Between Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison: Who's the better DC writer ?

[Braun Rodman]

Geoff Johns is a very good competent writer, sometimes spectacular. Morrison however is a generational writer.

It's the difference between talent and genius, both are great.

[kingaliencracker]

Johns is more consistent, but Morrison's best stories beat Johns' best stories by a substantial margin.

[lancerman]

Depends. They've both done character runs.

John's Green Lantern vs Morrisons Batman. They were both high quality. I'd argue Morrison did more high concept stuff. Johns was received better and did more for the character overall.

They both did a Crisis story. The vast majority consensus is that Final Crisis was a misstep, while Infinite Crisis was flawed but a solid follow up to the original.

I think John's better at the more mainstream stuff, while Morrison is better when he can delve into niche concepts.

[lancerman]

Let's maybe not go quite that far now. Johns used Batman (pissed & bitter albeit) better in GL than I think Tony ever did.

I'd still argue that Daniels first arc (the Black Mask one) was one of the better Batman stories at the time.

[Darth Kal-el]

Morrison is my all time favorite comic writer. Johns makes my top ten and I love the majority of his work but he has had some really bad and decompressed stories, not as bad as Bendis but still. Forever Evil, not much happened in the actual book and some tie ins were more interesting, same with Flashpoint. While his original flash run and GL were amazing

With Morrison I have read all his work and even if I am not blown away at first, the more I read it and understand the context, I begin to love it like Final Crisis

[Ilan Preskovsky]

Geoff Johns, because he establishes and reinvigorates characters like no other. Morrison's writing is a fun ride while it lasts but you always have the feeling that its temporary and not really significant in any way.

See, this just confuses me. Morrison's writing at its best is filled with subtext ad metaphor - it has depth and substance basically. Johns though, even at his best, strikes me as a very shallow writer.

[Buried Alien]

See, this just confuses me. Morrison's writing at its best is filled with subtext ad metaphor - it has depth and substance basically. Johns though, even at his best, strikes me as a very shallow writer.

Not every song is "A Day in the Life." Sometimes, your mood just wants to hear "I Saw Her Standing There."

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Ilan Preskovsky]

Not every song is "A Day in the Life." Sometimes, your mood just wants to hear "I Saw Her Standing There."

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Sure. But a) Johns hasn't even written an "I Saw Her Standing There" since Infinite Crisis - with his Superman stuff maybe being an exception - and b) I'm mainly just arguing against the idea that Johns' work is more "A Day in the Life" and Morrison's "I Saw Her Standing There" - which just strikes me as being completely the wrong way around. Wow, the Beatles metaphor really works here doesn't it?

And, for the record, in terms of straightforward superhero comics, give me a guy like Mark Waid over Geoff Johns any day of the week. Interestingly, I think the one thing that Johns has become increasingly bad at over the years are straightforward superhero stories. He did some great ones in his early years but the tone of his work has gotten more and more dark ("grimdark" even), even as the plotting has become more and more convoluted, yet thematically simplistic and banal character-wise. At this point I do wonder if working away from superheroes, at least for a while, wouldn't be the best thing for him. Again, I think he's shown himself to be a fine writer on a technical level but his status as Mr. DC (and when people have talked about the DC "house style" over the last few years, they're basically referring to Geoff Johns) has, to my mind, severely hurt his writing in the long run.

Unless I'm missing something, is Geoff Johns the only mainstream creator who has never done any substantial creator-owned work? I don't think that's a coincidence.

[Gordonstar]

I find he writes an nihilistic view IMO. Buts it's interesting.

[Jim Kelly]

The hitch in the topic question is the whole "writer" thing. If it was stated differently--then maybe Geoff Johns and Grant Morrison would be on an equal footing.

They're a weird contrast, because DC seems to build their universes around their stories and yet they can't mix. There's something about them--I can't even imagine them being in the same room together--there would some kind of matter-anti-matter reaction that would blow a wormhole in the cosmos.

Whereas, Morrison's work can fit okay with Mark Waid, Tom Peyer. And Geoff Johns fits with James Robinson, David S. Goyer.

[superduperman]

Morrison is often too "meta" for me. I like some of what John's has done and not others. I don't know that he's a "great" writer. Or legendary in the sense that Morrison is. I liked John's Batman Year One but not his origin for Superman. I liked what he did for Teen Titans but not changing Superboy's origin. So it's a mix with me. Morrison can be good and bad depending on the story. All Star Superman was a decent story and had some great elements, like when he stops the girl from jumping off the roof, but without a backstory, it was hard for me to get attached to any of the characters. We were witnessing the death of a Superman we'd never seen before. That's kind of hard to mourn. I like the fact that Morrison loves to tap into a character's whole history. It's just that sometimes he goes too far with the nostalgia stuff and it hurts the story. Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader comes to mind.

[Hilden B. Lade]

Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader was actually a Neil Gaiman story, for the record.

[Ilan Preskovsky]

Morrison is often too "meta" for me. I like some of what John's has done and not others. I don't know that he's a "great" writer. Or legendary in the sense that Morrison is. I liked John's Batman Year One but not his origin for Superman. I liked what he did for Teen Titans but not changing Superboy's origin. So it's a mix with me. Morrison can be good and bad depending on the story. All Star Superman was a decent story and had some great elements, like when he stops the girl from jumping off the roof, but without a backstory, it was hard for me to get attached to any of the characters. We were witnessing the death of a Superman we'd never seen before. That's kind of hard to mourn. I like the fact that Morrison loves to tap into a character's whole history. It's just that sometimes he goes too far with the nostalgia stuff and it hurts the story. Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader comes to mind.

No offense, man, and each to their own, but I couldn't disagree more with your reading of All Star Superman. It may be centered around his "death" but All Star is primarily a celebration of the "life" of Superman - in all his different incarnations, albeit through a modern Silver Age prism. And, on the odd occasion when it takes a more wistful, "mournful" tone, you get something like Clark saying a final goodbye to Lois Lane, which is a moment that should really resonate with any fan of the character, regardless of which variation happens to be your preferred take. The backstory here is really 75 years of Superman comics - that's kind of the point.

[LP22]

Dont know about you but I will always admire geoff for treating john stewart like crap,relly miss those days

[JBatmanFan05]

Morrison is an overall better writer but John knows how to write superhero stories better.

When you think of Morrison's JLA, I wonder about this claim.

What I find interesting as huge Morrison fan is how he seems to switch styles/aims...I think Grant is capable of doing great conventional Johnslike superheroing, but it's just that he seems to prefer more experimental stuff & style. You might say it feels like he can't settle for conventional much; he's always gotta be changing and doing something new & different stylistically. A mad scientist always experimenting.