Frank Miller attacks OWS: comic book movies are EVIL!

[mal-adjusted]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/nov/24/frank-miller-hollywood-fascism

This piece from the Guardian (a rag) uses Franks recent outburst as an attack on both hollywood and comic-books (and especially comic-book films).

the rant here is so ridiculous and the lack of logic used so garing that i i originally suspected that it was a piss-take. if anyone wants a little entertainment, give it a read, though the first half is a bit boring.

P.S my favorite bit is where he claims Gladiator was an alagory for G.W. Bush's election campaign :biggrin:

[sethysquare]

Wow. Both he and Alan Moore has gone insane.

[Dave Hackett]

But super-hero comics, especially Golden Age comics, did have facist overtones. It's always been a debated point when discussing super-hero narratives, because you can definitely take away the "he who punches hardest wins" message. Now that's obviously a gross over-simplification, but there is a point to be made there.

I thought he made good points in his takedown of Miller and dissection of jingoistic '80s actioners. Some of his other points are carried to a bit of an extreme, however.

[cliffhanger]

Action films traumatized this guy. Poor baby.

[gwydion]

That guy must be living in a different reality than the rest of us. First, and most importantly, there's nothing wrong with comic books per say. I may have issues with particular books or editorial lines, but that's natural.

Secondly, Hollywood is predominantly liberal, with a liberal world view. This guy must not have seen any of the plethora of (money losing) recent anti-war and anti military movies. Even action movies, which he holds up for special contempt, have throughout the decade, and even back into the 90s, had often as not a peculiar blend of liberal message and viewpoint with the more traditional right-wing view of violence.

And on what planet was Gladiator an allegory for anything at all, much less the Bush election? That's frothing at the mouth nuts! It was JUST an action movie. Sometimes a cigar is just a smoke, guy...:wink:

[carabas]

He lost me at Gladiator, when he claimed a film released in May 2000 was comment on elections held in November 2000.

Rambling idiot, pay it no mind.

[RohanRiderX]

I like frank... but its getting hard to defend his insanity

[FHIZ]

At this point, I really think even Alan Moore would tell Frank Miller to take the stick out of his ass.

[CarolStrick]

Thanks for the link! Enjoyed the article.

[Eumenides]

Wow. Both he and Alan Moore has gone insane.

What does Alan Moore have to do with this?

[Statham]

He lost me at the point where he lumped Clint friggin' Eastwood in with Chuck Norris, as though Clint has never contributed anything of worth to world cinema, or didn't come out with a surprising defense of gay marriage, recently.

Mouth-foaming, utterly ridiculous, totally offensive nonsense.

[Statham]

At this point, I really think even Alan Moore would tell Frank Miller to take the stick out of his ass.

Alan Moore's a crotchety old man who likes to be left alone unless he's doing interviews on his terms about things he actively wants to discuss. Frank Miller is the equivalent if the old guy who spouts crazy racist, offensive stuff like we haven't progressed beyond the 1950's. You know the sort, the ones who complain if their doctor isn't a white guy. Alan actively has some talent left, as much as LOEG is clearly him screwing with us mentally. Frank has now totally abandoned any subtlety and now makes us question exactly who he was rooting for in the stuff with Daredevil versus Nuke during Born Again.

[Bad Wolf]

He's right about action movies being predominantly right-wing; where he goes wrong is in generalizing all of American cinema.

[Zero Hunter]

I think it just comes off as another asshole seeing what he wants to see and then over generalizing everything else to fits his world view.

[Will.S]

Well he directed The Spirit so I probably shouldn't pay any attention to his views on cinema.

[Dr.wonderful]

Wait, superheroes movies are Evil? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_Year_One_(film))? Thank god, we're not making any of his movies books into movies. That would be baaaaaaaaaaaad. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Knight_Returns)

[Reginleif]

He's also a bigot too dont forget about that! If his take on Muslims is repersentative of anything found in Holy Terror.

[Blue Blazes]

Wow. Both he and Alan Moore has gone insane.

all the best are insane

[Blue Blazes]

What does Alan Moore have to do with this?

alan moore is known recently as a cranky old man, bashing the business that helped make him famous. millers take on comic movies and politics recently has made him sound a bit cranky too.

[keilthetarheel]

alan moore is known recently as a cranky old man, bashing the business that helped make him famous. millers take on comic movies and politics recently has made him sound a bit cranky too.

