posted
I get what you're saying about Morrison, though I find it a lot less than you do I think.
I think Morrison is quite brilliant and the way in which he evokes grand, epic storylines while at the same time keeping things quirky in a way only the comic book medium could do it is so enjoyable for me that I forgive him all of his 'minor' flaws. I think Eryk was right in that he represents the spirit of the Silver Age better than any other writer (besides perhaps Cooke), in that he is all about a sense of "creation" in everything he does, even when he is telling types of stories that have been told before.
You're point about not connecting with his characters is well taken. I think that's one of his "minor" flaws--in that it doesn't bother me that much. It's quite in the tradition of the Golden Age and Silver Age (of which I'm a fan), and it's all up to the reader to 'read into' the stories to the degree they connect with the characters. What I mean is, Morrison wastes no time with quiet character moments. If you, as the reader, connect with a character from his stories, that says more about you than the story. And I'm okay with that. But I do understand that might not be everyone's cup of tea. Yet, I do think he does have characters undergo a journey in all of his stories. Seven Soldiers really showcased this, with Zatanna, Guardian, Shining Knight and the rest really having some character development, though it was more subtle. In a way, his storylines are more grand and epic and his character development is more restrained--but at times, equally as powerful.
Now despite all this praise, sometimes Grant has some misses for me. Final Crisis was just awful to me. I get what he was trying to do but in my mind, he didn't accomplish it. And I loved his Batman stories with Bruce; but his Batman stories with Dick are leaving me cold. Yes, I require a better story to convince me to accept Dick as Batman that perhaps is unfair. But I expected Grant do actually do that. And he didn't. I actually have been in a 'burnt out on Grant' mode myself lately, to the degree I did not continue with "Joe the Barbarian" at Vertigo.
Still, despite my current 'burnt out' mode on Grant, I still love him as a writer. I think I'd probably rank him in my top 10. I think the ratio of "blown away by the amazingness to noticing the flaws" is just higher than Geoff's for me. Such a ratio is far too hard to calculate with mere words.
Grant Morrison also wrote All-Star Superman #6--which is the best single issue comic book story of the last 10+ years, perhaps the last 20 years. I have yet to see something that tops or matches it.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
PS - I thought Grant's X-Men run was terrific. Naysayers can't be trusted.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm trying to think of Grant Morrison books I've read and all I can come up with is JLA, All-Star Superman, Final Crisis, Seven Soldiers and Batman.
Of them, Seven Soldiers is definitely my favourite. If it hadn't been for the disappointing final issue it would probably be my favourite comics project of all time.
And I think this book(s) was dripping in the characterisation you say Morrison currently lacks Lard Lad. Zatanna, Bulleteer, Manhattan Guardian, Frankenstein, Klarion... these characters came to life for me. All that and this project had some of the highest high-concepts I've ever read. Characters, concepts, plotting, storytelling, art - this project knocked it out of the park IMO.
Batman was also a total WIN for me. I'd been secretly denying it to myself because I was always kind of anti him before... but I honestly think that Batman under Grant Morrison was my favourite book on the stands during his run. It was truly, truly exciting and RIP was a masterpiece IMO. (Batman & Robin has been less good but still excellent.) But this is another example of Morrison bringing the characterisation goods. I never cared one iota about Bruce Wayne before Morrison started writing him.
All-Star Superman was of course excellent and deserving of all it's accolades. Though I agree with you that it wasn't perfect. I can't quite put my finger on what about it was less than perfection but I must admit that something about the project left me a little cold. Like a wonderful work of art that you can admire but not get totally excited by. I still really enjoyed it though.
Final Crisis was of course drek and only gets worse the more I remember of it (which is not much - for a Grant Morrison book it was very light on ideas. Darkseid died, New Gods started infecting people, Barry Allen came back, Superman sang a song... did anything else happen?). A shame because it had started with some promise.
JLA was my first exposure to Grant Morrison. I'm surprised you think of this as an example of good Morrison characterisation Lard Lad because I can't think of any from it. I really didn't like this run. It was all flash and no substance IMO. There were some cool ideas and not every issue was bad but I found it all so very unengaging and overrated. I still think World War III is one of the worst JLA stories I've ever read and Crisis Times Five wasn't much better. Rock of Ages and that Conner Hawke/Key story were pretty good though so I'll give him that.
