CBR: When Words Collide - Nov 30, 2009

[CBR News]

As the end of the decade fast approaches, Tim reflects on Frank Miller's apocalyptic "Dark Knight Strikes Again" and Grant Morrison's also-apocalyptic "Final Crisis," and explains why one is so much better than the other.


Full article here (http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=23876).

[Trey]

Great Analysis.

And yes I do have DKSA in my top 10 not to say top 20. Granted I don't read any of the "real life drama stories", but I don't think things like Blankets, Box Office Poison compare to the more "epic" visceral works of the decade.

I also have Final Crisis and Morrison's Batman run in my top 10. These 2 stories were amazing reading them monthly. I've never anticipated comics like I did for RIP and Final Crisis.

I read DKSA, collected, about 3-4 years ago and instantly loved it. Better than DKR.

Can't wait to see your list.

[NickFury90]

Interesting read, but good God almighty is Frank Miller's work ugly. I can respect that he is master of his field, but man oh man his drawings look awful. He makes Igor Kordley look like Frank Quitely, and Rob Liefeld look like JH Williams III.

Now All-Star Batman and Robin, the Boy Wonder? Crazy, insane, full-throttle Frank Miller with some great Jim Lee artwork. Every time it comes out, its an event, and I love it.

[Adam K]

Hahaha, I love that the guy that has a Quitely avatar is calling Miller's work ugly. They're both pretty awful to look at in terms of... well, whatever it is that Jim Lee fits into, which I actually hate a lot.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I've found both of Miller's recent Batman series, this and All Star, read much better than the criticisms when they were coming out would have you believe.

In fact, they may have helped - by reducing expectation to an all time low, I found both to be pleasant surprises.

I don't think I liked DKSA as much as Tim did, but I didn't think it was the abomination it was being called when it was released.

[NickFury90]

Hahaha, I love that the guy that has a Quitely avatar is calling Miller's work ugly .

Frank Quitely is the greatest comic artist working today. His ability to express movement and kinetic actions is unparalleled. His work is meticulously detailed, innovative, and inventive. His characters feel like real people, their clothes have weight and girth. His economy throughout his panels is amazing, and combined with the supercompression of Morrison, they're the greatest creative team in comic history.

Quite Frankly, comparing him to other artists not named JH Williams III is pretty unfair.

[Adam K]

I can't believe someone just typed that out.

[DevynRodriguez]

Frank Quitely is the greatest comic artist working today. His ability to express movement and kinetic actions is unparalleled. His work is meticulously detailed, innovative, and inventive. His characters feel like real people, their clothes have weight and girth. His economy throughout his panels is amazing, and combined with the supercompression of Morrison, they're the greatest creative team in comic history.

Quite Frankly, comparing him to other artists not named JH Williams III is pretty unfair.


It is hilarious.

Millers stuff can be really ugly sometimes, but so does Quitely's. Their art is ugly, but it is what is the message the art conveys that is important.

Look at Jim Lee. There is no depth to his artwork. He draws the same way he drew when he first started. He is not an artist, he is an illustrator.

Look at Jose Munoz. Probably one of the most influential modern comic book artists. His artwork isn't pretty by any aesthetic level, but you can't deny Jose Munoz is one of the greatest comic artists of all time.

Frank Miller and Frank Quitely work on those levels. Quitely draws ass ugly panels sometimes, but its the storytelling that makes him amazing. Quietly isn't innovative by any standard. He draws like the crippled mutant of Brian Bolland. This is not a bad thing however. Everything you praise Quitely for was something that Bolland really brought to the table. Quitely is a fine illustrator, but is a great cartoonist.

And the fact that the only artist you seem to name draw for DC comics tells me that your not necessarily familiar with the pantheon of great comic book artist past the world of superheroes. J.H. Williams III and Quietly are great, but calling Quietly detailed, innovative, and inventive while criticizing Frank Miller is kind of odd. Frank Miller was breaking doors down so people like Quitely could work at the big two without conforming past the point where their art is simply not theirs.

Your free not to like the guy or the art, but its hard to deny his influence. In an where popular creators are afraid to change their styles to evolve, Frank Miller quite simply doesn't give a fuck. I commend him for it.

Plus Frank Miller has written two of the greatest Batman stories of all time and the greatest Daredevil story of all time. I think he deserves some kind of props. :wink:

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Quitely's art is ugly???

Shwa???

Give me some context here... what do you consider to be 'not ugly'?