In other words - there was no need to bring Moore's name into this discussion

Also, where did you get Miller's take on comic movies?? All I saw in the article was an idiot Internet writer trying to make some weird statements about movies

[Shellhead]

I thought he was dead.

[NickGuy]

Well he directed The Spirit so I probably shouldn't pay any attention to his views on cinema.
if the spirit had been a comic book done by miller everyone wouldve seen the genius fun and love miller poured into it.

i loved the movie myself

In other words - there was no need to bring Moore's name into this discussion

Also, where did you get Miller's take on comic movies?? All I saw in the article was an idiot Internet writer trying to make some weird statements about movies

yeah, that article was straight garbage. I stopped reading at the line


At least comic books themselves are so politically dim-witted, so pie-in-the-sky idealistic as to be hard to take seriously

[David Walton]

That's...a really weird article that uses Frank Miller's comments as a springboard for a self-indulgent rant about action films and superhero movies.

So...in summary, the author doesn't like action films or comics? Got it.

[keilthetarheel]

if the spirit had been a comic book done by miller everyone wouldve seen the genius fun and love miller poured into it.

i loved the movie myself




Same here. The Spirit was great. It had a lot of humor, plenty of beautiful actresses. The Spirit was an interesting, flawed hero - Sam Jackson as the villain was downright great. Not sure what's not to like about it

Zany - maybe. Better than 95% of all recent Hollywood action movies - absolutely



That's...a really weird article that uses Frank Miller's comments as a springboard for a self-indulgent rant about action films and superhero movies.



I'm not sure - but I think the Guardian is a really, really conservative "news" paper. I think they out-Fox-News Fox News.

[The_Dork_Nut]

Wow. Both he and Alan Moore has gone insane.

Moore I respect, he just removed himself from the main stream but still produces work that gets praised from various fans. Miller has been doing stuff that we see more criticism.

Anyway, just thought of this:
http://cdn.the-gutters.com/comics/1cf4c176dc46d771b9bdd01df2ee8fae553da8ff.jpg

[keilthetarheel]

Moore I respect, he just removed himself from the main stream but still produces work that gets praised from various fans. Miller has been doing stuff that we see more criticism.

Anyway, just thought of this:
http://cdn.the-gutters.com/comics/1cf4c176dc46d771b9bdd01df2ee8fae553da8ff.jpg

Too bad somebody would take the time to write and draw that, but not even understand the issues they are trying to address

[Schnitzy Pretzelpants]

Holy mackerel!

The fellow that wrote the post probably - at least in essence - shares many of the same political and social views that I do, but his essay is frankly more than a bit of an embarrassment to this (me, I mean) left-leaning-cheese-eating-socialist.

The twit should realize, for starters, that Clint Eastwood was against the Vietnam & Iraq wars, supported the ERA, is pro-choice on abortion and supports gay marriage.

And I practically spit my coffee all over my desk when I read:

"Paying your $12.50, these days, is not unlike doing a few lines of cocaine and pretending you don't know about the headless bodies in Juarez."

How is the above statement much different - if different at all - from Godwin's Law?

Also, considering that the last ten years of films have also produced films like No Country For Old Men, True Grit, Ides of March, Michael Clayton, Magnolia, Punch Drunk Love, and a host of others, his focus on a select group (yes, a large, monied, blockbuster group, but still...)I began to feel like I was being bludgeoned by an idealogy just as unconsidered and indiscriminate and black-and-white as that which he purports to criticize.

Goes to show, he may have been more articulate in his argument than Miller was in his, but Moody (the guy who wrote the piece) is no more nuanced in his argument, and like Miller, chooses to ignore any facts that stand between him and his opinions.

[dr chimp]

I'm not sure - but I think the Guardian is a really, really conservative "news" paper. I think they out-Fox-News Fox News.

guardian isnt a conservative paper and nothing in that article would suggest it is.

[T Hedge Coke]

That article is the dumbest piece of classist BS. Comics are some elitist one percenter enclave, and the movie industry was once "for the people"? C'mon, now. Does even the Guardian expect us to really swallow that?

And, how does the Spider-Man movie even feed into that at all?

[Robert L. Washington III]

Too bad somebody would take the time to write and draw that, but not even understand the issues they are trying to address

I'm pretty sure they actually do understand the issues and are just more interested in cracking spoof on the Old Spice ads than addressing them.

