Superheroes and cynical Fans

[The Question]

More like less. Because he is not very proud of them and thinks they are poor. Fact is, Watchmen was a rip off of a book called Superfolks written in 1977.

Did he actually say that he wasn't proud of Watchmen, or did he say that he thought super hero comics are silly? Because it is entirely possible to thing a genre is silly but still be proud of one of your works in it (especially if it was a deconstruction of said genre).

Also, while I fully admit that I haven't read Superfolks, what I've read about it makes it seem like it doesn't have much in common with Watchmen besides looking at superheroes from a more dramatic and literary perspective. Plot wise, they seem pretty different.

 

[Keyser Soze]

As genius a writer as he may be, I wouldn't take too much stock in his opinions. The impression I've got is that he has a great distaste for the superhero tales that made his name, and is always eager to burn his bridges with that genre and prove himself as a "real" writer. As he gets more and more wrapped up in his own literary importance, lesser mediums such as film and comics seem to become beneath him.

I've read reports before that he intended "Watchmen" to be the death knell of the superhero genre. So it wouldn't surprise me to discover he disliked the fact that it kiickstarted a whole new trend within superhero comics.

 

[RONDC20]

Keyser Soze Your not the first person to recommend All-Star Superman. I do plan on picking it up.

Alan Moore is a *****ebag. A self important prick. He may be a great writer, but he's a lousy human being.

 

[The Question]

Keyser Soze Your not the first person to recommend All-Star Superman. I do plan on picking it up.

Alan Moore is a *****ebag. A self important prick. He may be a great writer, but he's a lousy human being.

He may have a tendency to get huffy when adaptations of his work are concerned, but calling someone a lousy human being based, I would think, only on small news reports of him getting pissed about adaptations of his writing (most of which, by the way, HAVE sucked) is both extreme and, well, fairly silly.

 

[Keyser Soze]

He may have a tendency to get huffy when adaptations of his work are concerned, but calling someone a lousy human being based, I would think, only on small news reports of him getting pissed about adaptations of his writing (most of which, by the way, HAVE sucked) is both extreme and, well, fairly silly.

Alan Moore's favourite TV show is "The Wire". So he can't be all bad.

 

[RONDC20]

I don't know I've heard a lot of things about Moore. I've seen interviews with him and everything. The man is not nice.

 

[Blader5489]

I don't know I've heard a lot of things about Moore. I've seen interviews with him and everything. The man is not nice.

Actually, the man is very nice. He's just also insane.

 

[The Question]

I don't know I've heard a lot of things about Moore. I've seen interviews with him and everything. The man is not nice.

He seemed pretty personable in the interviews I saw. He seems to like to act all dark and spooky and mysterious in some of them, but that just has to do with his image as The Great Bearded Wizard of Northampton.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I don't know I've heard a lot of things about Moore. I've seen interviews with him and everything. The man is not nice.

If you do, even before you get the trade of 1-6, I'd go down to your local comic book shop and see if they have #10 in stock. It's a beautiful, heartwarming story. Superman is dying (not a spoiler, it's the dynamic for the series they set up in the first issue), and in issue 10, Superman has to decide what he's going to do with his last full day of life. And so he sets out to do as many good deeds, big and small, as he can, knowing that no matter how much he does, it'll never be as much as he would like to do. I think it could be the single best Superman story I've ever read.

 

[RONDC20]

Oh that sounds awsome! Keyser. Thats exactally the kind of Superhero story I need to read right now.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I don't mean to sound like I'm pimping All-Star Superman, but #11 has a quote that just gave me goosebumps, I think it perfectly sums up Superman and what I think he should be:

"What a life! I've traveled across time and space. I've seen and done things beyond imagination. Blessed with friends like Pete and Lana and Jimmy. And Batman... what incredible adventures we've shared. What amazing people I've known. But Lois, dear Lois... I loved you most of all. And no matter how dark it seems, there's always a way."

 

[RONDC20]

Keyser that just sounds so great! I need to read this. This is a Superhero folks. It is sad that this seem revolutionary.

