Who's the better writer.....

[CAGE]

Bendis or Millar.

[GNR]

I'm not going to say if one is better or not.

I will say that Bendis ruled on Daredevil and his NA one-shots while Mark ruled on Ultimates,Ultimates F4,and Wolverine.CW has been good so far but still early.

[KingOfDreams]

Millar...for his Wolverine and Ultimate FF runs.

[Lone Wolf]

Out of the two, Millar. You can depend on him to write a decent story, rather then Bendis who at times uses weak dialouge or big surprise storytelling. Currently, Millar is doing a fantastic job with Civil War, I just hope he can keep that up. Don't get me wrong, I like Bendis' work to a certain stand point. His Daredevil was one of the best I've read, even with Brubaker now helming the book. But as far as your question goes, Millar is my choice.

[Cyclops]

It depends, really. Bendis and Millar are such drastically different writers it's hard to compare.

Millar is essentially an action-movie writer. Big explosions, hard-ass heroes, hard-ass dialogue, massive and brutal fights, this is what he does best. However, his politics far too often leech into his writing. As had come up in one of my discussions with Dread, the Ultimate X-Men were initially going to be a presidential task force until Dubya was elected. Then he scrapped his plans and went ahead with what he did anyway. Coincidence? Probably not. Ultimates 2 is overtly political, perhaps even too much. This can be overbearing for most readers. His other weakness is to have anti-climactic endings from time to time, particularly his "Anti-Hush" storyline in MK Spider-Man. Highly anti-climactic. And last but not least, Millar seems unable to write characters who aren't sarcastic *******s.

Bendis is a TERRIBLE superhero writer. Give him something very superheroic to write and he cannot do it, no matter what his ego and sales charts tell him. However, if you take away the superheroics and give him a more crime-noir/street level superhero story to tell, a la Alias, most of Ultimate Spider-Man or Daredevil, he really shines. His dialogue ranges from really solid (Daredevil) to irksome (Ultimate Spider-Man, the butt of many Bendalogue jokes). Put him in the right genre and he's great, but out of his element (Avengers, Ultimate X-Men, House of M) and he's absolutely awful.

All in all though... as far as track records go, I'd have to give it to Mark Millar. Volume One of Ultimates was fantastic, the best of the Ultimate stock thus far. Ultimate Fantastic Four under his pen has been superb as well. Basically, as long as he's in the Ultimate Universe, he's not half bad. In other areas, he's not quite as good.

[GNR]

I want Mark on more 616.

[gildea]

Bendis. USM, DD, Powers
Millar Ultimates, Chosen, Red Son

My three favourite works by the two.

I give it to bendis.

[herakles]

Bendis or Millar.
They BOTH SUCK!!!
Omening is my fav

[PWN3R]

I want Mark on more 616.

Heck yes, that would be so sweet.

[TheCorpulent1]

Overall, Bendis is definitely the better writer as far as I'm concerned. They both suck on mainstream superhero comics, though. A lot.

[GNR]

They BOTH SUCK!!!
Omening is my fav

Ares is great.

[TheCorpulent1]

So was Thor's last arc and Stormbreaker (until the last issue). :up:

[Whirlysplat]

Bendis did great work on Powers. Ultimates is genius. To early in eithers careers to say yet give it another ten or twenty years.

- Whirly

[deathshead2]

Millar without him kirkman would never be able to make marvel zombies.

[yahman]

I want Mark on more 616.

I want Mark in D.C. His methods of 'less talk more action and realism' would make the JLA fascinating ! :)

[yahman]

Bendis did great work on Powers. Ultimates is genius. To early in eithers careers to say yet give it another ten or twenty years.

- Whirly

Miller's authority and Wanted are also great ! I love what he's done with the FF4 aswell, and he got me reading and X title. :)

[Cyclops]

I want Mark in D.C. His methods of 'less talk more action and realism' would make the JLA fascinating ! :)

I don't think his style would fit the JLA very well. Or DC period. DC works best when they're not trying to be realistic and fully accept the superheroic aspects of their characters.