^ Having said all that, I did buy every issue and I'm tempted to reread them now that I'm more of a Morrison fan than I was then to see if my opinion on these issues hasn't changed somewhat.
I'd actually put Morrison and Johns on a par as far as my enjoyment of their stories goes. Morrison impresses me more and I can usually tell I'm reading higher quality writing when I'm reading one of his books. But Johns tends to use the parts of the DCU that appeal to me more and has a uniformity to his stories that (though a bit samey sometimes) often provide the perfect 15 minutes of enjoyment I'm looking for when I want to just kick back with a good comic book and forget about the world for a while.
From: Australia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Officer Taylor: Batman? Johns never wrote Batman, did he?!?
He wrote at least one Batman arc where Deadshot went after David Cain. I thought there was more, but maybe not.
From: Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you don't think Morrison can do character work, you need to sit down and read We3, Vinamarama and Seaguy back to back and have your mind seriously changed.
"We3" in particular is a masterpiece and it all rests on giving these barely communicative animals such strong personalities that you get totally involved with the story.
From: Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rouge: If you don't think Morrison can do character work, you need to sit down and read We3, Vinamarama and Seaguy back to back and have your mind seriously changed.
"We3" in particular is a masterpiece and it all rests on giving these barely communicative animals such strong personalities that you get totally involved with the story.
Though I haven't read We3, I didn't mean to imply that character work was non-existent in Morrison's work. I feel, for example, that what I've read of his Animal Man was pretty strong in that regard. It's just in my opinion it's a pretty common complaint I have about his stuff. Obviously, I haven't read every single thing he's written, and there are some notable exceptions in what I have read.
Again, my other general complaint is that I have no idea what's going on in certain parts of his stories, and it usually seems rooted in his storytelling methods, as opposed to being a set-up for a mystery resolution at some point. Final Crisis was rife with this problem, and Batman R.I.P. had some of those issues as well (though I enjoyed the latter overall). I found Seven Soldiers: Zatanna confusing as well.
It's not that I'm not up for a challenging read. It's that I can rarely crack whatever code it is he uses to tell his story. It reads as if he understands what he's trying to do, but he may not realize some or most people don't. There's almost always that aspect to his scripts.
Just for the sake of comparison, I'll give you Alan Moore's run on Promethea. That was an extremely challenging book on very many levels that threw tons of huge concepts at the reader continually. But challenging as it was, I was able to follow what Moore was trying to do despite its complexity. And that's a tribute to how Alan can present concepts that are big, challenging and entertaining reads without losing me on the way. (It also has some great characterization!) If you haven't checked it out, try Promethea some time and imagine how Grant might have written it.
Other works like All-Star Superman and Batman & Robin are pretty clear and cohesive but lack an extra punch somewhere. Could be a lack of characterization, could be an ordinariness. Hard to say. But generally, I rarely put a Grant comic down completely satisfied.
Some examples of complete satisfaction being achieved were his first two or three Doom Patrol arcs and his spotlight issue on Crazy Jane from same. Certain issues of All-Star were absolutlely perfect, too.
quote:Originally posted by Blacula: JLA was my first exposure to Grant Morrison. I'm surprised you think of this as an example of good Morrison characterisation Lard Lad because I can't think of any from it. I really didn't like this run. It was all flash and no substance IMO. There were some cool ideas and not every issue was bad but I found it all so very unengaging and overrated. I still think World War III is one of the worst JLA stories I've ever read and Crisis Times Five wasn't much better. Rock of Ages and that Conner Hawke/Key story were pretty good though so I'll give him that.
JLA I'm overall satisfied with because his Big Ideas and storytelling style were understandable and rarely lost me. His characterizations could have definitely been better, but I feel he did his job enough conveying their personalities and attitudes when considering it was a team book consisting almost entirely of characters who had their own books. And for better or worse, his take on Batman there was pretty damn iconic!
