Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 58 of 58
  1. #46
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Terok Nor View Post
    Attachment 8779

    Miller's wonderful pin up for the back cover of Superman 400, which both Mark Millar and I think is the best comic DC has ever published.
    Not sure I've ever heard that picture described as wonderful before. My first impression of it was that it might have been drawn by Rob Leifeld on a lazy day.

  2. #47
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kid A View Post
    Yeah I've always interpreted DKR Superman as basically a criticism of the post-WW2 Superman who basically became an American propaganda character (and I know some people love that, but I aint opening that can of worms after what happened in that last thread). And like I said, Superman isn't portrayed as bad or even dumb, he's just in a bad situation because it's a dystopian future and he's not the protagonist.

    Miller isn't even alone in the idea that Superman lost his way when he went from a social crusader as a fantasy reaction to war and depression to a flag waver. Hence we got the New 52 Action reboot.
    Pretty much.

  3. #48
    Mighty Member Mr. Mastermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    So were Batman comics and virtually all comics. The vast majority of popular fictional characters, from Doc Savage to Horatio Hornblower, were to some extent used as propaganda for the war effort. For good reason, I might add.
    Batman didn't go up against corrupt business men and the establishment in his earlier appearances.

    As Kid A said, Superman continued to be a "MURICA" character long after WWII, much more so than Batman. Miller was saying that it's unnatural for Superman to be that type of character given his initial characterisation and how America is known for it's greed. All of this was very relevant during a time of Reaganomics.

  4. #49
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Mastermind View Post
    Batman didn't go up against corrupt business men and the establishment in his earlier appearances.

    As Kid A said, Superman continued to be a "MURICA" character long after WWII, much more so than Batman. Miller was saying that it's unnatural for Superman to be that type of character given his initial characterisation and how America is known for it's greed. All of this was very relevant during a time of Reaganomics.
    I said this before on the old forum. The Byrne reboot was a massive wasted opportunity for Supes. Imagine someone turning him back to his roots as a social crusader and man of the people in the Reagan years.

  5. #50
    Mighty Member Mr. Mastermind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,178

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LoneNecromancer View Post
    I said this before on the old forum. The Byrne reboot was a massive wasted opportunity for Supes. Imagine someone turning him back to his roots as a social crusader and man of the people in the Reagan years.
    That would have been pretty great under a different writer, but it probably would have been attacked at the time. Reagan was the last US President to be popular in office and won two massive landslides.

    I wonder if Alan Moore would have gone with that angle if he had done the reboot. He certainly wouldn't have made Superman pals with Reagan like Bryne did given how much he hated Thatcherism and politics in general at the time (and I'm guessing still does).

  6. #51
    Just left of the wormhole Terok Nor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    Not sure I've ever heard that picture described as wonderful before. My first impression of it was that it might have been drawn by Rob Leifeld on a lazy day.
    Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I think it's a wonderful synthesis of Superman's core and Miller's aesthetic.

    Also, before Byrne came on, DC was eyeing Miller and Steve Gerber to work alongside Marv Wolfman for the Superman reboot, FWIW.

  7. #52
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kid A View Post
    Yeah I've always interpreted DKR Superman as basically a criticism of the post-WW2 Superman who basically became an American propaganda character (and I know some people love that, but I aint opening that can of worms after what happened in that last thread). And like I said, Superman isn't portrayed as bad or even dumb, he's just in a bad situation because it's a dystopian future and he's not the protagonist.

    Miller isn't even alone in the idea that Superman lost his way when he went from a social crusader as a fantasy reaction to war and depression to a flag waver. Hence we got the New 52 Action reboot.
    That's all well and good. So, he kept the work of O'Neal, Adams, etc to solidify Batman's return as a dark vigilante. Great.

    And... I've read that he and Byrne decided to remodel the Superman reboot to be in line with DKR. Instead of returning him as a badass social crusader as well. So we got Supes counseling with Reagan. Fantastic.

    Now, That's 'love'.

  8. #53
    Incredible Member victorsage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dumbduck View Post
    That's all well and good. So, he kept the work of O'Neal, Adams, etc to solidify Batman's return as a dark vigilante. Great.

    And... I've read that he and Byrne decided to remodel the Superman reboot to be in line with DKR. Instead of returning him as a badass social crusader as well. So we got Supes counseling with Reagan. Fantastic.

    Now, That's 'love'.
    Byrne and Miller didn't work together on the reboot, and at the time Miller was far from a lover of Reagan. Honestly half the things people complain about with Byrne's Supeman are the things he brought back to many elements of the Golden Age Superman that the didn't like. Including his smart ass attitude towards criminals, his last survivor of Krypton status, patriotism, less then God like powers, and more stories revolving around the adventures around Metropolis and the Planet.

    In fact looking on Byrne's forum I found this little tidbit for your point.

    Gerber and Miller did pitch a Superman revamp in 1985. There's an interview with Gerber in The Krypton Companion where he says they wanted to "recreate the character with a contemporary sensibility while adhering as closely as possible to the spirit of the Siegel and Shuster original." He says they wanted to emphasize Superman's "role as a force for social justice" which I presume means more of the loose cannon socialist vigilantism we see in the early stories. He doesn't say anything more specific than that.

    At any rate, I'm glad it didn't happen. I don't think there's a bigger Gerber fan than me on this board, but I see Gerber's sensibilities as being a bad fit for Superman. I can't imagine it would have worked well. And Miller would be even worse... he shouldn't be allowed within 100 miles of Superman.
    So if anything it seems Miller at the time wanted a full out socialist Superman, which isn't what I'd argue for although I would argue for a Superman more aligned towards the Golden Age. In the same thread Byrne also speaks up.

