking.
If I didn't know what Superman was that page would be incomprehensible to me.
For people who do know what Superman is, you might as well have put <origin story goes here>.
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
His DC work is shit. Especially TDKR.
But mostly because he shits on Supes, and that is a terrible thing to do.
But mostly because he shits on Supes, and that is a terrible thing to do.
Amen. What a dick move.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Yup. That's comics.
I totally agree but I still find him calling Morrison a "Scottish Tribute Band" funny. I don't agree with what he's saying, I just find it funny.
Delta Assault
Member
I don't get the hyperbolic love for this page. It's a pretty good summary of Superman's origin, but so what? Are we gonna go and praise Cliff's Notes next?
Worshipping minimalism only takes you so far.
depths20XX
Member
The majority of comic writers are shit.
The fact that Miller has actually done some good stuff automatically makes him not "always secretly shit".
The fact that Miller has actually done some good stuff automatically makes him not "always secretly shit".
You mention Miracleman but that comic pretty much threw everything out about the character.
Boss Doggie
all my loli wolf companions are so moe
I won't let him touch Supes though. Dat political undertones as well.
Dat stealth edit saved your ass.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
You could level similar accusations at Swamp Thing, Watchmen and LOEG. The point is that they are all built upon existing foundations, something most superhero comics thrive on.
Nowhere near as terrible as using the term "supes."
It's a lot more than a freaking summary though. It's minimalistic, yes, but conveys nearly everything about where superman came from, how he grew up and what he's about in four panels and almost as many short sentences. It's the sort of thing that, if the reader knew nothing about Superman, they'd get his deal in a glance. If you know him really well, when you read it the first time you fist pump because it's Essence of Superman distilled down to its core. As a chronic over-thinker, its something I've just sat there and contemplated. Each panel and their chosen words.
But all that said, it's hardly the best moment in the comic. For me, that's got to be the page where he saves the girl who's about to jump.
What's beautiful about that scene is that it's not so much Superman--his strength, his flight, even his goodness, so on--that saves the girl. It's the idea of Superman that saves her. That things can get better, that people do care, that you're stronger than you think you are. Superman isn't just some thick-headed thug in tights and a cape like Luthor and other real-world detractors would like people to believe.
He's an idea that's trying to save you. The idea of Superman is as important to how he's saving Metropolis and the world and the fact of him is. Maybe more so. He's an outsider who is unabashedly human when he has every excuse not to be. He's a hero who is unapologetically altruistic because as Grant himself once said, who the fuck are we kidding with all this dark and edgy shit? Being the good guy is cool. It's hard, but it's super cool. Because being cynical is easy, being aloof and cold and detached? That requires 0% emotional investment. Being Superman? That's about facing everything you know is wrong. Head on and with all your heart, every second, every day. There's a reason they call it The Never-ending Battle.
Especially in the world we live in today, its easy--natural even--to just accept that we're doomed and see the only viable or sane road to heroism being one of vengeance against awful forces as all the lights go out. But the idea of Superman challenges me to see the world differently, to act differently, to find something better. It's funny that a stranger from another world would be what it would take to make me feel human, but then again, maybe not. Maybe it always had to be an outsider who could see us as we are and still love us that would make the difference.
/sermon
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
bengraven
Member
He has a niche that he was once the best at. The gritty urban anti-hero. Sin City is a fucking masterpiece because it's him at his unadulterated, doing something unique and new and in a world he created for himself.
When he's outside of that comfort zone, he has an ego being such a well regarded writer that he can do anything and he fails quite a lot.
When he's outside of that comfort zone, he has an ego being such a well regarded writer that he can do anything and he fails quite a lot.
beat
Member
Peak Miller really understood Batman. (And Daredevil) But I don't think he ever got Superman.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
He used the Superman archetype to make a political point. A crappy political point, but a political point nonetheless.
my favourite Alan Moore quote is about Garth Ennis, tho; he'd be a really good artist if he could avoid writing entirte issues about people talking in pubs, or something like that. I agree with it, lol
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Haha! When did it say that?
I'm trying hard to find the source, but I do remember reading about it somewhere, damn
Delta Assault
Member
That's like the best chunk of his Hitman run though! People talking in pubs!
I'm welling up here.
Yeah, it was a bit misplaced in this thread, but the words were coming out right so I had to get them down.
It makes me sad that there are quite a few people that will never touch a Superman comic because of that political point.
I don't even really like his take on Batman to be honest. I've always seen Batman as a story not about rage or revenge, but about taking incredible pain and sorrow and weaving something beautiful from it, something beneficial and good. That's the only way Robin makes any sense at all, if you ask me.
- Status