Like is this an aberration in your taste, or do you think Paul Pope is also ugly?

[NickFury90]

Quitely's art is ugly???

Shwa???

Give me some context here... what do you consider to be 'not ugly'?

Like is this an aberration in your taste, or do you think Paul Pope is also ugly?

He has a Philip Bond avatar, so he's not completely insane.


It is hilarious.

Millers stuff can be really ugly sometimes, but so does Quitely's. Their art is ugly, but it is what is the message the art conveys that is important.

Look at Jim Lee. There is no depth to his artwork. He draws the same way he drew when he first started. He is not an artist, he is an illustrator.

Look at Jose Munoz. Probably one of the most influential modern comic book artists. His artwork isn't pretty by any aesthetic level, but you can't deny Jose Munoz is one of the greatest comic artists of all time.

Frank Miller and Frank Quitely work on those levels. Quitely draws ass ugly panels sometimes, but its the storytelling that makes him amazing. Quietly isn't innovative by any standard. He draws like the crippled mutant of Brian Bolland. This is not a bad thing however. Everything you praise Quitely for was something that Bolland really brought to the table. Quitely is a fine illustrator, but is a great cartoonist.

I can see some similarities in Quitely from Bolland, but not outright cribbing or a poor man's version.


And the fact that the only artist you seem to name draw for DC comics tells me that your not necessarily familiar with the pantheon of great comic book artist past the world of superheroes.

I make no apologies for what I like. I'm an unashamed superhero fanatic. Now that doesn't mean I haven't read Sandman/Preacher/various Hellblazer/Love and Rockets/etc, but in my mind only two artists come up in my head when I think of the best artists in the business, and thats Quitely and Williams III.


J.H. Williams III and Quietly are great, but calling Quietly detailed, innovative, and inventive while criticizing Frank Miller is kind of odd. Frank Miller was breaking doors down so people like Quitely could work at the big two without conforming past the point where their art is simply not theirs.

Again, I respect that he's a master of the art form of comics, but I hate, hate, HATE looking at it, to the point where I don't want to read the story(which happens very rarely).


Plus Frank Miller has written two of the greatest Batman stories of all time and the greatest Daredevil story of all time. I think he deserves some kind of props. :wink:

Writing =/= artwrok, and Batman: Year One/Daredevil Born Again are great because the masterful work of David Mazzucchelli.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

He has a Philip Bond avatar, so he's not completely insane.

That's just making it mess with my head even more!

[Mike O]

Dark Knight Strikes Again works for me because it's very similar to The Dark Knight Returns, but replaces the cold war with the medias assault on our everyday lives (something the Dark Knight Returns did as well to a lesser extent). Instead of a story about two super powers inching closer and closer to mutual annihilation to people becoming more and more complacent and willing to believe whatever their televisions tell them, which of course is much more timely now than it was in the late 80's.

[Adam K]

First, let's stop saying "ugly." That word weirds me out with repetition.

For the sake of it though, one more time: Yes, I do think of Paul Pope's art as ugly shit. I feel the same about Chaykin, Miller, Quitely, and most Kirby. Those are also all dudes that would make it into my top 10 artists. "Ugly," though obviously loaded with negative connotation, hardly means the same thing as "bad," and in the cases of who I mentioned, it doesn't matter because it's still cool, energetic, and exciting to look at while at the same time, functioning perfectly well as a manner of storytelling.

[Reptisaurus!]

*ClapClapClapClapClapClapClapClapClap*

Very, very nice.

Man, this takes me back: The DKSA wars are the first thing I remember about CBR. (Us Pro-Sider-ers totally won.)

[krushjudgement]

Frank Quitely is the greatest comic artist working today. His ability to express movement and kinetic actions is unparalleled. His work is meticulously detailed, innovative, and inventive. His characters feel like real people, their clothes have weight and girth. His economy throughout his panels is amazing, and combined with the supercompression of Morrison, they're the greatest creative team in comic history.

Quite Frankly, comparing him to other artists not named JH Williams III is pretty unfair.

I agree with this guy.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

For the sake of it though, one more time: Yes, I do think of Paul Pope's art as ugly shit.

So you can see why that's a bad term if you do actually like his art then?

[Adam K]

Yeah, but I'd say there's a difference between "ugly" (at least in the sense that I'm using it) and the guy that was saying that Miller's art was ugly in the sense that its "awful to look at."

I mean, this all sprung from me thinking it was kinda funny that a guy that'll praise Quitely so highly, who's known for art that's less than conventional (at least for mainstream cape books) bringing up other unconvential art in a negative sense.