[T Hedge Coke]

Too bad somebody would take the time to write and draw that, but not even understand the issues they are trying to address

That made me so much happier for Richard Pace's take, even if he killed his Miller with the Year One movie.

[gwydion]

Well he directed The Spirit so I probably shouldn't pay any attention to his views on cinema.

I would point out here that the article linked in the OP was NOT written by Frank Miller. Those are the views of some Guardian writer.

[darkmorgado]

alan moore is known recently as a cranky old man, bashing the business that helped make him famous

Not entirely true. While I haven't spoken to him personally, he lives around the corner from me (well, a couple of minute's walk) and we frequent the same coffee shop (NOTE: he wouldn't have a clue who I am, I'm not saying we are acquaintances or anything along those lines). I've overheard him talking frequently about various things to what I assume is his PA or something and another woman who I would assume is his second wife (or however bigamists resolve those issues), but I have never heard him bash the industry. Ever. He loves the industry.

[invisiblefive]

at this rate,i suggest cbr creates an ows sub-forum (or even better, a subforum about miller's rant against ows, complete with polls and appreciation threads...)

[Jono11]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/nov/24/frank-miller-hollywood-fascism

This piece from the Guardian (a rag) uses Franks recent outburst as an attack on both hollywood and comic-books (and especially comic-book films).

the rant here is so ridiculous and the lack of logic used so garing that i i originally suspected that it was a piss-take. if anyone wants a little entertainment, give it a read, though the first half is a bit boring.

P.S my favorite bit is where he claims Gladiator was an alagory for G.W. Bush's election campaign :biggrin:The fact that you found the first half boring tells me all I need to know.

He's not saying that literally everyone in Hollywood is a cryptofascist. And he's DEFINITELY not attacking all comic book movies. He's saying that the majority of unthinking action movies have a disturbingly fascistic ethic to them. And they do.


He lost me at Gladiator, when he claimed a film released in May 2000 was comment on elections held in November 2000.He didn't say it was a comment on the election results, he said it was an allegory for the candidacy. Probably a hard sell, and he shouldn't have tossed it in there, but without hearing the argument I won't dismiss it out of hand.


What does Alan Moore have to do with this?Oh, you know that wacky Alan Moore! Wanting to be treated with respect and dignity! Thinking that comic books should not just be necrophiliac exercises in recycling old storylines! What a loon, that guy!


Action films traumatized this guy. Poor baby.Really? You didn't read it. The guy said he loved going to action films until his mind suddenly changed about them while watching a forgettable Seagal movie.


if the spirit had been a comic book done by miller everyone wouldve seen the genius fun and love miller poured into it.

i loved the movie myselfMe too. I think the reason nobody liked it was that they expected something other than what they got. Which is a silly reason to dislike a movie, but a depressingly common one.


I'm not sure - but I think the Guardian is a really, really conservative "news" paper. I think they out-Fox-News Fox News.Way to be informed. It's the newspaper of choice for most of the English-speaking left.


Too bad somebody would take the time to write and draw that, but not even understand the issues they are trying to addressWhat's the issue that is being misunderstood? Frank Miller accuses every single member of an earnest, honest protest movement of being, thieves, murderers, and rapists, and of giving aid and comfort to Al Qaeda! HE'S NUTS.


I have never heard him bash the industry. Ever. He loves the industry.From his interviews, it does sound like he doesn't like the industry (and come on, what intelligent comic book fan DOES like the industry?), but that he loves the medium.


He lost me at the point where he lumped Clint friggin' Eastwood in with Chuck Norris, as though Clint has never contributed anything of worth to world cinema, or didn't come out with a surprising defense of gay marriage, recently.That's not really what he implied.

Yes, the guy doesn't understand comics. He thinks they're trash literature. That's nothing new. That's the mentality the medium has been fighting against for years (although with the current direction of superhero comics, one has to wonder if we've all just given up that fight.) And yes, he REALLY overstates his case with some of the hyperbole, but his underlying point about the troubling undertones of American pop culture is well taken.

[Tages]

I stopped reading around the point he called Eastwood a reactionary defender of vigilantism. The last two decades of his career, from Unforgiven through Gran Turino, have been reiterating the point over and over again that vigilantism doesn't work.

But, as petulant and asinine as the specifics of Moody's argument may be, the broader point is hard to dispute. And calling the Guardian a "rag" is indefensible.