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Morrison's JLA work is peppered with characterization, but it was a book about big scale comic book action. He did very well with big idea like Wonder World and One Million, and yet, he had his small moments - WW in the war of Angels story, GL, Steel and Huntress in the aforementioned One Million and World War III stories.
A lot of his work works best when you read the complete story. He does a fine job of breaking Batman and Robin into arcs, but Final Crisis is a more epic story, grander on the large and small scales.
Where Grant brings the innovation to comics, Geoff Johns brings the heart. He's very much invested in the nostalgia of it all. While he does drive forward- creating a new JSA and the multi-colouored Lanterns, he's not breaking new ground, merely expanding on it. But when he does that, he does it well.
From: Denver, CO | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's interesting that we joke about Johns or Bendis writing all the books for their respective publishers. They do high profile work, and they are often heavily involved in the big events. But look at their output, are they doing any more work than any other writer?
Johns himself has said he can do 4 books a month- GL, Flash, Brightest Day, and the occasional mini. Matt Fraction over at Marvel will be writing Uncanny X-men, Thor, and Invincable Iron Man. They deliver similar quality work; why aren't we all talking about Fraction's contribution to Marvel's direction?
Bendis is writing 2 Avengers titles and Ultimate Spiderman, along with the Ultimate mini du jour. Gail Simone has a new welcome to Tranquility book coming out, she writes S6, and Johns asked her to revive Birds of Prey. Mayhap we will be talking about her renovating the DCU in 5 years.
From: Denver, CO | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CJ Taylor: It's interesting that we joke about Johns or Bendis writing all the books for their respective publishers. They do high profile work, and they are often heavily involved in the big events. But look at their output, are they doing any more work than any other writer?
I'd say it's not just so much their output, Ceej, it's about how their respective company's events and dominant creative directions largely take their cues from stuff set up in and branching out from their books. It's really hard to argue against Bendis being the mastermind at Marvel the last couple of years thru Secret Invasion, Dark Reign and Siege. Geoff is a slightly more recent equivalent with how he set up New Krypton and Blackest Night.
Does that make more sense?
-------------------- "Suck it, depressos!"--M. Lash
From: The Underbelly of Society | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes I wonder if perhaps fandom gives Bendis too much credit in guiding Marvel.
Based on his workload of the last few years, it's obvious things he wants to do are more likely to get green lit by Joe Q.
Based on the sales of his titles of the last few years, it's obvious other writers and artists will want to do things spinning out of his stories: obviously a writer looking for work would up his chances of approval if he wants to do a Luke Cage story or Dr. Voodoo story since they spin right out of New Avengers.
But he has no real position at Marvel that lets him guide the company. The real guiding force at Marvel is Joe Q; Bendis just his ear and is able to rally the other writers. But note Bendis has absolutely zero involvement with Spider-Man, the Hulk or the X-Men. Bendis also has limited interaction with Thor, Cap and Iron Man--he only has ever interacted with them through the Avengers.
What happens is Bendis creates an awesome story for his own Avengers comics; Joe Q sees it as a money-making scheme; other writers are trying to get projects green-lit and so say: "how about I take Bendis latest story and do the Fantastic Four / Iron Man / X-Men / whatever side of it in a miniseries".
In other words, the whole point of this post, is that Bendis has "implied power" at Marvel (even to him). He does not have "actual power". I suspect, based on interviews, he's come up with other ideas and the other writers have shot him down. We just never hear about it.
Bendis, like Johns, also has a huge message board with hundreds (thousands?) of followers who kind of see him as the Supreme Hydra of their community.
But not that long ago, Millar had that same power at Marvel and suddenly it seems as if he doesn't anymore. An FF run that wasn't a huge sales hit, Ultimate Comics that no longer sell or recieve any acclaim at all (from critics or fans), and he's focusing on independent stuff. He's making more money, sure, but not at Marvel...and so he's quickly gone from a guiding light at the Companay to a writer who I suspect would have to try to find a place to fit in when he's next ready to.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bendis destroyed the Avengers, which did have an effect on the Spider Man books (huge effects), Cap and several others. Like Geoff at DC, Bendis has pretty much had the point man position for the Marvel universe since Avengers Disassembled.