At this point though, we're just kinda arguing semantics as opposed to conventional and unconventional art styles, which is what I was getting at.

[krushjudgement]

You know, I can't get into either of these books.

I collected all the Final Crisis stuff and waited until it was done. Then I read Seven Soldiers of Victory first- and I loved it! Then I started digging into FC and found myself confused and annoyed. I finished it and gave all the issues away.

And really I love Grant Morrison!

Maybe I'll get the trade and give it another go.

As far as DKSA goes, are we sure that Frank Miller wasn't just phoning this one in for a paycheck? Was it really that intentionally deep? Maybe I'm not as smart as you guys but it just didn't seem like a quality piece of work. I'm all for experimental and interesting (hell, I love the films of John Casevettes) but DKSA just left me feeling empty and used.

Seriously, your article seemed more well written than Miller's existential vomit.

[the goddamn batman]

Interesting read, but good God almighty is Frank Miller's work ugly.

there's nothing ugly about Miller's art. Even when it's ugly. (DKSA)

but, anyone who proclaims the other Frank as the greatest working artist in comics is obviously a bit prone to hyperbole.

[the goddamn batman]

I'm gonna do this on it's own as it actually pertains to the article in question:

why is DKSA suddenly good? I imagine people finally got enough distance from their hopes and ideas of what the book was going to be to finally look at it for what it is.

There's bound to be some disappointment involved. Miller completely detatched from the art style of DKR and it seems that instantly put most people off right away. There's still this idea that a cartoonist can't make a deacision to make specific art that doesn't fit the norm. Obviously he just wanted a paycheck.

I don't think it's the best story out there, but as a contextual sequel I think it's a wonderful work. I love the art. Though, I'd stab your kitten for a copy in black and white.

[EarthX]

DKSA was awful.

An entire series is stained with Miller's inability to build up Batman without emasculating Superman.

At least in DKR it was short and sweet and only a piece of the story.

This thing was issue after issue of "Superman's a wuss".

Heck, it was the central plot.

Yuck.

[ultraaman]

I didn't read The Dark Knight Returns until 1998, long after its cutting edge had been dulled, and I am a confessed Morrison megafan so my perspective on both DKSA and FC are skewed.

That being said, both stories are the biggest piles of drek I've read in almost 30 years of comic collecting. The DKSA was a bloated, derivative sequel with nothing to say. FC was a 12-issue maxi-series crammed into 7 issues that had so much to say that it became jibberish.

And don't even get me started on the art. Frank so phoned in that work; and I have never been a fan of J.G's mud. I have no idea what Didio(t) sees in him but Doug should have drawn the entire thing.

[lead sharp]

I feel like I'm being asked to choose between watching Miller masturbate himself or Morrison masturbate the DCU.

The results are the same though, wipe up and feel strangely guilty about enjoying it but deeply unfulfilled afterwards.

[rev sully]

I read both in their initial release, serialized.

OK...so now I have yet to go back and read both especially DK2. It was great...but...
I think I was underwhelmed at the time. I loved key things about it. Nonetheless, I still kinda get rankled over Dick Grayson's treatment. I grew up with a teenage Robin who was once a Boy Wonder in the older stuff. I get it...
May I ask a question as well...the Dick Grayson is ALL-STAR BATMAN & ROBIN is that the same Grayson in DK2? Is the Goddamn Batman the DARK KNIGHT but younger? I'm usually good at knowing this stuff but I ask for help here...
I loved the Flash (especially the outfit). I loved the Atom (I too dig that petri dish scene). I loved the Hawk Children. Wonder Woman works great here. Also this Final Luthor/Brainiac team-up.
I dunno what it was about DK2 but if I have to choose for topic's sake I'd choose FINAL CRISIS. I love CRISIS* stories so I'm prejudiced. :cool:
There were hassles upon the initial release but I've gone back and read SUPERMAN BEYOND 3-D a few times. I love the 3-D work...it's so good, then there's the story & the headstone but iDigress...
LEGION OF 3 WORLDS was wonderful...splendid. But it'll give you a headache thinking about how it fits in Final Crisis. let's just say it does and call it a day, huh? Why ruin a great story with fanboy whining...get all Superboy-Prime on it I will not.
As a story, there is this scene in Final Crisis #5, the Trial of Hal Jordan on Oa.
http://i.newsarama.com/images/FC_5-8.jpg
hopefully that panel sums it up. As Geoff Johns does in a Hollywood-style when nailing dialog on favorite characters (such as Hal, Barry Allen, et al.), Grant does with more panache in the scope of what needs to be done. It must be the European thing. Batman sounds great all throughout Final Crisis. His death scene was memorable. Green Lanterns such as Guy Gardener & John Stewart sound great and lock-on. It was a big story...lots of characters to cover. The dissemination of the Anti-Life Equation...a meme, a mass e-mail. Evil Gods with Word-Weapons! It's not that highbrow. Final Crisis #7...eh. Could have been better, sure but I like the ending better than DK2 when it comes down to it.
I never sat well with the final panel of Batman in DK2. There is a ridiculousness in that round, almost Normal Rockwell-like best with the broken teeth & torn, crooked ears. I get the joke.

