SHH Exclusive Outdoor Posters: First Look at the Spirit

[rogue trooper]

What is even more surprising for me is that people here in this thread and in others seem to like all this crap.

That's a entangled mystery for me.

It is such an obvious misleading version that I venture people in fact do not really like Eisner's conceptions and are thanking gawd Miller just put his obsessions all over it.

This is from Will Eisner. Reminds me of Sin City. I have a feeling that if this picture had Frank Miller's signiture and not Eisner's, you would probably bash it, wouldn't you?(rhetorical)

 

[Gotham]

This is from Will Eisner. Reminds me of Sin City. I have a feeling that if this picture had Frank Miller's signiture and not Eisner's, you would still bash it, wouldn't you?(rhetorical)

Looking at that, it does resemble the work we're seeing done by Miller.

 

[Mercurius]

Looking at that, it does resemble the work we're seeing done by Miller.

Sorry, pals.

It resembles NOTHING what Miller is doing.

Looking at this image you get the very specific way Eisner had with light and shadow which IS NOT Sin City's way, for gawd's sake.

Moreover, Eisner's was definitely a marked, iconic 40's style.

And there is NOTHING remotely 40ish in this jumble of crappy pics. Everything is "updated" for the teens not to complain, thus making the spirit of THE SPIRIT go away.

You couldn't be of more service in showing HOW MUCH Miller departs from the virtues of the comic book with this image of Eisner's drawing. Thanks.

PS: one more thing, guys. Look how the angle is extreme.

In Eisner's comics, some scenes have this absolutely bizarre angle, to stress some part of the action or some narrative detail. I doubt VERY MUCH we'll get something of that sort in Miller's movie.

For one thing, the man just forgot to use the title letters as part of the scene in the poster, which was A MUST. Instead, he went automatic to his "Sin City" botch, splattering black and white in a shadowy face.

NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SPIRIT.

 

[Noir]

Looking at that, it does resemble the work we're seeing done by Miller.

Yes it does.

 

[Mercurius]

Yes it does.

Please, read the above more carefully. t:

 

[Noir]

I don't see how you can say as the only thing we've see are pictures of the cast in front of a green-screen

 

[Noir]

Rogue Trooper, I used that photo in my blog with its newest post. I've given you credit for finding it of course.

 

[Mercurius]

I don't see how you can say as the only thing we've see are pictures of the cast in front of a green-screen

Well, if you could say it resembles (without even pointing to what is resembling what), I think I could show it does not, by saying how these very unfortunate pics and style work depart from the original image in spirit AND form.

 

[Noir]

I think thats accurate to something Eisner would've drawn.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

The only real "major departure" I've seen so far, visually, is the suit color. That's not exactly a sin. Most superhero suits in blockbusters like this undergo transformations in order to avoid looking too goofy on screen, and The Spirit's live-action incarnation thus far is damn faithful to Eisner's world.

 

[rogue trooper]

Rogue Trooper, I used that photo in my blog with its newest post. I've given you credit for finding it of course.

Cool, thanks. I got it from this book here that I own:

 

[Jack Ups]

Mercurius please can you stop flaming on and on, we get it, you dont like anything at all that your seeing, but the rest of us are ( and i have been a spirit fan for 20+ yrs)
at the moment your like a broken record.

 

[Mercurius]

Mercurius please can you stop flaming on and on, we get it, you dont like anything at all that your seeing, but the rest of us are ( and i have been a spirit fan for 20+ yrs)
at the moment your like a broken record.

Hey, this is a free country!

My record isn't broken because I'm bringing new arguments to explain my point (which I don't think was exactly understood so far).

Anyway, in one thing you're almost right: many of you are happy with the pics, and some of you are Spirit fans. And that is a bit amazing for me.

When our good Noir, for instance, says that crappy image looks like something Eisner would do, oh boy, I really don't know where you get this kind of impression.

Rogue trooper posted another great iconic image of The Spirit, and this is another example of how utterly absurd is Miller's multi-flawed depiction. Ok, you find it quite like Eisner, ok, I got it.

 

[mego joe]

Hey, this is a free country!

My record isn't broken because I'm bringing new arguments to explain my point (which I don't think was exactly understood so far).

Anyway, in one thing you're almost right: many of you are happy with the pics, and some of you are Spirit fans. And that is a bit amazing for me.

When our good Noir, for instance, says that crappy image looks like something Eisner would do, oh boy, I really don't know where you get this kind of impression.

Rogue trooper posted another great iconic image of The Spirit, and this is another example of how utterly absurd is Miller's multi-flawed depiction. Ok, you find it quite like Eisner, ok, I got it.

Just remember, plenty of people think that Superman Returns was 'spot on' for characterization as well. And plenty think the opposite. We all can't be right. It's all about degrees, even when to us the Miller stuff just seems so wrong. There's always hope, but the Miller pics make me think it's just going in some wrong directions.

 

[Mercurius]

Just remember, plenty of people think that Superman Returns was 'spot on' for characterization as well. And plenty think the opposite. We all can't be right. It's all about degrees, even when to us the Miller stuff just seems so wrong. There's always hope, but the Miller pics make me think it's just going in some wrong directions.

I think it may be an interesting flick: nice actors, adventure, fantasy.

But that's about it. Eisner's just a name of "inspiration" in this case.

 

[Rezzo]

 

[slevinkelevra]

dope.

 

[MattBearPig]

Yowza!

 

[Gotham]

Wow! That's awesome.

 

[3 Dev Adam]

This is from Will Eisner. Reminds me of Sin City. I have a feeling that if this picture had Frank Miller's signiture and not Eisner's, you would probably bash it, wouldn't you?(rhetorical)

Erm... no.

This is a VERY famous Spirit image... but it wasn't drawn by Will Eisner. It was pencilled by Eisner collaborator Jack "Plastic Man" Cole circa 1944, and much (MUCH) later inked by Eisner and published.

 

[Noir]

Look closely, It has Eisner's sig right on it.

 

[Omega Wizard]

I PMed them to you too.

Also, if anyone else wants to take a look I said F'it and put them on my blog..
Link in the sig'.

Could you shoot me a PM too?

 

[3 Dev Adam]

Look closely, It has Eisner's sig right on it.

Of course it does. Just like all Uncle Scrooge comics are signed by Walt Disney, not Carl Barks. Those guys (Cole, Jules Pfeiffer, etc) worked for Eisner as GHOST PENCILLERS, but a trained eye can spot the styles.

And let it be clear that Eisner signed almost all Spirit art not because of ego, but because the publishers demanded it.

 

[rogue trooper]

Of course it does. Just like all Uncle Scrooge comics are signed by Walt Disney, not Carl Barks. Those guys (Cole, Jules Pfeiffer, etc) worked for Eisner as GHOST PENCILLERS, but a trained eye can spot the styles.

And let it be clear that Eisner signed almost all Spirit art not because of ego, but because the publishers demanded it.

...drawn by Eisner or not, it's very Eisner-like and very Spirit-like.

 

[3 Dev Adam]

...drawn by Eisner or not, it's very Eisner-like and very Spirit-like.

Yeah, as opposed to what Frankrap Miller is doing with the character.