 

[The Question]

I really don't think it's that big a deal. I mean, All Star Superman is a great book. Fantastic. Don't get me wrong. But I don't really think it's such a big issue that there are some cynical people reading comics and some cynical characters in comics. I mean, I think it's a great thing. Someone once said that science fiction, really, is about writing the world as it is, but just one stepped removed from the actual reality and into a sort of fantasy, so the reader can, on the surface, just see this fun fantasy and enjoy it for that, but if they want to, dig deeper and actually start thinking, but in a way that's a bit easier to swallow than reading a newspaper or getting lectured at. Fiction, I think, shouldn't be about escapism. Fiction, good fiction, anyway, should always make you think. Even if it's just making you think about all the good things in the world that you should be happy for. And that, I do not consider escapism.

So, comics, even super hero comics, shouldn't shy away from the dark and the nasty. It shouldn't obsess on it either, and while I think BOTH of the big companies go through phases where they do, as a whole it looks like a pretty even field to me. You've got your Spider-Mans filled with their "somehow" lighthearted angst, you've got your Superman about believing men can fly, and you've got your Punisher about obsession and self destruction and your Spectre about moral and spiritual conflict and struggle and desperately trying to atone for one's sins.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I really don't think it's that big a deal. I mean, All Star Superman is a great book. Fantastic. Don't get me wrong. But I don't really think it's such a big issue that there are some cynical people reading comics and some cynical characters in comics. I mean, I think it's a great thing. Someone once said that science fiction, really, is about writing the world as it is, but just one stepped removed from the actual reality and into a sort of fantasy, so the reader can, on the surface, just see this fun fantasy and enjoy it for that, but if they want to, dig deeper and actually start thinking, but in a way that's a bit easier to swallow than reading a newspaper or getting lectured at. Fiction, I think, shouldn't be about escapism. Fiction, good fiction, anyway, should always make you think. Even if it's just making you think about all the good things in the world that you should be happy for. And that, I do not consider escapism.

So, comics, even super hero comics, shouldn't shy away from the dark and the nasty. It shouldn't obsess on it either, and while I think BOTH of the big companies go through phases where they do, as a whole it looks like a pretty even field to me. You've got your Spider-Mans filled with their "somehow" lighthearted angst, you've got your Superman about believing men can fly, and you've got your Punisher about obsession and self destruction and your Spectre about moral and spiritual conflict and struggle and desperately trying to atone for one's sins.

Oh, I agree that variety is the spice of life, and not all comics have to be like All-Star Superman. I was merely saying that All-Star Superman seems to perfectly fit what RONDC20 is looking for in a superhero comic.

 

[Aristotle]

But I don't really think it's such a big issue that there are some cynical people reading comics and some cynical characters in comics. I mean, I think it's a great thing. Someone once said that science fiction, really, is about writing the world as it is, but just one stepped removed from the actual reality and into a sort of fantasy, so the reader can, on the surface, just see this fun fantasy and enjoy it for that, but if they want to, dig deeper and actually start thinking, but in a way that's a bit easier to swallow than reading a newspaper or getting lectured at. Fiction, I think, shouldn't be about escapism. Fiction, good fiction, anyway, should always make you think. Even if it's just making you think about all the good things in the world that you should be happy for. And that, I do not consider escapism.

So, comics, even super hero comics, shouldn't shy away from the dark and the nasty. It shouldn't obsess on it either, and while I think BOTH of the big companies go through phases where they do, as a whole it looks like a pretty even field to me. You've got your Spider-Mans filled with their "somehow" lighthearted angst, you've got your Superman about believing men can fly, and you've got your Punisher about obsession and self destruction and your Spectre about moral and spiritual conflict and struggle and desperately trying to atone for one's sins.

You've got a lot of very salient points here, Q, but you're missing a couple things. First, it's not just "some" cynicism and darkness and gray morality. It's close to 100% now, and not just in comics. This is what our pop-culture mythology is now. And don't get me wrong, I fully believe that it's reflective of societal reality. But we live in a self-aware age of storytelling, an age that has never before existed. The postmodern age now allows us to take control of our mythologies, an opportunity that literally no other era of history has had. We can be conscious of what our stories are telling us, and how we can change them, how we can make our mythologies work for us.

But we refuse to do so! We refuse to take our stories and make them inspiring, despite the uninspiring and painfully horrific world we live in.

Any fool can look outside his window and write about what he sees. Hell, there's about 50 "reality shows" on TV these days doing just that. It takes a special kind of person to write about what he dreams we could be.