But I think perhaps they might be too different to compare? The criterion was acceptance into the Great Top 20 of Tim Callahan, right? I'd rather read yours than make up my own. I think in mine, I'd choose something "grand" like COSMIC ODYSSEY over DK2 in the Top 20...again, I like Final Crisis' scope and Starlin/Mignola's Cosmic Odyssey is right next to FC...heck they should be read together! Huzzah!

crea shaakti,

*Dear Santa, I want for X-Mas a LEGO: DC CRISIS videogame...

[bongoes]

I hated DKSA. It may be because I don't really like Miller's work, besides Year One, but I really didn't like. Final Crisis on the other hand is one of my favorite recent comics.


*Dear Santa, I want for X-Mas a LEGO: DC CRISIS videogame..
That would be amazing.

[Thad]

No accounting for taste, but I'm still very much in the "DKSA was awful" camp.

Things that nobody had ever done before? It was fan-wank. About the point Wonder Woman and Superman started having midair sex, I realized I was reading a comic written by Brodie Bruce from Mallrats. It's bad fanfic (as opposed to Dark Knight Returns, which is the greatest fanfic ever written).

I'm going to have to disagree with your 75/25 assessment, too; I thought this was more like 99/1 (although with Batman it's a rather incestuous measurement as Batman's character WAS the Frank Miller version for the 15 years preceding the story).

And the ending is quite possibly the stupidest moment in Batman history. And yes, I remember that Batman was once tied to a deadly player piano by Liberace.

Not to say it was all bad -- I liked a lot of the political satire, from the press corps scenes to the banter between Green Arrow and the Question. And for all that the "Hal Jordan magically fixes everything (oh yeah Hal Jordan is God now)" resolution was a deus ex machina of epic proportions, I quite liked his little soliloquy about how, deep down, Batman is an incurable optimist who will never give up and never stop fighting for the better world he knows is possible.

I wouldn't rank it as great. I wouldn't even rank it as good. But I'll grant it had its moments.

Oh, and a quick bone to pick:


The 1980s had some huge milestones, but once you get past the work of Alan Moore and Frank Miller and a little book called "Maus," the pickings get a little slim.

Love and Rockets?

[krushjudgement]

Oh, and a quick bone to pick:



Love and Rockets?

Cerebus, and the decade that Marvel comics was on fire.

[Trey]

The art on DKSA was beautiful, you ugly bastards!!

For all the reasons given in the article.

Its not always about drawing approximations of reality. Panel layout, spacing, angles, shadow, colors, thick lines, thin lines, etc...etc..

It may look garish, it may appear ugly, but damn is it powerful and extremely effective. When an artist can present the work in a way where its hitting on two separate wavelengths, thats the stuff that wows people.

Loose drawing /ordered panel choices
Chaos and Order. (Final Crisis)

You really see it in music: heavy/light melodic/distorted fast/slow ugly/beautiful
you see this esp in heavy metal/rock/rap where it is both at the same time.

[tomgastall]

Cerebus, and the decade that Marvel comics was on fire.

American Flagg.

[TimothyCallahan]

I would put Quitely, Miller, and J. H. Williams III in my Top 5 all-time artists, probably.

Sienkiewicz and Mazzuchelli might be the other two.

Steve Rude and Howard Chaykin in contention.

Shit, I need to do a WWC on this topic!

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

As far as DKSA goes, are we sure that Frank Miller wasn't just phoning this one in for a paycheck? Was it really that intentionally deep? Maybe I'm not as smart as you guys but it just didn't seem like a quality piece of work. I'm all for experimental and interesting (hell, I love the films of John Casevettes) but DKSA just left me feeling empty and used.


If he was phoning it in for the pay check, I don't think he would have changed styles and tone so drastically.

I took it as his way of saying 'DKR was just one side of the prism, there's no need to throw the baby out with the bath water', and so we got a tale about why all the dorky elements of the silver age are also cool.

I don't like it as much as the original, and I don't think anyone was waiting around for Frank Miller to tell us that the silver age was cool (he must've missed Marvels and Kingdom Come), but I doubt he would have done it the way he did if he just wanted more cash.


I would put Quitely, Miller, and J. H. Williams III in my Top 5 all-time artists, probably.

Sienkiewicz and Mazzuchelli might be the other two.

Steve Rude and Howard Chaykin in contention.

Shit, I need to do a WWC on this topic!

No Paul Pope?

[NickFury90]

After reading the first issue of "That Yellow Bastard" and the first chapter of DKR today, I realizes that its not all of Frank Miller's art I don't like. Its just the ugly mess in this book. I think he's fricken' brilliant in DKR/Sin City. I don't know if it was Klaus Jenson's inking or the black and white style, but it worked incredibly well in both stories.

[Adam K]

I would put Quitely, Miller, and J. H. Williams III in my Top 5 all-time artists, probably.

Sienkiewicz and Mazzuchelli might be the other two.

Steve Rude and Howard Chaykin in contention.

Shit, I need to do a WWC on this topic!

And this is why we're internet buddies on twitter but not really.

[krushjudgement]

If he was phoning it in for the pay check, I don't think he would have changed styles and tone so drastically.

I took it as his way of saying 'DKR was just one side of the prism, there's no need to throw the baby out with the bath water', and so we got a tale about why all the dorky elements of the silver age are also cool.

I don't like it as much as the original, and I don't think anyone was waiting around for Frank Miller to tell us that the silver age was cool (he must've missed Marvels and Kingdom Come), but I doubt he would have done it the way he did if he just wanted more cash.



But I would contend that his style changed because he was doing a rush job; not because he was trying to make an artistic point. Unless the point is "You want a DKR sequel huh? Well, be careful what you wish for!"

I wonder how much he got paid up front...

[Scott Bierworth]

You lost me at:

"All of this overshadowed the fact that "Final Crisis," when all is said and done, is one of the most powerful DC series in years. Maybe the best "event" comic ever produced for the company."

I couldn't read any farther after seeing that comment since you stated it as if were a fact rather than a very subjective opinion.

I normally love Morrison but Final Crisis was, in my opinion, the worst thing he's ever done.

[npizz]

There is nothing in Miller's DK2, or in any of his work in the last 18 years, that exemplifies any of the depth or effectiveness that Callahan asserts. Miller's story is nonsensical, the art amateurish (and not because it's "ugly"-- it's amateurish because it's ineffective and looks like it was scrawled on a cocktail napkin by a drunk, then colored by a epileptic using WordArt). "So much for silver-age reverence"-- I guess, but what does Miller offer instead, crypto-fascist disdain? What I can't understand is why-- after all the Sin Cities, 300, ASBAR, and ESPECIALLY 'The Spirit' --why would one bend over backwards to try reading a deeper subtext into any of Frank Miller's Hooker Fantasies? The man writes the worst, most derivative and juvenile dialogue in comics (and in Hollywood-- though no one's hiring him ever again), creates (and then continually repackages) characters with less depth than the paper they're printed on, and basically repeatedly churns out domination/submission/S&M fantasies. Also, he keeps naming anonymous thugs 'Jocko Boy.' It is, simply, retarded. Surely viewing the ridiculous jackassery that is 'Frank Miller's Will Eisner's The Spirit' should give one reason to reevaluate Miller's work at least down through the nineties.
The man is a coke-addled boob whose literacy does not extend past Mickey Spillaine, and for whom strippers represent the highest evolution of the female of the species. "She's my warrior. My valkyrie. I can taste seven different dicks on her breath. My warrior. My valkyrie."

[TimothyCallahan]

And, yeah, Paul Pope!

Scott, I'm not sure you understand how writing works. If I make an assertion in a column, of course it's my opinion. Do you really want me to write, "In my opinion" before every sentence? That would be silly.

npizz, no.

[TimothyCallahan]

The Spirit is unbelievably bad, but the best part of the movie is the end credits when we see the Miller artwork. So while the movie does accentuate Miller's many flaws, it's his artistry that makes his kind of narrative work -- when its in comics.

