Barbara The Potty-Mouth
To DC's credit, I rush to read these previews for "All-Star Batman & Robin" as soon as they are posted.
Barbara Gordon kissing her dad hello on the cheek:
"Hi Daddy. I'm going to hit the books. Big test tomorrow -- With Miss Ainsworth who is totally a total bitch."
Later, in captions:
"Never have a detective as a dad. Not unless you're really good at bullshitting him."
"And always throw in a smile when you're bullshitting your dad."
Cursing teenagers are fine if the book in question has a "mature readers" label on it. But thankfully, there is an option on the stands for those younger persons who wish to get into reading about Batgirl:
What gets me is that I actually kind of LIKE this preview (the Barbara bits, not the Black Canary/BINO bits). Time will tell what actually happens when she tries to fight crime.
ReplyDeleteIs it just me, or is that a REALLY poor Batgirl costume redesign? Considering the popularity of the 'Draw Batgirl' meme from a while back, you'd think Lee would have made an effort - I've seen better designs from 8 year-old kids.
ReplyDeleteI love Miller's take on Batgirl. Jim Lee sucks.
ReplyDeleteAs to the swearing, this is the Goddamn Batman's Goddamn Gotham. Everybody swears all the goddamn time. It's probably some side effect of the goddamn air pollution.
ReplyDeleteThere's another sample of the new ASBARTBW where Gordan says "The Goddamn Batman" like four times in three sentences. I'm moving closer and closer to the "Miller just screwing with everybody" camp, because the self-parody just gets better and better.
ReplyDelete"I love Miller's take on Batgirl. Jim Lee sucks"
ReplyDeleteI think it's really not about Jim Lee sucking, it's more that his literal approach to the art doesn't work with Frank Miller's slapstick. The logic behind teaming them was -- you've got the biggest writer & the biggest artist, let's make lots of money. But not when the art doesn't match the writing; then you have a disservice to both parties.
"I'm moving closer and closer to the "Miller just screwing with everybody" camp, because the self-parody just gets better and better."
ReplyDeleteI think you're right; I think Miller thinks this is, if you would excuse the expression, "goddamn hilarious."
People are still reading this crap? Really?
ReplyDeleteIt's the same joke as Dark Knight Strikes Again. Folks want a Frank Miller Batman story again, but it also has to be better than Year One and DKR. The solution? Play with their expectations and create something that makes you laugh at the same time.
ReplyDeleteI'm starting to think Miller's way more clever than I ever gave him credit for. It started coming together with the two two-page splashes a few issues ago of Superman running across the ocean at Batman's request shouting "DAMN!", and this comes close to sealing it.
"Play with their expectations and create something that makes you laugh at the same time."
ReplyDeleteDoesn't humour usually have a point, though? The only purpose in what you suggest would be Miller admitting via indirect means that he's incapable of writing a good story anymore - so he pokes fun instead.
Also, he'd be spreading the joke a little thin at this stage, as the last Martha Washington book was rather poor too.
"Doesn't humour usually have a point, though? The only purpose in what you suggest would be Miller admitting via indirect means that he's incapable of writing a good story anymore - so he pokes fun instead."
ReplyDeleteOr is the humor meant to convey, albeit in an indirect way, that no one, not even Miller himself, can improve upon DKR and Batman: YO, and to even try is just a pointless excerise doomed to fail?
I certainly feel that from ASBAR. That, and him having fun making the monkeys who brate the series dance. I mean, I can see him laughing at ever new review that blasts the book as crap. If people can't see he's just playing up on their worst views of the book at this point, I think we might have found something more dense that a diamond.
ASBAR is "what if Batman and crew lived in Sin City?" If you are expect anything more (or better), then you've only your own expectations to blame. Me, I'm sitting back and enjoy the humor Miller is dishing out. I'm laughing right along with him.
"The only purpose in what you suggest would be Miller admitting via indirect means that he's incapable of writing a good story anymore - so he pokes fun instead."
ReplyDeleteIt wouldn't be admitting that at all. If anything, it'd be deciding nothing would ever be good enough to match the expectations the fans had for a Miller Bat-book post-DKR and just telling the story he wanted to tell, regardless of how goofy or great it ended up being. I don't think "poking fun" is necessarily the opposite of "writing a good story" - I think he's writing the book in a way that's fun to him, and whether other people think it's good or not (and for that matter, whether any of the subtext I've implied in earlier posts is actually there or not) is not really a concern of his. The issues I've read have been a jumbled mess, more car wreck than comic, but still really funny. It's as each new issue hits that I wonder more and more if it's all intentional, which would make the book kinda-sorta genius.