[The Angry Comic Book Critic]

Alright everyone it's time Frank Millar needs to be committed call the men in white coats and have them haul his whore crazed ass off to the Nut house. At first it was him just sucking at comics All Star Batman and Robin, Dark Knight Strikes Again and such then it was movies like the Spirit.

Now he's just completely lost his goddamn mind there is no excuse for him any more he's off the wagon and hopped aboard the Crazy Train and he's also appears to be incapable in recent years of portraying a female character in a non Whoreish way.

Don't get me wrong I love Frank's Daredevil run The Dark Knight Returns, Sin City, Batman Year One but this is just getting sad he's gone from this...
http://willieshakes.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/talent.jpg?w=251&h=300
Little bit over board maybe but I need a strong example of the kind of Talent Frank had back when his comics were awesome.

to this...
http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/16181215/2/stock-photo-16181215-crazy-man-in-straight-jacket-with-crossed-eyes.jpg

A crazy man I have infinite pity for.

I don't know what made frank like this best I can come up with is he never got over Sin City....I miss the old Frank that made Great Comics and Rocked the comic world to it's core with innovative stories and interesting characters not this new frank who made Wonder woman into a Man Hater, Batman into a Depraved psychotic and Every female comic character under the sun in to a prostitute.

[Schnitzy Pretzelpants]

Other people have already said this, but I want to make sure it is read again:

The Guardian is a decidedly LEFT leaning newspaper/agency.

It's one of my preferred sources for news, and while left-leaning, it most certainly ISN'T reactionary in it's reportage.

Let's bare in mind that reportage is reportage and op-ed pieces are op-ed pieces. This is an op-ed piece, which in journalism means that the opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of The Guardian or other members of it's staff.

As I said in a previous post, I myself am pretty far left, and I find the writer - Rick Mooney - to be making pretty gross generalizations in this essay. He's building the kind of argument I would expect from a 1st or 2nd year university student in a campus newspaper.

In as much as he's painting broad strokes with an extremely broad brush, his essay is about as accurate as Miller's disgusting rant. Mooney at least didn't throw in words and accusations like rapist and murderers though.

However, even for this lefty, he casts the word fascist around a way too freely, and in a really reactionary, rather than considered way.

[mal-adjusted]

He's not saying that literally everyone in Hollywood is a cryptofascist. And he's DEFINITELY not attacking all comic book movies.

The kind of comic-book-oriented cinema that has afflicted Hollywood for 10 years now, since Spider-Man, has degraded the cinematic art, and has varnished over what was once a humanist form.

In future, you may want to read the whole article before jumping to conclusions. that way you won't go off half cocked again.



He's saying that the majority of unthinking action movies have a disturbingly fascistic ethic to them. And they do.

Care to back that up with some facts? Or will trying to add a suitable amount of authoritativeness do?



The fact that you found the first half boring tells me all I need to know.


oh, get over yourself

[Tages]

Other people have already said this, but I want to make sure it is read again:

The Guardian is a decidedly LEFT leaning newspaper/agency.

It's one of my preferred sources for news, and while left-leaning, it most certainly ISN'T reactionary in it's reportage.

Let's bare in mind that reportage is reportage and op-ed pieces are op-ed pieces. This is an op-ed piece, which in journalism means that the opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of The Guardian or other members of it's staff.

As I said in a previous post, I myself am pretty far left, and I find the writer - Rick Mooney - to be making pretty gross generalizations in this essay. He's building the kind of argument I would expect from a 1st or 2nd year university student in a campus newspaper.

In as much as he's painting broad strokes with an extremely broad brush, his essay is about as accurate as Miller's disgusting rant. Mooney at least didn't throw in words and accusations like rapist and murderers though.

However, even for this lefty, he casts the word fascist around a way too freely, and in a really reactionary, rather than considered way.

It's worth pointing out, incidentally, that Moody is a really crap writer (http://www.powells.com/review/2002_07_04.html.), who is making his point in his typically verbose, pretentious way.

It doesn't mean he doesn't have one. Just that it's expressed very poorly.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

He lost me at Gladiator, when he claimed a film released in May 2000 was comment on elections held in November 2000.

Rambling idiot, pay it no mind.

He lost me at Gladiator, when he claimed Ridley Scott had put political allegory into one of his films.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I stopped reading around the point he called Eastwood a reactionary defender of vigilantism. The last two decades of his career, from Unforgiven through Gran Turino, have been reiterating the point over and over again that vigilantism doesn't work.

