![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thehefnerBut back to comic book stuff for the moment.
So I'm finally starting to read Grant Morrison's BATMAN run in trade form. I had only ever skimmed the issues in the store and read whatever was posted on![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
scans_daily, and was regularly left feeling either cold or frustrated. But it wasn't fair to judge until I'd actually sat down and read the bloody thing, right?
So from the library, I've picked up BATMAN AND SON and THE RESURRECTION OF RA'S AL GHUL* and read them quite thoroughly. Well, except for the goddamned Joker prose issue. That shit was more purple than Mr. J's wardrobe. It was like bad fanfic, and I never realized just how horribly out-of-character Harley Quinn was until the Henchgirl read Harl's dialogue aloud.
Here's a rule of thumb Henchgirl taught me in regards to reading Batman stories: if you can't hear a character's lines being spoken by their BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES voice-over counterparts, that means they're badly written.
But that's the thing about Grant Morrison. He doesn't at all seem interested in writing Batman stories. All he cares about are writing Grant Morrison stories.
Nothing wrong with that, really. After all, a lot of people love that. Morrison is one of the biggest rock stars in comics today (for reasons I honestly don't entirely fathom, tbh). Many people who love Grant Morrison's run say things about how they haven't been this excited for a Batman comic in years, that this is the first time the Joker's ever actually been scary**, all this stuff that indicates to me that these people never really liked Batman in the first place.
But they like Grant Morrison, who only ever writes Grant Morrison stories, and I can't fault anyone for that (much as my passive-aggressive tone would indicate that I really would like to try anyway). It's a personal preference.
But when it comes to superhero comics... well, by and large, my preference is not for the writer, but for the characters. When I read a Batman comic, it's for the characters first and foremost, not the writer. Morrison is a writer who uses characters to serve his own ideas, rather than letting the characters serve the story (in the way that Paul Dini does, on his best days). And it drives me bloody bonkers.
To make matters worse is his obsession with obscure Batman stories, particularly from the silly and cracktacular Silver Age. Now look, I know full well that if I were writing comics, I'd mine material directly from, say, some utterly forgotten issue of THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD by Bob Haney and Jim Aparo. My love of these stories fuels my writing of them, and I'm a great believer in employing the richness of continuity and past stories.
But you know who else is? Geoff Johns. He gets a lot of shit for this, but the real genius to his method is that he actually takes the time to catch new readers up to speed with who these characters are without bogging the story down. And it can be relatively subtle too. Take his reintroduction of Arisia, how he managed to bring her up just enough to make her revelation actually mean something to the newbie reader.
Morrison doesn't give a shit about that. He plucks out characters like I-Ching, the Sensei, and the entire Zurr En Arrh bullshit, and just throws them in there with no explanation nor reason for anyone to care if they aren't as well-versed in DC Comics circa 1955-1975. It gives off the impression of elitist arrogance, a smirking fuck-you to people who aren't hip enough to see all the clever, brilliant shit he's doing.
But then, maybe I'm just projecting those feelings after years of having Morrison fanatics telling me that I don't like Grant Morrison because I don't "get" Grant Morrison. No, I get Morrison all right. I just happen to have much less interest in stories about wacky ideas and wanky concepts over actual character.
That said, god damn me, I think I actually kinda like Damian. If I'm understanding my HP well enough without having read any, I dare say he's kind of like if Batman adopted Draco Malfoy. Oh god, I feel doubly dirty for admitting that. But yeah,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
nymphgalatea, I'm totally seeing it now.
I may post further thoughts once I've properly read THE BLACK GLOVE and BATMAN R.I.P. Or maybe I'll just fume with frustration in silence, venting only to my poor Henchgirl who must suffer this experience with me. Even if fandom and DC are turning to Morrison's Morrisonny vision at the expense of true Batman stories, at least I know I have a girlfriend fangirl with whom I can always commiserate. And that's priceless.
*Wow, so the editor in charge of coordinating this multi-title crossover was totally asleep, right? Because how else to explain the jarring changes in scene and lack of character depiction? Like, aaaaand suddenly Ra's--who has suddenly gone from being a bald monk to looking exactly like his classic self--is strangling Damian in the middle of an epic battle that somehow just started happening while no one was looking?
WTF is up with Alfred defending Damian in that RA'S AL GHUL story? Yes, Tim's attacks on Damian are unprovoked, but, um, didn't you forget that this is the same little psycho who tried to fucking murder Tim a few days earlier?!
**Do NOT get me fucking started. Morrison's Joker, and the love of so many fans for it, drives me up the frelling wall.
So I'm finally starting to read Grant Morrison's BATMAN run in trade form. I had only ever skimmed the issues in the store and read whatever was posted on
scans_daily, and was regularly left feeling either cold or frustrated. But it wasn't fair to judge until I'd actually sat down and read the bloody thing, right?So from the library, I've picked up BATMAN AND SON and THE RESURRECTION OF RA'S AL GHUL* and read them quite thoroughly. Well, except for the goddamned Joker prose issue. That shit was more purple than Mr. J's wardrobe. It was like bad fanfic, and I never realized just how horribly out-of-character Harley Quinn was until the Henchgirl read Harl's dialogue aloud.
Here's a rule of thumb Henchgirl taught me in regards to reading Batman stories: if you can't hear a character's lines being spoken by their BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES voice-over counterparts, that means they're badly written.
But that's the thing about Grant Morrison. He doesn't at all seem interested in writing Batman stories. All he cares about are writing Grant Morrison stories.
Nothing wrong with that, really. After all, a lot of people love that. Morrison is one of the biggest rock stars in comics today (for reasons I honestly don't entirely fathom, tbh). Many people who love Grant Morrison's run say things about how they haven't been this excited for a Batman comic in years, that this is the first time the Joker's ever actually been scary**, all this stuff that indicates to me that these people never really liked Batman in the first place.
But they like Grant Morrison, who only ever writes Grant Morrison stories, and I can't fault anyone for that (much as my passive-aggressive tone would indicate that I really would like to try anyway). It's a personal preference.
But when it comes to superhero comics... well, by and large, my preference is not for the writer, but for the characters. When I read a Batman comic, it's for the characters first and foremost, not the writer. Morrison is a writer who uses characters to serve his own ideas, rather than letting the characters serve the story (in the way that Paul Dini does, on his best days). And it drives me bloody bonkers.
To make matters worse is his obsession with obscure Batman stories, particularly from the silly and cracktacular Silver Age. Now look, I know full well that if I were writing comics, I'd mine material directly from, say, some utterly forgotten issue of THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD by Bob Haney and Jim Aparo. My love of these stories fuels my writing of them, and I'm a great believer in employing the richness of continuity and past stories.
But you know who else is? Geoff Johns. He gets a lot of shit for this, but the real genius to his method is that he actually takes the time to catch new readers up to speed with who these characters are without bogging the story down. And it can be relatively subtle too. Take his reintroduction of Arisia, how he managed to bring her up just enough to make her revelation actually mean something to the newbie reader.
Morrison doesn't give a shit about that. He plucks out characters like I-Ching, the Sensei, and the entire Zurr En Arrh bullshit, and just throws them in there with no explanation nor reason for anyone to care if they aren't as well-versed in DC Comics circa 1955-1975. It gives off the impression of elitist arrogance, a smirking fuck-you to people who aren't hip enough to see all the clever, brilliant shit he's doing.
But then, maybe I'm just projecting those feelings after years of having Morrison fanatics telling me that I don't like Grant Morrison because I don't "get" Grant Morrison. No, I get Morrison all right. I just happen to have much less interest in stories about wacky ideas and wanky concepts over actual character.
That said, god damn me, I think I actually kinda like Damian. If I'm understanding my HP well enough without having read any, I dare say he's kind of like if Batman adopted Draco Malfoy. Oh god, I feel doubly dirty for admitting that. But yeah,
nymphgalatea, I'm totally seeing it now. I may post further thoughts once I've properly read THE BLACK GLOVE and BATMAN R.I.P. Or maybe I'll just fume with frustration in silence, venting only to my poor Henchgirl who must suffer this experience with me. Even if fandom and DC are turning to Morrison's Morrisonny vision at the expense of true Batman stories, at least I know I have a girlfriend fangirl with whom I can always commiserate. And that's priceless.
*Wow, so the editor in charge of coordinating this multi-title crossover was totally asleep, right? Because how else to explain the jarring changes in scene and lack of character depiction? Like, aaaaand suddenly Ra's--who has suddenly gone from being a bald monk to looking exactly like his classic self--is strangling Damian in the middle of an epic battle that somehow just started happening while no one was looking?
WTF is up with Alfred defending Damian in that RA'S AL GHUL story? Yes, Tim's attacks on Damian are unprovoked, but, um, didn't you forget that this is the same little psycho who tried to fucking murder Tim a few days earlier?!
**Do NOT get me fucking started. Morrison's Joker, and the love of so many fans for it, drives me up the frelling wall.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 06:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 06:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 06:18 pm (UTC)Batman and Robin, on the other hand, I'm totally enjoying. It could be because it's basically an entirely new status quo and set of characters, so Morrison's free to do almost anything.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 09:14 pm (UTC)It helps that he had a true visionary artist like Williams. Morrison needs to work with visionary artists, not just adept illustrators. It's when he works with someone like Williams or Quitely that even I go, "Okay, wow, I get this." But Tony Daniel? Yeeech.
So it's for those reasons that I'm rather surprised I don't hate Tan's artwork for the new storyline. We'll see where it goes. Because yeah, I too am rather digging B&R, mainly because it's staying in its own playground and not spilling out onto the other titles, thank god. Morrison should be given his own line, how own continuity. Everyone would benefit from that. Everyone.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 07:07 pm (UTC)b) Paul Dini? Seriously? Oh, darling...
c) I like the new Joker, actually, as the old persona had grown old and useless,
d) The Ra's al Ghul shit I blame on DC, not Morrison,
e) Using characters everybody is familiar with to serve new ideas? MY GOD, THE MAN MUST BE STOPPED.
f) The Black Notebook (or whatever) collection helps you to grab more intricacies, but honestly I think that his run did "Bruce Wayne is seriously insane and now we get to prove it" better than anybody who's tried it before.
In conclusion, how are you doing?
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 08:53 pm (UTC)Old and useless? Jesus, how I wholeheartedly disagree. The old persona, when used by a writer who knows what the fuck he's doing, is fifteen kinds scarier than the SILENT HILL reject that Morrison's created. The Joker is so much scarier when he's the Devil incarnate: charming, seductive, actually funny, and capable of snapping at any second. To go back to Dini, I consider this to be far, far more disturbing than anything Morrison's Joker has done:
Using characters everybody is familiar with to serve new ideas? MY GOD, THE MAN MUST BE STOPPED.
Come now, man, don't stoop to glib snark.
My problem is that he uses ideas first, at the expense of those characters. One cannot override the other, but should serve one another.
And I am fine, thank you for asking. Although a bit more on the grumpy side.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 08:59 pm (UTC)Sorry about that.
We'd need to be in person (SADNESS AND REGRET GO HERE! DAMN IT! IT SUCKED TO MISS YOU! WHY DID LIFE HAVE TO BE SO STUPID WHEN YOU WERE NEAR HERE?!) to discuss this in depth, but yes, I loved Batman: The Animated Series, I just don't really care for his comic work as much. Different animals.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 09:09 pm (UTC)Aw, not even the Joker Christmas issue with the drive-thru?
And if we're going as far back as Morrison's JLA for good Joker appearances, what about Dixon's JOKER: DEVIL'S ADVOCATE? That is some of the best use of the Joker I'm talking about I've ever seen.
Bear in mind, you're talking to a guy who finds Brian Cox's Hannibal Lecter much scarier than Anthony Hopkins'.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 08:58 pm (UTC)The new Joker's just scary.
Which is the better take?
Morrison's Joker would work much better as the Scarecrow, that's the bottom line.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 09:00 pm (UTC)Wait, yes I can.
Morrison's JLA.
ZING!
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 07:30 pm (UTC)In all seriousness, replace 'Grant Morrison' with 'Alan Moore' and this is my entire argument for why I hate Alan Moore.
Yes I know I'm about to get killed for saying that.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 09:04 pm (UTC)No, I understand how you feel about Moore. But the difference is, I usually feel more of a soul behind Moore than I ever do with Morrison. With Morrison, it feels like, "Look at how clever I'm being!" without anything to back it up. Moore takes his "cleverness" and actually does something with it. Again, take WATCHMEN. Once you get past the first chapter, the "clever" set-up and everything, he takes it to deep, powerful, moving, and humane places.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-01 12:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 09:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 09:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 09:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 10:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 10:11 pm (UTC)What time do the festivities start?
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 10:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 10:19 pm (UTC)Heffie, I AM STANDING UP AND APPLAUDING RIGHT NOW. That sums up my feeling on Morrison in a way that I can't ever articulate to Morrison fans because they tend to make me feel blinding rage. Their stock defense is (9 times out of 10): "If you don't like it, it's because you aren't a super clever special snowflake who GETS IT" and it makes me want to hit them with bricks.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 10:29 pm (UTC)Y'know, I'm reminded of what Chuck Dixon said about WATCHMEN: "It is a brilliant tour-de-force of comics storytelling and features a great example of Moore's greatest talent; the ability to let his readers congratulate themselves for being smarter than they are."
I feel like that applies to Morrison's fans as well. As I say above, though, I think Moore actually DOES something with it, unlike Morrison, who too often just feels clever for the sake of clever rather than actually using it to further the story and explore character.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-01 02:17 am (UTC)Other that that tiny little exception :P I also read for the characters. Batman is awesome. The Batman/Superman title from a little while ago, the one where all that AU stuff went down that I still don't understand the mechanics behind? That was amazing. Especially the fight where Bats and Supes are up against Marvel and Hawkman.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-01 02:37 am (UTC)Also in this argument is Millar and Bendis respectively making Magneto a similarly monster psycho in Ultimate X-Men, and all of Spierman's foes into mindless, raging genetic mishaps. Where's the personality?
no subject
Date: 2009-10-01 12:04 pm (UTC)However I rationalise all the different portrayals of the Joker as different parts of his fractured personalities. So this probably helps when Morrison is making him scary and others are making him more of a slightly deranged clown. I may be in the minority in Loving the Ledger portrayal. Indeed I thought "They got it, they actually got what my idea of the the way the Joker should be".
Now onto Morrison. Well I am Scottish and I have been reading and enjoying his work since the very early 2000ad days. This makes me very biased, so apologies in advance. I loved his run on Batman but I know that he is someone you either get or you dont. It doesnt make me high and mighty, mainly because I have to really think through some of his work to get what he is actually saying (Invisibles, Final Crisis, The Filth for example). You can argue that working is not something that the reader should not have to do but I disagree. Different styles suit different people. Sometimes the surface story is enough, sometimes it hints at treasures hidden underneath. Morrisons work often does the latter and that is why he is one of my favourite writers.
My first experience of Morrison was his Zenith run in 2000ad - even now it stands up as a work of brilliance. This is possibly the best example of what I mean. While you read the story (and I am thinking Phases 3 and 4 here), you dont actually need to know who the various British comic characters are, the story fits together and makes sense. However if you do investigate further, it makes the whole experience much deeper.
My LCS owner completely disagrees with me mostly on this matter although he does agree that Batman and Robin is the best Morrison has been since the Invisibles.
Right....shutting up now
no subject
Date: 2009-10-02 08:44 am (UTC)His Mad Hatter story with Tweedledee and Tweedledum is the very best depiction of Jervis in many, many years (ever since Morrison--yes, to tie this all together!--came up with the lamentable "pedophile Hatter" take), his character development with the Riddler is wonderful, his Zatanna is the only comic superheroine I've actually crushed upon, his epilogue of the Ra's Al Ghul story was single-handedly better than the entire story that preceded it, and that Joker Christmas "slay-ride" issue is one of the greatest Joker stories of all time. It's impossible for me to read it without hearing Mark Hamill's voice.
How did it feel wrong to you? If you're at all inclined, this essay analyzes what I love about it pretty well better than I ever could. In a nutshell: This is an awesome story because it particularly showcases Joker’s own brand of twisted hilarity - horrible things are happening, and they’re funny. We can afford to laugh at them because they’re fiction of course, but they still make us wince. Joker is in rare form here, devastatingly charming as he speeds through the streets of Gotham, delightedly causing chaos all for the benefit of the trussed up Robin.
But fear not, you're most definitely not in the minority for loving Ledger's take. I adore it too, even if Hamill still edges him out for me. I'm with you, they're all fractured aspects of the same character, and I think that's important to bear in mind. That's rather what I like about the Dini/Hamill version, in that he's the most versatile (and therefore, most unpredictable) of the Jokers: he can be the nightmare of Morrison's stories one moment and the prankster clown of the Silver Age in the space of seconds.
Absolutely, different styles suit different people. And FWIW, there's work of Morrison's I absolutely adore. ALL-STAR SUPERMAN, particularly. But I've tried to read stuff like THE INVISIBLES an DOOM PATRON over and over again, and there's just absolutely nothing there that resonates with me, nothing I can grab onto nor care about. When I read those, all I see are the ideas and "cleverness," but the heart and soul are lost on me, and damn if I can tell you why most of the time. At least with Batman, I already have a much stronger, more solid idea of what works for me and what doesn't, y'know?