That is not necessarily a bad thing for some fans, and is a bad thing for others. By that I mean Geoff and Bendis are the ones seemingly leading the charge, and get the most shots lobbed at them.
It really looks like the real issue here is Didio and Joey Q. These two have been pulling strings for a while now...Didio has been returning DC to a semblance of the Silver Age, while Joey Q has made changes everywhere.
I do not agree with either on all of their decisions and ideas...they have both had some very good things happen under their watch, but have a lot more patience for DC and Didio returning to the classics (for me at least) than what JQ did to Spider-Man, the mess that is the X-Men, and the lack of real diversity that Marvel shows in their overall publishing. DC has a full fledged kids line, Vertigo, Wildstorm, plus other areas they publish. Marvels seems anemic by comparison.
From: Turn around... | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
Well I consider Vertigo an entirely seperate comic book company that has the same ownership as DC Comics. Didio and Co. aren't allowed to touch it and that's how it should be; ipso facto, "DC" can't claim any of the credit Vertigo gets for all its great series.
Saying they are the same company is akin to saying Coca Cola and GEICO are the same company because of shared ownership. So long as they operate independently, I like to treat them as such.
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
I hated Avengers Dissessembled. But did it destroy the Avengers? No, not really.
The Avengers were already broken. Austen was horrific. Geoff was only 'meh' (granted, the Bill Jemas write for the trade era was in full effect) and even Busiek lingered for years. The series hadn't been relevant or great in a long time. And the Avengers is my favorite Marvel franchise besides Spider-Man.
While I did not like the New Avengers at first, cringing at the inclusion of Wolverine and Spider-Man, annoyed at Bendis using his favorites Spider-Woman and Luke Cage, it grew on me.
And here's the result:
- the Avengers franchise is now the top seller in comic books
- People actually care and are interested again and its spilled into Iron Man, Thor and others.
- Cap, Iron Man, Thor, Hawkeye and the rest are basically all back. It took awhile but its happened. The only Avengers who took a huge hit in Dissembled were Jack of Hearts & Ant-Man (neither really Avengers), and Scarlet Witch (who obviously will have several more stories to come) and the Vision (who is in Young Avengers). Only the last (the Vision) still bothers me.
If you want to call it anything, Marvel pulled a huge "bait & switch" on fandom in general that took several years. The idea that they destroyed the Avengers created some interest in the series but all they really destroyed was Avengers Mansion. Now the sales & interest is there and they are bringing the traditional Avengers back to the fold gradually (begun some time ago and now really kicking off).
In the process, they've created a renewed sense of interest in Hawkeye and some others; they've got people interested in Luke Cage and Spider-Woman for the first time ever (like me); and they've got FOUR or FIVE Avengers titles ongoing!
Spider-Man in the Avengers is something I've never wanted. I wouldn't mind if it ended now. But you know what? Bendis writes him so damn good in the Avengers its hard to complain.
Wolverine in the Avengers isn't what I want or any of us want. But guess what--he's here to stay. Here's a flagship character at Marvel for 30 years now and as much a part of their top-line as Cap, Spidey or anyone. JSA fans might have hated Superman and Batman joining the JLA in the 60's on a more permanent basis but it was and remains something that will continue hereafter permanently. None of us have to like it. Some of us can refuse to accept it. But all I can say is: shrug it off, it's okay. He barely ever does anything anyway except appear on covers.
I think Bendis & Marvel have either by design or accident created a brilliant plan in making the Avengers the most important team franchise in comic books. And it's worked! And the quality is actually there! It's not only a sales success, the stories and art are pretty fantastic!
From: If you don't want my peaches, honey... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unless Geico starts selling it's own cola, you're argument drops short of the goal line. They all have the DC comics bullet on them, Geico doesn't have the Coke logo...not the same product at all. DCU and Vertigo are sold to the same customer...comic fans.
Didio may not have control of Vertigo, but that wasn't my point when I was talking about "overall" publishing. The overall point was I think DC puts out a loot more good things than Marvel. My opinion.
From: Turn around... | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
Hyperpath: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic | Subscribe To Topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
