SDCC: Kubert & Janson Join "The Dark Knight III: The Master Race"

[HsssH]

Many people believe many things, I don't see how that should be a factor when judging someone's work.

[Agent Z]

Many people believe many things, I don't see how that should be a factor when judging someone's work.

It is when your beliefs end up heavily influencing your work. Hell, more often than not, writers beliefs and biases factor into how their work is portrayed.

[t hedge coke]

Are there people who hate Holy Terror simply because of bandwagoning? Yes. However, there are just as many, if not more, who have read the book and judged it for themselves and decided they find it offensive. And not because Miller was trying to be 'ironic' or whatever such nonsense. No because he does believe the racist drivel he has the Fixer spout. And his comments on Islam are more than enough proof of his mindset.

If the Fixer is 100% his mouthpiece, why does Miller write characters into the story who can tear apart much of what he says? Or, make it obvious that the Fixer has some psychological and sociological hangups before the terrorist attack even starts? He wrote not-Catwoman in there as a sort of conscience for the Fixer, that to me, then, means that he has a broad enough perspective to be able to write the things she's saying as well.

And no offense, T. Hedge Coke, because I do have a lot of respect for you, but quite frankly the whole 'you just don't get his grand vision' defense tends to come across as insensitive and condescending.

No offense taken. I really didn't/don't mean it that way.

I'm not happy with Holy Terror. I'm not happy with many of his decisions, there, but when we see characters actively criticizing the racist, jingoistic, and exceptionally sexually repressed lead, I think it's okeh to start reading it as if Miller doesn't 100% believe him, either. Miller may still be racist, reactionary, and ignorant, and the book itself certainly seems to be.

[marvelprince]

Exactly, no one told me it was satire when it was published,all I knew was that it was Miller continuing his take on Year:One Bats and last I checked YO was not satire and if it was then a satire of what exactly? what exactly was the point of this book? it went nowhere after 10 issues. But hey this forum has people defending Batman and Robin as a comedic take on Batman and using that point of reference to justify the movie,heck even call it good even though Schumacher and Clooney have repeatedly apologized for being part of that disaster.
All-Star Batman was garbage,you can like it, God knows I like a lot of crappy stuff(Cry for Justice) but lets not pretend it's some work of art.

I like Cry For Justice too! I like that it was an exploration of what justice meant and how it pushes that concept, while at the same time acknowledging that it wallowed in its grim-dark excesses with moments like Ray Palmer's hilariously bad "Welcome to Pain" and that the characters say the word Justice!!! way too many times (I made a drinking game out of it actually). I love it, but I acknowledge it for what it is and understand why people don't like it. I don't go "Well obviously the subtlety of the themes went past your head" (thats an actual quote I remember reading from someone defending it). Its seems the default for arguing with people who's points you know have validity so you undercut them but telling them they just don't get it.

I used to get that from fans of Final Crisis all the time. "You don't like it cause you didn't understand what it was REALLY about". Noooooo, I understand where Morrison was trying to go I just didn't like the story.

Not a jab at you btw THC, you seem like a reasonable person. I was just speaking generally here. I have no problems with anyone liking or hating any story, its just the revisionist nature of some fans that I don't like.

[t hedge coke]

Not a jab at you btw THC, you seem like a reasonable person. I was just speaking generally here. I have no problems with anyone liking or hating any story, its just the revisionist nature of some fans that I don't like.

No, that I can get. It is possible, after all, to just dislike something even if other people love it. And to dislike it for legitimate reasons.

(And, I want to try Cry for Justice again, knowing more of the circumstances behind scenes.)

[MykeHavoc]

I unapologetically like Cry for Justice. Prometheus has always been a favorite villain, and he proves to be among the most vicious and calculating. But he underestimates the "code" by which the heroes operate, specifically Ollie, and get's one of the most satisfying ends I could think of. Simple, to the point. "Justice". F**k yeah. Lian's death. Roy's " I can't feel my arm". Congorilla and Starman. The art. I think it's a great book. People compare it to Identity Crisis in tone, but there again is another book I love that most seem to dump on. I like it when my superhero books get heavy. If the stakes never feel real, and I'm not willing to shed a tear for some pictures on paper, then why am I reading them? I want my emotions to ran the gamut with fiction: the thrilling, joy of victory and the occasional downright dirty feeling of failure brings a welcome bit of levity to the DCU.

[John Aston]

I'm not too interested in this, not because of Frank Miller, but more so of the diminishing returns of doing sequels to projects that needed not sequels and Brian Azzarello. All-Star Batman and Robin is pure awesome and far more interesting than what DC was publishing with Batman proper. With Jim Lee on the book, maybe the readership at large was expecting a mainstream Batman tale and Jim Lee is typically drawing mainstream superhero comics but get the Hyper-Noir plot and dialogue from Frank Miller. I chuckle imaging the strict DC/Marvel reader having their brains explode reading All-Star Batman and Robin.

To whomever posted the Fourth Wall videos on Holy Terror..... good lord how obnoxious.... at a point the "reviewer" became so aggressive in bashing Frank Miller and Holy Terror both turned into the victim, which was shortly after back-patting himself after informing the viewer of a series bad reviews he gave Miller setting up his prejudice against the material. I recently read Holy Terror for the first time and it's okay. Not Miller's strongest work, by far, but not worth joining the Internet Brigade of Shaming to character assassinate the guy on social media, videos or message boards. Also, it's perfectly okay for a writer to explore characters and worlds with no redeemable values which do not, in part or in whole, reflect the author's worldview of any particular subject matter.

[XanatosVanBadass]

Yeah, I can't take anyone who posts a link to an Internet reviewer to do their arguing for them seriously. Especially when the reviewer is an agenda driven fool like Linkara. His fans are obnoxious.