 

[Anubis]

Keyser Soze Your not the first person to recommend All-Star Superman. I do plan on picking it up.

Alan Moore is a *****ebag. A self important prick. He may be a great writer, but he's a lousy human being.

Amazing how you can say that on the Internet and not to Mr. Moore's face.

 

[RONDC20]

I agree with Aristotle here. Wholeheartedly. He is absolutely right.
At the same time I am not against some drama. This is why I love batman so much.

Some people have expressed their desire to see a
darker and edgier Batman. They want to see R rated Batman films and
what not. I honestly do not understand why they want to see this.

Look if you want a hero that gleefully kills with a big grin on his
face read The Punisher or Wolverine or Frank Miller's horrible take
on Batman, but the traditional Batman that I know and love is not a
killer.

Batman is not an anti-hero he is a dark hero.
I tend to prefer the amiable, good natured and selfless nature of a
hero with a strong Moral code of conduct, but thats just me.

I love Batman and I'll tell you why. Some want to see a much darker and
Frank Miller inspired Batman, who kills and has a much looser moral code
of conduct.

I disagree. I'm an idealist. I tend to look up to
Superheroes who have a strong moral code of conduct, selfless and
Heroic.

Batman has always walked a thin line between between Hero and Anti-
Hero, but that's what I love about him. As dark and brooding as he is
he never lost that idealism and heroic nature about him.

If there ever was an R Rated Batman film I don't think I would like it
too much. He would simply become this ultra violent Anti-hero and I
don't want that. I don't want Frank Miller's Batman.

Yea thats right I HATE!!! Frank Miller's take on Batman. Too dark and
violent. I think Frank Miller is way overrated. To me Batman is the
best of both worlds. He is a Dark Hero not an anti-hero.

Has anyone actually read the abomination that is All Star Batman?
If he goes too far in one direction then hes no good. He can never
get too idealistic or boy scoutish cause he would loose his dark and
interesting identity, but if he goes too dark or brooding he becomes
an anti-hero and I don't want that either.

I think the best example of a nice balance of Batman's character is
Bruce Timm's Batman. I also love the way Jeph Loeb wtites him, he
keeps that balance as does Geoff Johns, Ed Benes, Paul Dini and
Dwayne Mc Duffie.

Batman's never given in to his demons, sure he walks a fine line
and often times nearly falls in, but he never actually does and I
like to think that it's the people around him that help him. Alfred,
James Gordon, Robin, Batgirl, Superman. All these people have had a
major influence on him.

So yea I do not want to see a Batman that is mean and
sadistic and kills with glee. Can you really call a Batman like that
a hero? Only if you kid yourself. A killing Batman, No I would not
like that. Not at all.

I'll never forget that scene in Batman Hush when he thought Joker
shot his friend Thomas Elliot. I mean this was drama folks and I
loved every single minute of it. He was ready to kill Joker. All
these past memories came back as he beat Joker to a Bloody pulp. How
Joker killed of Jason Todd, How Joker killed Gordon's wife, How
Joker shot Barbara and paralyzed her.

Batman was ready to murder the Joker, but then guess who stopped
him. Gordon. It was soo dramatic and I loved it . It's this drama
that makes Batman so great.

Gordon said to Bats: " You have to think about what you are doing.
Who and what made you who you are. Your role model. The beliefs they
instilled in you. And think of how the Joker could NEVER understand
that. It's what makes him who HE is. THINK. I may no longer carry a
badge, but I still believe in the policeman's oath To protect and
serve. All I can do is appeal to you through our friendship. I would
not let you do this when he shot my daughter...killed my wife. I
don't know how I could stop you, but I wont let you trow your life
away."

"You and I have seen more than our fair share of tragedies and
thirsted for revenge. If Batman wanted to be a killer, he could have
started long ago. But it's a line. On one side we believe in the
law. On the other....Sometimes the law fails us. Maybe thats why
I've understood you... allowed you to help protect this city. Batman
if you cross that line-- If you kill the Joker tonight--I will lead
the hunt to bring you to justice. In the eyes of the law. In my eyes
you'll be no different from him."

Batman says: "How many more lives are we going to let him ruin?"

Gordon responds: "I don't care I wont let him ruin yours"

Batman: It was from an alley like this one that a man with a gun
emerged from the darkness and murdered my mother and father. In that
single moment my childhood ended. I made a promise on the grave of
my parents that I would rid this city of the evil that took their
lives. Tonight... I nearly became a part of that evil."

This is heavy drama folks, but it was great. This is what makes
Batman so great, that fine line he walks. I never, NEVER want to see
him cross that line.

BTW I would like to thank everyone who responded to this topic
in a mature, rational and respectful manner. Andy C, Aristotle, Keyser,
baerrtt and Q? You have all posed some excellent points.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Some good points, RONDC20. Just one thing to add.

You talked about how you don't want to see an R-rated Batman. I too don't think an R-rated Batman is a good idea, or even necessary. Why? Look at "The Dark Knight". That film had more tension and even terror in it than a whole lot of R-rated films. Too often, gore and violence is used as a substitute for plain old good writing.

 

[The Question]

You've got a lot of very salient points here, Q, but you're missing a couple things. First, it's not just "some" cynicism and darkness and gray morality. It's close to 100% now, and not just in comics. This is what our pop-culture mythology is now. And don't get me wrong, I fully believe that it's reflective of societal reality. But we live in a self-aware age of storytelling, an age that has never before existed. The postmodern age now allows us to take control of our mythologies, an opportunity that literally no other era of history has had. We can be conscious of what our stories are telling us, and how we can change them, how we can make our mythologies work for us.

But we refuse to do so! We refuse to take our stories and make them inspiring, despite the uninspiring and painfully horrific world we live in.

Any fool can look outside his window and write about what he sees. Hell, there's about 50 "reality shows" on TV these days doing just that. It takes a special kind of person to write about what he dreams we could be.

I would like you to explain how it's close to 100%. Because, I honestly don't see it. Yes, there are plenty of dark and grim and cynical stories out there, in comics and books and movies and on TV. See 'em all the time. But I also see plenty of stories that make you think about what's good in the world and what we have to be happy about. Maybe they is more of a lean towards the grim. But from where I'm sitting, I don't see it being anywhere near close to 100%

Also, I would argue that a ark and grim story full of moral ambiguities, when well written, is just as inspiring as a well written story full of stalwart heroes and happy fun times. Because a well written story that's full of darkness, generally speaking of course, is saying to the reader "Hey. Stop and look at the world. This is what it is. Maybe you should think about the hows and whys of it for a few minutes." It teaches us about the horrors of the world so we can do something about it. Both types of story try to inspire the same kind of action through separate means.


Also, RONDC20:

From what I've read, Frank Miller's Batman still doesn't kill people. He's "darker and edgier" in that Miller emphasizes Bruce's anger and obsession. But he's got the same moral code as ever.

 

[trustyside-kick]

I'm not final in my answer, because I've never really asked myself why I enjoy the superhero genre...but here is what I came up with:

The "human heroes" aka the ordinary people who still put on the cape and cowl and fight for justice (Ex: Batman, Hawkman, Green Arrow, etc). They do things that you and I may love to do...if we could. They put the risk of dying each night well aware that they are human. They do what we sometimes wish we can do, but cannot. Why? Because we may lack the courage, the strength, the morality, etc etc.

The "metahuman heroes" aka the people with superpowers who can do feats easily that you or I would drop jaws at (Ex: Superman, Aquaman, The Flash, Green Lantern). With these characters, they often get into situations that you and I cannot experience. It puts a sort of fantasy into your head and you think "man, wouldn't it be cool if I could do that", and then of course you admire them because some can act like Gods, but choose not too.

As to the talk about cynical fans? I have friends like that. While it bothers me as well, I can still easily see why they feel that way. People sometimes love characters who do things you and I cannot or would not do. Characters like Dr. House are obnoxious, rude, etc etc...he says the things you and I wish we could say to people but we do not because it would be impolite and improper. He acts how we sometimes want to act, so it is sort of a way to let go of some stress/steam. If that makes sense.

 

[RONDC20]

Thanks Keyser I'm glad to see you agree with me. Q? obviously you have not read the abomination that is All Star Batman written by Miller. This is nothing like All Star Superman.