[krushjudgement]

You know, I saw one of Miller's Robocop films on cable the other day. I watched about half an hour of it. It was terrible. But what I realized was that it seemed exactly like a Frank Miller script come to life. He's a bad writer. Really he is. I have yet to read his early Daredevil work (I know blasphemous) but apparently it's really good, and I dug DKR; so maybe he's been a bad writer since about 1990; whenever Sin City started melodrama-noir-vomiting on all of us fan boys.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

But I would contend that his style changed because he was doing a rush job; not because he was trying to make an artistic point. Unless the point is "You want a DKR sequel huh? Well, be careful what you wish for!"

I wonder how much he got paid up front...

I don't think he did rush that art work - it is quite simplistic in places, and I can see why people would accuse the line work as being rushed, but the pages are clearly designed to work as pages - he's put a lot of thought into it.
I'd say the line work looks the way it does because he was trying to give it that feeling of bursting with energy - it's all happening so fast he didn't have a chance to draw it still life like Bryan Hitch would have.


There is nothing in Miller's DK2, or in any of his work in the last 18 years, that exemplifies any of the depth or effectiveness that Callahan asserts. Miller's story is nonsensical, the art amateurish (and not because it's "ugly"-- it's amateurish because it's ineffective and looks like it was scrawled on a cocktail napkin by a drunk, then colored by a epileptic using WordArt). "So much for silver-age reverence"-- I guess, but what does Miller offer instead, crypto-fascist disdain? What I can't understand is why-- after all the Sin Cities, 300, ASBAR, and ESPECIALLY 'The Spirit' --why would one bend over backwards to try reading a deeper subtext into any of Frank Miller's Hooker Fantasies? The man writes the worst, most derivative and juvenile dialogue in comics (and in Hollywood-- though no one's hiring him ever again), creates (and then continually repackages) characters with less depth than the paper they're printed on, and basically repeatedly churns out domination/submission/S&M fantasies. Also, he keeps naming anonymous thugs 'Jocko Boy.' It is, simply, retarded. Surely viewing the ridiculous jackassery that is 'Frank Miller's Will Eisner's The Spirit' should give one reason to reevaluate Miller's work at least down through the nineties.
The man is a coke-addled boob whose literacy does not extend past Mickey Spillaine, and for whom strippers represent the highest evolution of the female of the species. "She's my warrior. My valkyrie. I can taste seven different dicks on her breath. My warrior. My valkyrie."

Well, we know one person he's a better writer than...


OH, and why's everyone shitting on Sin City?
It went downhill, and it was never high art, but those first few volumes are quite a lot of fun.

[krushjudgement]

OH, and why's everyone shitting on Sin City?
It went downhill, and it was never high art, but those first few volumes are quite a lot of fun.

Yeah, that's true. They were pretty fun. I mean, I loved 'em the first time around.

[TimothyCallahan]

Actually, I think Miller's Daredevil doesn't hold up well at all.

I just reread it a couple of weeks ago, and though it gets better by the end, the first half of his stint as writer/artist? Well, it's a slog.

[NickFury90]

I read the Alan Moore spoof of Miller's DD before the actual thing, its crazy how accurate it is LOL

http://xrayspex.blogspot.com/2008/03/alan-moore-spoofs-frank-miller.html

[Reptisaurus!]

There is nothing in Miller's DK2, or in any of his work in the last 18 years, that exemplifies any of the depth or effectiveness that Callahan asserts. Miller's story is nonsensical, the art amateurish (and not because it's "ugly"-- it's amateurish because it's ineffective and looks like it was scrawled on a cocktail napkin by a drunk, then colored by a epileptic using WordArt). "So much for silver-age reverence"-- I guess, but what does Miller offer instead, crypto-fascist disdain? What I can't understand is why-- after all the Sin Cities, 300, ASBAR, and ESPECIALLY 'The Spirit' --why would one bend over backwards to try reading a deeper subtext into any of Frank Miller's Hooker Fantasies? The man writes the worst, most derivative and juvenile dialogue in comics (and in Hollywood-- though no one's hiring him ever again), creates (and then continually repackages) characters with less depth than the paper they're printed on, and basically repeatedly churns out domination/submission/S&M fantasies. Also, he keeps naming anonymous thugs 'Jocko Boy.' It is, simply, retarded. Surely viewing the ridiculous jackassery that is 'Frank Miller's Will Eisner's The Spirit' should give one reason to reevaluate Miller's work at least down through the nineties.
The man is a coke-addled boob whose literacy does not extend past Mickey Spillaine, and for whom strippers represent the highest evolution of the female of the species. "She's my warrior. My valkyrie. I can taste seven different dicks on her breath. My warrior. My valkyrie."