    In hindsight, I wish JB had been able to take on Superman without it having to be a reboot.

    ••

    As most here already know, that was my original pitch. I wanted to pick up right from whatever happened to be the issue immediately before my first, and set off on a story arc over six or eight issues that would bring Superman to the point I wanted him to be.

    The reboot was DC's idea. I didn't fight it, since it effectively made my job easier!
    Honestly I haven't seen anything that makes it seem Miller doesn't love the character. Just because he wrote the character a certain way for his story doesn't mean he hates the character, just that he's using them a certain way. Writers use characters to tell a story, and often alter them to tell the kind of story they want to write. Granted I have no problem with people saying they don't like how an author used a character in a story, but to hint that they are lying about their own feelings of a character is a bit much. I'm not a huge Miller fan for the record, although I do love Sin City, he is very good with a noire setting
    Last edited by victorsage; 09-09-2014 at 10:19 PM.

  9. #54
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by victorsage View Post
    Byrne and Miller didn't work together on the reboot, and at the time Miller was far from a lover of Reagan. Honestly half the things people complain about with Byrne's Supeman are the things he brought back to many elements of the Golden Age Superman that the didn't like. Including his smart ass attitude towards criminals, his last survivor of Krypton status, patriotism, less then God like powers, and more stories revolving around the adventures around Metropolis and the Planet.

    In fact looking on Byrne's forum I found this little tidbit for your point.



    So if anything it seems Miller at the time wanted a full out socialist Superman, which isn't what I'd argue for although I would argue for a Superman more aligned towards the Golden Age. In the same thread Byrne also speaks up.



    Honestly I haven't seen anything that makes it seem Miller doesn't love the character. Just because he wrote the character a certain way for his story doesn't mean he hates the character, just that he's using them a certain way. Writers use characters to tell a story, and often alter them to tell the kind of story they want to write. Granted I have no problem with people saying they don't like how an author used a character in a story, but to hint that they are lying about their own feelings of a character is a bit much. I'm not a huge Miller fan for the record, although I do love Sin City, he is very good with a noire setting
    Ok, I had read at least 2 different people saying that Byrne and Miller decided to keep Supes in line with DKR, but I can't dispute Byrne himself.

    Still, for me, Byrne's Superman was like a Frankenstein of the worst aspects possible, removing the fantastic aspects from the character, powering him down and 'relatableising' to 'Marvelise' the character, at a time when Marvel was already powering up their characters to a cosmic level, and keeping him a flag waving boy-scout.

  10. #55
    Incredible Member victorsage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dumbduck View Post
    Ok, I had read at least 2 different people saying that Byrne and Miller decided to keep Supes in line with DKR, but I can't dispute Byrne himself.

    Still, for me, Byrne's Superman was like a Frankenstein of the worst aspects possible, removing the fantastic aspects from the character, powering him down and 'relatableising' to 'Marvelise' the character, at a time when Marvel was already powering up their characters to a cosmic level, and keeping him a flag waving boy-scout.
    Well they are wrong. If you honestly want to know about Byrne getting the Superman job you can read his forum. He's talked about multiple aspects of his work their (not just the reboot obviously) if your interested enough to look.

    I disagree about your opinion of Byrne's Superman though. He brought back many aspects of the character I like personally. From the fact he was the last survivor of Krypton, to him throwing criminals in trash cans and hanging them on poles, to him having "Adventures" that revolved around more Earthly problems and dealing with the city of Metropolis, and the Daily Planet staff. That said this isn't a place for this debate.

    Here's a bit more on Steve Gerber and Frank Miller's pitches from a couple of blogs.

    Gerber and Miller's Pitch.
    More info.
    More
    "Metropolis"

  11. #56
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by victorsage View Post
    Well they are wrong. If you honestly want to know about Byrne getting the Superman job you can read his forum. He's talked about multiple aspects of his work their (not just the reboot obviously) if your interested enough to look.

    I disagree about your opinion of Byrne's Superman though. He brought back many aspects of the character I like personally. From the fact he was the last survivor of Krypton, to him throwing criminals in trash cans and hanging them on poles, to him having "Adventures" that revolved around more Earthly problems and dealing with the city of Metropolis, and the Daily Planet staff. That said this isn't a place for this debate.

    Here's a bit more on Steve Gerber and Frank Miller's pitches from a couple of blogs.

    Gerber and Miller's Pitch.
    More info.
    More
    "Metropolis"
    Thanks!

    Well, when I think of earthly problems I think more of Supes strugling to find the line between pro-active and reactive, helping a humanitarian crisis in a fictional country because they asked for his help, for example, yet still getting flak for it, less DP soap-opera and more fighting social issues as Superman and not only Clark Kent. And right now, I think the character should be more cosmic as well. Oh, well, it's all personal preferences.

    I think this reboot (52) lost another great chance with Supes because of the 5 year jump. It's implied that as he grew in power he had to dial back his social crusading, because his impact would start being much bigger than Metropolis. This transition, this strugle, the lessons, I think would have been great story material.

  12. #57
    ribs mocco
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Mastermind View Post
    Batman didn't go up against corrupt business men and the establishment in his earlier appearances.
    Batman went up against a corrupt businessman in his debut story. It was established in that first story that Batman is a vigilante and an enemy of the police. Bill Finger was always conscious of this and would often include scenes of Batman resisting arrest / assaulting the cops when necessary. This lasted until late 1941, when the creative team was ordered to deputize both him and Robin.

  13. #58
    Spectacular Member DetectiveStrange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    212

    Default

    As has been said, I think he does like and respect Superman, but he simply loves Batman much more. I always found it interesting that Miller not only thanks Shuster and Siegel in TDKR but also the Fleischer brothers - he must have some fondness for those classic Superman cartoons.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •