Oh alright. That is kind of a relief. And kind of a disappointment because I love me some Frank Miller art. He is probably my GOAT comic book artist. And I think he has gotten better as an artist (even as he got worse as a writer)
I feel ridiculously old for not immediately and innately knowing what GOAT stands for.
Miller’s art style has changed multiple times - sometimes in the same book
Anyone who has read Ronin will know this
Frank Miller is easily a Mount Rushmore level creator, up there with Kirby and Moore as the greats.
The question marks on his ability to write female leads, after his work with Elektra, Martha Washington, Carrie Kelly, Casey McKenna etc is just baffling.
I sometimes feel like I grew up in a parallel world.
Huge news for DC
You’re probably too young. I think it was Muhammad Ali that coined it.
Would the Miller we have seen in recent years recognise his younger self that wrote all those though? The problem is the later Miller persona has eclipsed the younger. Especially in the public perception.
Now, if he has decided to get back to doing the sort of smarter stuff that made his name in the first place instead of stuff like the infamous Holy Terror, it could be quite something - which I think is the general hope of recent posts.
Greatest Of All Time. It’s funny, because it hijacks goat as a term that means the exact opposite, as Charlie Brown knows.
Mmmm… for both I’d say they’ve gotten lazier (or “loOser” if you wanna be polite) with their styles, which happens to most artists as they get comfortable with their styles and need to meet deadlines. In Miller’s case though, it’s gotten looser and looser to a point where it just doesn’t look good (IMO).
You can call it “change” if you want, but a change for the worse is still bad.
I don’t think it’s a matter of cheating to make deadline. The Stuart Immonen style I liked so much in Superman was simplistic compared to…just about any other modern Superman artist. There were no rippling muscles. But it was hugely evocative. The best art isn’t concerned so much with the amount of detail but the impact of the detail it does have. And Miller’s trademark Sin City style, of the heavy use of shadow, was exactly that. What you think of an artist getting lazy (or loose) really probably is that artist changing what they choose to emphasize, the effect they’re trying to have. Dark Knight Strikes Again, for instance, was a deliberately more expansive story than its predecessor, which cast the aging Batman as a creature of despair where he then became a creature of hope. Strikes is about making him a symbol, not of fear for criminals but of hope for average citizens. It’s ironic that Master Race has to pretend it didn’t happen, that it again reduces him to a solitary figure, so that he has to learn the lesson all over again, learn to go beyond himself.
Regarding Miller, it’s really a shame we never got more Sin City yarns out of him. Really could have used five or six or seven more of them in the past fifteen years. A nice mix of 5/6 issue miniseries and shorter OGNs.
Seems like he’s pretty much abandoned it.
oops… yeah, corrected…
Anyways, yeah I get your point, but not all artists are the same… a lot of them get “lazy/looser”, some actually change their style, or tweak it… you can sort of see which is which, tbh. Let’s take Bagley… Bagley’s style got looser with the years, so did Larsen’s, and so did Miller (to a point where I think it’s too much).
Maybe Immonen changed his style (I should check, I don’t remember his styles off the bat), there’s other who have done it, like Capullo, for exemple, who went with a more simple and stream-lined style for his DC work when compared to what he was doing on Spawn.
Anyways, looser is not always bad, except if you go too far, wether it’s because of deadlines or any other reason, where it looks too “rushed”. A good example of someone going for a looser style but doing it right is Stephan Sjejic (sp?), who used to do some really detailed stuff, but then went a lot looser and simpler, but he ended up with a great style none-the-less.
Millar’s art for the past decade or more has just looked rushed (and ugly, as far as I’m concerned)… he still has the sam-ish style, it just looks like he doesn’t sketch anymore and goes straight into very loose inks. I mean, hey I guess it’s okay if it doesn’t bother you, but I was quite angry after I paid for DK2 and was greeted with that attrocious art in it…
Miller is, and will always be, one of my all-time top creators. I’m interested in anything he puts out. I don’t automatically love anything he does, but I always find something of interest in there.
His art evolution has been interesting to track. He’s clearly got to a point now where he’s actively favouring a more exaggerated, almost grotesque style of cartooning, and in the process he seems to have lost a fair chunk of his audience.
I think it’s rarely the laziness or sloppiness that it’s often characterised as: I think there’s usually a lot of thought that goes into his work, especially when it comes to rhythm and pacing.
I’m really enthused by this latest news, and the art from both projects announced so far looks great. I’m hoping his Superman project in particular is going to be something special.
He’s talked about coming back to Sin City a couple of times - there was meant to be a project around the same time as the second movie, and more recently he’s talked about a Western set long before the other stories - but it’s never come to fruition.
To be honest I don’t know if I’m desperate for more as I’m not sure he’s got that much more to say with it, although the Western story might be an interesting change.
To Hell and Back seemed like a great place to lay the series to rest. I’d love a prequel in the Wild West though.
Yeah just to clarify, when I say lazy I don’t mean that the guy is literally lazy, it’s just that his work looks that way… “lazy/loose”.
And I think that’s a fair criticism - when you compare it to his more controlled stuff like Ronin or DKR or Daredevil (or even Sin City) it’s very different.
I’m struggling to see what Sin City had to say in the first place, underneath the pulpy crime yarns and heavy shadows.
I have enjoyed the ones that I’ve read (and love the first movie) but it definitely marks the decline for me.
I mentioned in a review of Mesmo Delivery the other day that there are some comics where the style is the substance, and I feel that way about Sin City.
Without getting too wanky about it, I feel like it’s a real exercise in playing with the form of comics - not just pushing the stark/abstract black-and-white stuff as far as it can go, but also the storytelling, particularly moment-to-moment. I love the bold use of huge images and the amazing control of pacing and how a reader moves through a comic.
That stuff can only go so far though, and by the last few stories I felt like it was getting a bit tired. Although Hell And Back changed things up with something different, even if it wasn’t completely successful.
Yeah, and btw, as far as I’m concerned DK2 is by far the worst thing he’s done, particularly the art (hell, I wouldn’t even call it that)… But I don’t think he was being lazy… you can very much feel the intent on that book, and it’s nasty… to me it reads like he was having a go, maybe at DC, maybe at Batman fans, maybe at the industry, maybe all of the above… I dunno, but it feels like he did it out of spite and laughed all the way to the bank (add to that the fact that he got crazy after 9/11 who knows wtf he was thinking).
Also, I just realized that in spanish we have one word (flojo) for both lazy and loose… but maybe it doesn’t work like that in english, hence the confusion
DK2 was one I was disappointed with at first but ultimately grew to like a lot, and even love in places.
It was definitely a conscious effort to do something very different to the first one, and maybe more than any other Miller project it’s the book where you can see the impact of 9/11 (and its fallout) on his mindset, even as he’s writing it.