Man, this is going in the PERMANENT quote file. The one marked "special."

[rev sully]

Actually, I think Miller's Daredevil doesn't hold up well at all.

I just reread it a couple of weeks ago, and though it gets better by the end, the first half of his stint as writer/artist? Well, it's a slog.

I was 10 years old when I bought DAREDEVIL #175 off the spindle rack at the "Corh-nah Stoah" before Day Bus Camp.
http://www.manwithoutfear.com/issuesinfo.cgi?issue=175
That's where I learned to bring something to read on the road.
That holds up. I think it's 'cuz of Klaus Jansen's inking. I'm still wowed by him. His inking. He plays so well with Romita Jr (Millar's Marvel Knights Wolverine). I said that Electra moved like she used to. Like she did in those two mentioned issues of Daredevil. His self-drawn stuff...eh. I'm with you there and we'll disagree on DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN. I'm a little "eh" on that one as well. it never made my longbox or bookshelf.

[DevynRodriguez]

For the record, Paul Pope is probably my favorite artist of all time.

And Sin City? Cartooning 101.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I gave DKR and DKSA a flick through the other night - and it just re-affirmed for me that Miller wasn't just 'doing it for the cash', but that he was trying to say something different and do something different than he before.
One element that stood out for me showing his different approaches was his portrayal of the media.
In DKR the television is in quite a bit, but always in panels done to resemble a television screen, and never breaking for this. It's important, and encroaching, but contained.
In DKSA, reflecting the shift in media caused by technological increases in our day and age, the panels of tv or internet coverage are all overlapping, shouting for attention, and taking over any page they are on - it is no longer contained to the television, it's everywhere, drowning out everything else it can.

[Reptisaurus!]

I gave DKR and DKSA a flick through the other night - and it just re-affirmed for me that Miller wasn't just 'doing it for the cash', but that he was trying to say something different and do something different than he before.
One element that stood out for me showing his different approaches was his portrayal of the media.
In DKR the television is in quite a bit, but always in panels done to resemble a television screen, and never breaking for this. It's important, and encroaching, but contained.
In DKSA, reflecting the shift in media caused by technological increases in our day and age, the panels of tv or internet coverage are all overlapping, shouting for attention, and taking over any page they are on - it is no longer contained to the television, it's everywhere, drowning out everything else it can.

BUT they're also somewhat... I dunno if anachronistic is the right word, but they're not serving a NEW purpose or elevating the discourse. They're still the chorus in the Greek tragedy.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

BUT they're also somewhat... I dunno if anachronistic is the right word, but they're not serving a NEW purpose or elevating the discourse. They're still the chorus in the Greek tragedy.

Well, isn't that what the media is? It was a satire after all, so giving them extra flash and even less content seems about right to me.

I just don't think that someone doing a rush job to cash in - as many say he was - would have thought out a new way of doing something new with something he could have left exactly the same and no one would have complained.

[krushjudgement]

Well, isn't that what the media is? It was a satire after all, so giving them extra flash and even less content seems about right to me.

I just don't think that someone doing a rush job to cash in - as many say he was - would have thought out a new way of doing something new with something he could have left exactly the same and no one would have complained.

I agree with the first part about media for sure.

I'm still not sold on the "not cashing in" argument.

[TimothyCallahan]

Did Frank Miller do it to cash in?

Who cares? I don't care about why an author did anything.

I only care about how it turns out.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I agree with the first part about media for sure.

I'm still not sold on the "not cashing in" argument.

Well if you're convinced, you're convinced, but Miller has enough cash from previous big projects (DKR, Sin City), film projects (Robocop's & Sin City would have been on the cards at that point) and such that I don't think he has to do anything he doesn't want to do - the man's not short a dime.

[krushjudgement]

Did Frank Miller do it to cash in?

Who cares? I don't care about why an author did anything.

I only care about how it turns out.

Valid point. But it sucks when a work of art is so sloppy that you can't help but question it.

[TimothyCallahan]

What you call "sloppy," I call "boldly stylish."

DKSA looks better than almost anything on the superhero shelves this year.

[Reptisaurus!]

Valid point. But it sucks when a work of art is so sloppy that you can't help but question it.