Yeah, Michael Caine makes the films about vigilantism working these days.

[Paradox]

sethysquare tut tuts:

Wow. Both he and Alan Moore has gone insane.

Alan Moore's not insane, he's merely hyper-weird.

And I like it. :biggrin:

[pariah-1972]

Moore I respect, he just removed himself from the main stream but still produces work that gets praised from various fans. Miller has been doing stuff that we see more criticism.

Anyway, just thought of this:
http://cdn.the-gutters.com/comics/1cf4c176dc46d771b9bdd01df2ee8fae553da8ff.jpgThat chest hair is scaring me...is he gonna turn into a werewolf?

[mailedbypostman1]

Well they are.

[dupersuper]

all the best are insane

Also many of the worst.

[darkmorgado]

Other people have already said this, but I want to make sure it is read again:

The Guardian is a decidedly LEFT leaning newspaper/agency.

It's one of my preferred sources for news, and while left-leaning, it most certainly ISN'T reactionary in it's reportage.


It's rather odd for someone to claim the Guardian is conservative. It's as ridiculous as if someone in the US tried to claim Fox was liberal.

Your second point though, is a bit of a stretch. As much as I love the Guardian, and as liberal as I am (being a paid-up member of the Liberal Democrat Party), they really do love a bit of precious knee-jerking.

I prefer the Independent.

[king mob]

Wow. Both he and Alan Moore has gone insane.

Go on, explain why Moore is insane.

[king mob]

alan moore is known recently as a cranky old man, bashing the business that helped make him famous.

Fucks sake not this bollocks again, no he's not 'bashing the business that helped make him famous'. He's pointing out the actual wrongs that's been done to him by companies and actually gone away to do what he wants rather than just write superheroes forever.


And as for this piece in the Guardian, it's another example of the Guardian's dogwhistle articles designed to get hits rather than put forward a sensible or even coherent argument.

[darkmorgado]

Exactly. He loves the industry, he loves the medium. He just hates the couple of occasions where some select people have screwed him over.

I read the thing on Comic Book Legends recently about how the Captain Britain reprint issues were resolved, and it was incredibly simple and straightforward. There was no preening, diva-ish lunacy involved, no "I'm too good for this industry" crap that so many people erroneously ascribe to him.

He's a great creator in a great industry. He just doesn't believe that he should bow down and take it if the great gods of Marvel and DC screw him over. And there's nothing wrong with that at all, it's a healthy attitude that I can wholeheartedly get on board with.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Go on, explain why Moore is insane.

He uses rape as a plot device, and hasn't created as many characters as Kirby!

[Michael P]

Go on, explain why Moore is insane.

He doesn't want Hollywood's money.

[Captain Clarkie]

I'd rather watch "Captain America" than "The Ice Storm" Mr Moody.

[The Beast Of Yucca Flats]

Fucks sake not this bollocks again, no he's not 'bashing the business that helped make him famous'. He's pointing out the actual wrongs that's been done to him by companies and actually gone away to do what he wants rather than just write superheroes forever.

u shut up he ows us anuther batman storie hed be nuthin without us!

[pariah-1972]

I don't think Alan Moore is insane but he may be a little nuttier than your average person or at least he wants people to think that.

He has some strange philosophies and beliefs at least compared to the average person.

And like others have said i think he hates the industry (or at least the corporate- mainstream part) but he still loves the medium since he hasn't completely retired from making comics yet tho i'm sure he could if he wanted too.


It would be nice if he put out his own comic book company that would be truly independent and creator owned with his name and vision at the top it could def be a rival for the other companies (mainstream and indie)

[invisiblefive]

I don't think Alan Moore is insane but he may be a little nuttier than your average person or at least he wants people to think that.

He has some strange philosophies and beliefs at least compared to the average person.

And like others have said i think he hates the industry (or at least the corporate- mainstream part) but he still loves the medium since he hasn't completely retired from making comics yet tho i'm sure he could if he wanted too.


It would be nice if he put out his own comic book company that would be truly independent and creator owned with his name and vision at the top it could def be a rival for the other companies (mainstream and indie)

i think he has one: doesn't he own ABC?

[The Beast Of Yucca Flats]

i think he has one: doesn't he own ABC?

Aside from LOEG, no; the rest are all owned by DC. As I recall it-- and someone else can feel free to correct me if I get anything wrong here-- Moore & Co. stood to get more money up front for the books if the rights to them went to the Wildstorm. And as Moore trusted Lee (and the artists apparently really could've used the money/work at the time), they went with that. And the reason League is creator-owned is because it was already in production prior to Wildstorm's courting of Moore; as such, it falls outside the aforementioned ownership deal.

[coveredinbees]

Go on, explain why Moore is insane.
He doesn't brush his hair.

[carabas]

He has some strange philosophies and beliefs at least compared to the average person.And that's saying quite a bit considering the average person believes in Jewish sky gods that have kids, with mortal women, who can do magic and then die and become zombies.

[Gothos]

Wow. Both he and Alan Moore has gone insane.

At least they're entertainingly insane.

Rick Moody is just boring-insane.

[Gothos]

Jono11 said:


He's not saying that literally everyone in Hollywood is a cryptofascist. And he's DEFINITELY not attacking all comic book movies. He's saying that the majority of unthinking action movies have a disturbingly fascistic ethic to them. And they do.

I too would like to see this assertion enlarged upon.

[Jared Song]

Oh, you know that wacky Alan Moore! Wanting to be treated with respect and dignity! Thinking that comic books should not just be necrophiliac exercises in recycling old storylines! What a loon, that guy!


Alan Moore has alot of integrity and has good reason not to work for the big 2. However, I think he can be hypocritical at times, like when he criticizes the mainstream comic industry for continuing to publish the same superheroes.

His DC work was mostly working on the same superheroes, and he originally wanted to have Watchmen consist of Charlton characters. Once the industry was relying more on the direct market, that kind of ensured that comics would be a niche form of entertainment, with a certain genre being the dominant one.

DC has put out alot of great non-superhero stuff, but none of it has really caught on quite the way Sandman did. I think Y The Last Man was the only one that really got noticed.

[pariah-1972]

And that's saying quite a bit considering the average person believes in Jewish sky gods that have kids, with mortal women, who can do magic and then die and become zombies.Well when you put it like that LOL

[StoneGold]

But super-hero comics, especially Golden Age comics, did have facist overtones.

If anything, early Superman comics had socialist undertones. Screw that, overtones. Superman was a crusader for social justice. Might makes right /= fascism.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Aside from LOEG, no; the rest are all owned by DC. As I recall it-- and someone else can feel free to correct me if I get anything wrong here-- Moore & Co. stood to get more money up front for the books if the rights to them went to the Wildstorm. And as Moore trusted Lee (and the artists apparently really could've used the money/work at the time), they went with that. And the reason League is creator-owned is because it was already in production prior to Wildstorm's courting of Moore; as such, it falls outside the aforementioned ownership deal.

That's pretty much it.
The artists got higher rates if the books were owned by ABC/Wildstorm.

LoEG had been worked on and optioned for a film before the forming of ABC, so that's why it was creator owned.

If only Levitz hadn't felt the need to tinker...

[Paradox]

In general, I liked Paul Levitz, but man, when he made mistakes, they were always whoppers! :tongue:

"mistakes" in my opinion, of course.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

In general, I liked Paul Levitz, but man, when he made mistakes, they were always whoppers! :tongue:

"mistakes" in my opinion, of course.

Yeah, that's how I feel.

He seemed to really not like Wildstorm. He neutered an exciting line several times over.

[king mob]

u shut up he ows us anuther batman storie hed be nuthin without us!

u rawkk!!!1

[king mob]

I don't think Alan Moore is insane but he may be a little nuttier than your average person or at least he wants people to think that.

He has some strange philosophies and beliefs at least compared to the average person.

He's a British eccentric of the kind we used to admire before this Thatcherite/Blairite intolerance of something different became the norm.


And like others have said i think he hates the industry (or at least the corporate- mainstream part) but he still loves the medium since he hasn't completely retired from making comics yet tho i'm sure he could if he wanted too.

He's made it clear he's done with mainstream superheroes, and his financial situation seems secure enough for him to do what he wants.



It would be nice if he put out his own comic book company that would be truly independent and creator owned with his name and vision at the top it could def be a rival for the other companies (mainstream and indie)
He's done self publishing with Mad Love in the past, and he's publishing Dogem Logic now. He seems happy doing things away from comics so he's doing music, writing novels and doing talks/comedy in local pubs, schools and libraries.