For anyone thinking about reading this series. I warn you with this. This is not the Batman we all know and love. It's just some cheap sadistic and mean knockoff that the over rated Frank Miller decided to write about. Nearly all complaints about the series are directed at Frank Miller's writing, specifically his non-traditional interpretation of the main character. In the series to date, Batman is consistently violent and cruel, excited by his own sadism towards criminals, musing over the injuries he has inflicted. His abuse extends even towards innocents: he verbally and physically abuses Dick Grayson in
an attempt to prevent him from grieving over his parent's deaths, even slapping the boy in the face.

Immediately following this, Batman appears to kill a group of corrupt police officers by landing the Batmobile on top of a
pursuing squad car. Later, at the Batcave, he withholds food from Grayson and suggests that the boy catch rats and eat them if he is
hungry. Miller's trademark gritty dialogue was thought to have gone over the top when the character introduced himself to Grayson
as "the Goddamn Batman" - the phrase has gone on become something of a meme among comic book fans for its perceived comedic value, and
according to reviewer Brett Weiss, "drew derision from fans and critics alike"

Reviewer Peter Sanderson, acknowledging that the series is "widely reviled", pondered whether Batman's treatment of Grayson is akin to
a drill sergeant toward a new recruit, but questioned whether this would merely traumatize Grayson further.

Reviewer Brett Weiss, in the Comics Buyers Guide #1636 (December 2007), gave the first issue of the series high marks for being
interesting and edgy, but opined that by issue #6, the series became "a bad joke", citing the series "absurdly bad, faux-noir
dialogue", and presenting Batman "as a psychopath, as opposed to merely dark and disturbed." Weiss praised Jim Lee's art
as "gorgeous", but opined that it was wasted on the title, which he saw as "something that seems to be bad on purpose".

Comics journalist Cliff Biggers, in Comic Shop News #1064 (November 7, 2007), called the series "one of the biggest train wrecks in
comics history", expressing amazement at how he feels Frank Miller disregarded every aspect of Batman's character in order to tell "A
Sin City story in bat-garb." Reviewing issue #7, Biggers excoriated the sequence with Batman and Black Canary as "farcical"
and "Tarantinoesque", arguing that Miller's work could not get worse. Biggers gave the issue a "D", explaining that it would have
been an "F" if not for Jim Lee's art, and suggested that one way to salvage the work would be for DC to reprint the book with blank word
balloons, and let readers submit their own scripts.

Nuff said.

Good Points Trustyside-kick

 

[The Question]

When someone says "Frank Miller's Batman," I tend to think of Year One and The Dark Knight Returns. All Star batman, I regard as Miller not being at all serious because he knows he's Frank Miller and he can get away with it and he's having fun. Ain't a damn thing wrong with that, although that doesn't mean I want to pay money to read it.

 

[Andy C.]

The only Miller Batman story I can still actually stand to read is Year One. The rest of his work reads as little more than adolescent sadism and Superman-bashing for its own sake. Plus, I've always thought his artwork looked like crap.

 

[Whirlysplat]

Did he actually say that he wasn't proud of Watchmen, or did he say that he thought super hero comics are silly? Because it is entirely possible to thing a genre is silly but still be proud of one of your works in it (especially if it was a deconstruction of said genre).

Also, while I fully admit that I haven't read Superfolks, what I've read about it makes it seem like it doesn't have much in common with Watchmen besides looking at superheroes from a more dramatic and literary perspective. Plot wise, they seem pretty different.

Superfolks introduces the feet of clay and fetishism ideas of Watchmen.
Moore describes superhero comics as tights and fights he thinks they are only liked by bullies. He mocks himself and all he wrote at them time. V for Vendetta was the one he was most critical of. The whole totalitarian idea in the U.K. he mocked because it would still be carried out by our incompetant beurocrats. If actually had the pleasure of meeting and hearing Alan speak a few times over the years.

 

[The Question]

Superfolks introduces the feet of clay and fetishism ideas of Watchmen.

Which are pretty common ideas used in characterization in a lot of fiction. And they weren't even what Watchmen was about. The main themes of Watchmen were morals, responsibility, and power.

Moore describes superhero comics as tights and fights he thinks they are only liked by bullies. He mocks himself and all he wrote at them time. V for Vendetta was the one he was most critical of. The whole totalitarian idea in the U.K. he mocked because it would still be carried out by our incompetant beurocrats. If actually had the pleasure of meeting and hearing Alan speak a few times over the years.

I have never heard Moore speak critically of V for Vendetta. What exactly did he say he didn't like about it?