I think it accomplishes what Miller's tryin' to do, though. Everything looks BIG and EXCITING and kind of off-kilter. I always picture Frank goin' "YAH! YAH! YAH! ATTACK!" and laughing like a goddamn maniac with every brush stroke.

[Adam K]

What you call "sloppy," I call "boldly stylish."

DKSA looks better than almost anything on the superhero shelves this year.

Maybe not "better," but definitely more interesting.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I think it accomplishes what Miller's tryin' to do, though. Everything looks BIG and EXCITING and kind of off-kilter. I always picture Frank goin' "YAH! YAH! YAH! ATTACK!" and laughing like a goddamn maniac with every brush stroke.

Well as he's trying to get the audience to go "YAH! YAH! YAH! ATTACK!" and laugh like a maniac whilst reading his Batman books, it does seem appropriate.

[Rebis]

What you call "sloppy," I call "boldly stylish."

DKSA looks better than almost anything on the superhero shelves this year.


Yikes Tim. I read this column back when it was first published and couldn't quite believe an intelligent guy like you really bought into what you were asserting about Miller. I try not to think about DKSA, but when I do, I still recall the burn in my eyes from that wretched artwork. About the only part that gave me a memorably enjoyable thrill was the early sequence with the Atom.

Anyway, here's a dissenting view (http://www.comicsalliance.com/2009/12/17/the-15-worst-comics-of-the-decade/) that made me smile.

[TimothyCallahan]

I saw that guy's comments on DKSA, Rebis, and I'm pretty comfortable saying that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

DKSA looks pretty damn good!

[Reptisaurus!]

I saw that guy's comments on DKSA, Rebis, and I'm pretty comfortable saying that he doesn't know what he's talking about.

DKSA looks pretty damn good!

Yeah, I've never read anything by anyone who didn't like DKSA who seemed to get what it was about on a basic thematic level. (The media being used as the tool of future wars, the generation gap.)

[TimothyCallahan]

No, I think some people just think it's ugly or poorly drawn.

But those people tend to think Jim Lee is the pinnacle of comic book art. Which is a pretty big indicator that they don't really understand comic book art.

[NickFury90]

I think its completely hideous, and my favorite artists are Quitely, Williams III, Wieringo, Hitch, and Mazzucchelli :/

[TimothyCallahan]

Hitch now, or Hitch from the Authority days? Because he seems like the odd man out on that list.

Still, you like those guys and you can't see the energy in Miller's DKSA art? You can't appreciate the bold style?

I mean, you might still think it's hideous and yet see the personality in it.

[NickFury90]

Hitch now, or Hitch from the Authority days? Because he seems like the odd man out on that list.

Still, you like those guys and you can't see the energy in Miller's DKSA art? You can't appreciate the bold style?

I mean, you might still think it's hideous and yet see the personality in it.

Hitch from the Authorty/Ultimates days. The Absolute Editions/Ultimates Omnibus are some GORGEOUS books. Now, his work seems really rushed, but when he's on point, he's one of the best.

For DKSA, I can see the energy, the dynamic posing, the work of a man's who's been mastering the field of comics for several decades, but its just so damn UGLY that I just can't stand to look at it.

And its just in this book, for some odd reason. It works incredibly well with the black and white Sin City volumes(at least the ones I read), Dark Knight Returns(where he seems more restrained, perhaps because of Klaus Jenson's inks), or even Ronin(despite the absurd future environment and outfits).

[rev sully]

Hitch now, or Hitch from the Authority days? Because he seems like the odd man out on that list.

Still, you like those guys and you can't see the energy in Miller's DKSA art? You can't appreciate the bold style?

I mean, you might still think it's hideous and yet see the personality in it.

I get what Tim means though about the artwork though. I loved the Superchix...What can I say. I loved the lots of things about it. I read it over and over again although not as many times as the original DK. Although, Authority, Vol. 1 made my Top 10 of the 00s not DK2. Nonetheless, I really dug on the way DK2 moved and looked. I loved the costumes, especially Barry Allen's. I still loved the Hawk kids. This was mos def my SuperFriends all grown up. Although I really don't like the treatment of Dick Grayson but someone hadda be the Big Bad, huh? I haven't read All-Star Batman & Robin ('sides #1 where I got Off The Boat)...am I to take that contextually? Should I go read All-Star B&R to feel better about DK2?

Remember when Jim Lee was new? Ahhh...for me it was the Genosian Press Gang in Uncanny X-Men. I was into anime then too like Robotech and the Press Gang had this really neat mech captained by a Nagel girl. I was in love.