[king mob]

Moore is interviewed in today's Observer about the use of the V mask by the Occupy movement and it's fairly interesting.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/nov/27/alan-moore-v-vendetta-mask-protest

[pariah-1972]

[QUOTE]He's a British eccentric of the kind we used to admire before this Thatcherite/Blairite intolerance of something different became the norm.When is the last British eccentric that we had? it seems like you can't be eccentric British unless you drink and curse a lot.
But then there is the rampant homophobia and close mindedness of the world.




He's made it clear he's done with mainstream superheroes, and his financial situation seems secure enough for him to do what he wants.Which is all good some of his best stuff wasn't Superhero anyways.


He's done self publishing with Mad Love in the past, and he's publishing Dogem Logic now. He seems happy doing things away from comics so he's doing music, writing novels and doing talks/comedy in local pubs, schools and libraries.If that makes him happy i'm all for it, but a part of me can't help wishing he could give the comic industry a run for it's money and do more of a "show don't tell" with his valid critisms but considering how many times he has been screwed over in the past even from independent labels i really don't blame him either.

[king mob]

If that makes him happy i'm all for it, but a part of me can't help wishing he could give the comic industry a run for it's money and do more of a "show don't tell" with his valid critisms but considering how many times he has been screwed over in the past even from independent labels i really don't blame him either.

Why should he? He's done superheroes, not to mention dabbled badly in self publishing so he's now doing what he wants. Marvel and DC are in a mess of their own creation so let them deal with their own problems while Moore can do what he wants.

[Captain Clarkie]

Great interview Mob, thanks for posting that.

[jesse_custer]

I don't see a big problem with the article. Unlike most "critics," Moody actually does his job here: he analyzes the cultural implications and subtext (whether intentional or not) of media. You don't have to agree with Moody to see that he's put a lot of thought into this piece, more thought than what you get from most reviews these days.

You might laugh at the idea that Gladiator has a political message, for example, but it's a provocative idea, and Scott didn't intentionally have to make the message for the subtext to be there. The fact is, Hollywood producers ARE political, and the films they choose typically do not question the status quo of American capitalism.

The best line from this article:


American movies, in the main, often agree with Frank Miller, that endless war against a ruthless enemy is good, and military service is good, that killing makes you a man, that capitalism must prevail, that if you would just get a job (preferably a corporate job, for all honest work is corporate) you would quit complaining. American movies say these things, but they are more polite about it, lest they should offend.

He's not using Miller as an excuse to rant so much as arguing that Miller, a recent inductee into Hollywood, represents the mainstream of the filmmaking business. Commenting on comic book movies in this context is a no-brainer, given their incredible success and the fact that we're talking about Miller.

[pariah-1972]

Miller isn't a recent inductee into hollywood since he wrote the script for Robocop 2 (even if supposedly most of it didn't get used)

[jesse_custer]

In the last few years, he's had great control over two films, not to mention the faithful adaptation of 300.

Writing a barely used script for a shitty sequel isn't exactly an induction. Miller was incredibly irrelevant to Hollywood until recently.

[pariah-1972]

In the last few years, he's had great control over two films, not to mention the faithful adaptation of 300.

Writing a barely used script for a shitty sequel isn't exactly an induction. Miller was incredibly irrelevant to Hollywood until recently.Well i liked Robocop 2 but i heard they threw out most of what he wrote cause it was no good.

[Gothos]

I don't see a big problem with the article. Unlike most "critics," Moody actually does his job here: he analyzes the cultural implications and subtext (whether intentional or not) of media. You don't have to agree with Moody to see that he's put a lot of thought into this piece, more thought than what you get from most reviews these days.

You might laugh at the idea that Gladiator has a political message, for example, but it's a provocative idea, and Scott didn't intentionally have to make the message for the subtext to be there. The fact is, Hollywood producers ARE political, and the films they choose typically do not question the status quo of American capitalism.

The best line from this article:


He's not using Miller as an excuse to rant so much as arguing that Miller, a recent inductee into Hollywood, represents the mainstream of the filmmaking business. Commenting on comic book movies in this context is a no-brainer, given their incredible success and the fact that we're talking about Miller.

I don't have a problem with the idea that films have subtext, even subtext produced without conscious intention. I object to the notion put forth by Moody: that the subtext is inevitably political in nature.