[herakles]

So was Thor's last arc and Stormbreaker (until the last issue). :up:
As I said bendis and millar SUCK
Omening RULES!!!

[Manic]

They both satisfy me in different ways. Bendis gives me the nice dialogue, and has a knack for making his characters sound like real people-- even to the point of stammering every once in a while. Millar gives me the hot-shot action, and his characters kick my ass through the pages.

If you could combine the two into one writer, I'd marry him in Canada.

[yahman]

I don't think his style would fit the JLA very well. Or DC period. DC works best when they're not trying to be realistic and fully accept the superheroic aspects of their characters.

It still thinks you can still have fantastical realism (Although thats a bit of an oxymoron). It works wonders for Supreme power, The Authority and Ultimate FF4. Something similar to the genre of 2001 space odyssey

[yahman]

They both satisfy me in different ways. Bendis gives me the nice dialogue, and has a knack for making his characters sound like real people-- even to the point of stammering every once in a while. Millar gives me the hot-shot action, and his characters kick my ass through the pages.

If you could combine the two into one writer, I'd marry him in Canada.

He's Britsih and his names Alan Moore !

[Cyclops]

Right, but the DC Universe is a different entity than that though. I just feel DC works best if their characters are superhero archetypes instead of believable characters in believable situations.

[yahman]

Right, but the DC Universe is a different entity than that though. I just feel DC works best if their characters are superhero archetypes instead of believable characters in believable situations.

I don't know, I loved Metzelders more realistic approach, which is why Im looking forward to his fourthcoming run. :)

[Spider-Man™]

As much as i like Bendis and his run for UMS, Millar just blew me away with CW. So i say Millar.

[yahman]

As much as i like Bendis and his run for UMS, Millar just blew me away with CW. So i say Millar.

Your basing youre oppinion on a single comic ? :)

[The Question]

Right, but the DC Universe is a different entity than that though. I just feel DC works best if their characters are superhero archetypes instead of believable characters in believable situations.


I don't. Solely making them character archtypes is boring. Like I've always said, Superman fighting Bizarro is fun, but I've alays been much more interested in what Clark Kent does when he's not wearing the costume. I like it when they aknowlege the fact that SUperman is a person with dreams and shortcomings. That's not how the public of the DCU sees him, but at the end of the day, he's still a guy who grew up in Kansas and moved to the big city to become a writer. Millar, I think, would work wonders on Superman. He's very good at mixing the big action with "how exactly does this character tick" moments.

[gildea]

I don't think his style would fit the JLA very well. Or DC period. DC works best when they're not trying to be realistic and fully accept the superheroic aspects of their characters.


His superman red son was marvellous.

And his superman adventures where great also.

[DBM]

Millar or Bendis?

That's like asking which is better, being stabbed in the left eye or the right eye.

But if I had to choose I guess I'd go with Millar.

[Anubis]

It depends on what they're writing. Both are good, and have written stuff that I love. Best thing I've read from Miller was maybe Superman: Red Son. Wanted was good. The Wolverine run was okay. His current UFF run has been great. And I enjoyed his run on Authority more than Ellis'. Bendis on the other hand has written a ton of great stuff. Powers, Torso, Alias, Daredevil. I wont decied. Both are at least in my top ten so they share the stage with the likes of Gaimen, Moore, and Buesik.

[GNR]

Right, but the DC Universe is a different entity than that though. I just feel DC works best if their characters are superhero archetypes instead of believable characters in believable situations.

I agree 100%.

[Anubis]

That's bulls**t.

[Lackey]

Bendis easily

[TheFalcon]

I can't say which one is the best writer, but my favorite is definitly Millar. I've only read Bendis' Ultimate work, but Millars Ultimate work as well as stuff like Superman: Red Son has been better IMO.

[nite-owl]

Bendis.

[The Question]

That's bulls**t.


Basically. Having the characters simply be character archtypes makes them boring and aloof. I like Superman because he is Clark Kent. Because he has friends and an actual life, and isn't just Superman who pretends to be a person every once and a while for ****s and giggles.