If it's crap... We'll tell you
Frank Miller: The George Lucas of comics?
While I may actually be one of those few arseholes who actually like a couple of the prequels (or at least in chunks, namely part 3), I think there can be some general comparisons made between Frank Miller and George Lucas:
- both started small, proving themselves in their fields with original work (Miller with Ronin, Lucas with THX-1138 and American Graffiti)
- changed things, forever, as Ledger-Joker would say, with their groundbreaking material (DK Returns and Star Wars), both following mythology and distinct cultural and pop-culture influences for their own blend of pop-art
- amassed a substantial "cult" of followers that led to inspiring many, many others in their respective fields (i.e. a good deal of Batman in the past 20 years; a whole fuckload of science fiction and fantasy in film)
- continued on with some quite respectable work as their careers went on (i.e. Indiana Jones, Batman: Year One, Daredevil, uh, Indiana Jones 2 and 3 maybe, Sin City)
.... - both, in the past several years, have let their huge ass egos go to their heads - the prequels at their worst, ESPECIALLY Star Wars: The Clone Wars from last year; Dark Knight Strikes Again and The Spirit.
... am I wrong on this? any other comparisons that can be made? (One could also say that perhaps Sin City the movie and Revenge of the Sith are their only saving graces in the past several years, but that those successes were mainly from other creative people like Rodriguez and Steven Spielberg's severely uncredited work on Sith)
- both started small, proving themselves in their fields with original work (Miller with Ronin, Lucas with THX-1138 and American Graffiti)
- changed things, forever, as Ledger-Joker would say, with their groundbreaking material (DK Returns and Star Wars), both following mythology and distinct cultural and pop-culture influences for their own blend of pop-art
- amassed a substantial "cult" of followers that led to inspiring many, many others in their respective fields (i.e. a good deal of Batman in the past 20 years; a whole fuckload of science fiction and fantasy in film)
- continued on with some quite respectable work as their careers went on (i.e. Indiana Jones, Batman: Year One, Daredevil, uh, Indiana Jones 2 and 3 maybe, Sin City)
.... - both, in the past several years, have let their huge ass egos go to their heads - the prequels at their worst, ESPECIALLY Star Wars: The Clone Wars from last year; Dark Knight Strikes Again and The Spirit.
... am I wrong on this? any other comparisons that can be made? (One could also say that perhaps Sin City the movie and Revenge of the Sith are their only saving graces in the past several years, but that those successes were mainly from other creative people like Rodriguez and Steven Spielberg's severely uncredited work on Sith)
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Derrick D on -
Well Lucas is just trying to make a ton of money. Miller... I have no idea what happened to him.
-
Permalink Reply by Iffy on -
Both helped sexualize important key characters from their respective mythos.
(Princess Leia's slave costume in Jedi; Catwoman starting off as a dominatrix in Year One)
-
Permalink Reply by Costa_K on -
Hmm...I've never thought of this comparison, but it's totally workable.
-
Permalink Reply by Andres U. on -
god i hate frank miller when he tries to revamp other series'. he should keep to sin city and noir stuff.
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. Detfink on -
I don't know if I would compare Miller to Lucas. Maybe someone like Orson Welles, a visionary who had a good run in a finite period and went bat shit crazy and turned out crap in his later years...
Maybe Frank is Unicron in Transformers 3? ;P
-
Permalink Reply by Doctor Lightning on -
See I don't agree with that. The problem with Welles was that he actually never lost his greatness, he just was too bull-headed with studio people to get anything done in his last years aside from acting gigs. Some of his last filmmaking work like F For Fake is amazing. Miller can get what he wants done since he still has some clout, but he's (at the moment anyway) lost his mind.
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. Detfink on
-
There's no mistaking Welles genius. Like Frank Miller, he was trying to reinvent art but he didn't Care if it made a buck. I was just commenting more or less on the fact he just disappeared after his insanity and drinking habit took over. A cruel fate for all true artists. His acting...yea. He ain't Lawrence Olivier. lol.
Lucas was ALWAYS looking to make a fast buck from the get go. My god, he graduated from USC a $50K college for trust fund babies. No one spent more time messing with gizmos and toys than George...and if that didn't convince you, think of the fuckin THX that forced us to upgrade sound systems in theatres all over America (and increased movie ticket prices).
Back to Frank Miller, I don't think he can get done what he wants. He's just like Moore, enjoying the royalties of his work decades after it was cutting edge. Its just gone mainstream.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Lown on -
Frank Miller has been losing his mind for the last ten years (or at least when the Dark Knight Strikes Again came out).
Follow Spill on Twitter!
Latest Activity
Welcome back to the countdown, as we are at the end of my top ten best movies of the decade.
Remember it was very hard to organize the list of the best films of the decade and still this is my opinion on the best film of the decade. So I thank yo…
Photos
Music
© 2009 Created by The Spill Crew