As for the humor having a point, beyond the intrinsic value that comes in taking something (in this case, the aforementioned expectations of fans) and turning it completely on its head, I'd say amusing yourself is just as good a reason as any other for doing something fun.
And there goes the goddamn James, getting to the goddamn point faster and more eloquently than I.
ReplyDeleteAnd there goes the goddamn James, getting to the goddamn point faster and more eloquently than I.
ReplyDelete"I LOVE BEING THE GODDAMN JAMES! :)
Heh.
"Me, I'm sitting back and enjoy the humor Miller is dishing out. I'm laughing right along with him."
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the fact that it's at heart a humor book, it is just that sometimes I read this stuff and I'm like:
"ok I get it -- you think mainstream superhero comics are crap! ok!"
I like Morrison a hair more because at least he dresses up the notion that mainstream superheroes are crap with some frosting.
I mean really, Miller should just have Superman sit in a pile of his own poop and hit himself in the head with a brick and say: "dumb! dumb! I'm dumb! I'm a misguided American cliche!" And then a closeup of Batman splitting a bad guy's head open and saying: "crazy! I'm crazy and out of control!"
"Marshall Law" did it a little bit better, but maybe that impression is partially due to the fact that it had an appropriate artist for the material.
If Kevin O'Neill drew "ASBAR," it would have worked far far better.
"Marshall Law" did it a little bit better, but maybe that impression is partially due to the fact that it had an appropriate artist for the material.
ReplyDeleteIf Kevin O'Neill drew "ASBAR," it would have worked far far better.
Perhaps, but then, DC wouldn't have gotten nearly as many to try out the book. Putting two fo the most popular creators in the industry todat together on a book isn't just for "bragging rights." It's because it will bring in the cashola. I know that's what the head editorial staff was focused on.
And even from a creative standpoint, I can still see Jim Lee being the right choice. His style is the epitome of what is expected out of modern superhero comic art. What better way to labast it throuhg parody, than to have the man who represents that look to be the one to provide the art on the series? O'Neill might be a better choice for overall parody, but using Lee for the type of parody Miller is obviously working seems to make a lot of sense, from a twisted logic sort of way (much like the book itself does).
You articulate your points better than I managed, I fear. My only response is that for me, a book is either enjoyable or it isn't, and for my money, ASBARTBW isn't. "Hah, you poor bastards want me to write something good, but I'm going to write a piece of crap - ON PURPOSE! - and you'll have to pay good money for it!" hardly sounds like a good mindset for a writer to have going into any project.
ReplyDeleteI don't know that Miller's recent Batman work has been strictly a reaction against the genre or the high expectations for his work. It seems to me that it's most likely his response to being quite unjustly labled a groundbreaker in "seriousness" and "gritty realism".
ReplyDelete"I like Morrison a hair more because at least he dresses up the notion that mainstream superheroes are crap with some frosting."
ReplyDeleteI feel like I said this before, so apologies if repeating myself, but where in Morrison's work does the impression that he thinks mainstream superheroes are crap comes from? I've always thought he pretty clearly loves them, and just wishes people would take more advantage of the full potential that comes with the concept. If there's a greater love letter to super heroes than Flex Mentallo (not to mention his JLA, Seven Soldiers, All Star Superman, etc, etc), I'll eat Gallaher's mud-encrusted hat.
When ASBAR was first announced, they were playing it up as the "iconic" versions of characters. I'm sorry, I don't doubt for a second that Frank Miller is just rolling his eyes at the criticisms because this is the Batman HE wants to create. He's not trying to do subtext or some deeper meaning, otherwise we would've gone somewhere with this concept, at least include a bit of metatextuality into it. Instead all we get is "HAR HAR SPERM BANK GODDAMN I M SO CLEVAR!!!11"
ReplyDelete"Hah, you poor bastards want me to write something good, but I'm going to write a piece of crap - ON PURPOSE! - and you'll have to pay good money for it!" hardly sounds like a good mindset for a writer to have going into any project.
ReplyDeleteI don't think "I'm writing crap on purpose and making fans pay for it" is the motivation here, though. He's not out to rip off fans, just mess with their expectations. He's using what they feel a "Miller Batman" should be and turning it on it's ear.
I fully believe that he is taking all the criticisms the book (and he himself) is getting as fuel for ideas on how to go. I mean, when there was that feminist outrage as his requested panty shot of Vicki Vale in ASBAR #1, and then you see how he portrays Wonder Woman in issue #5, it wouldn't take much to believe that is him using her as the mold for the outrage of those feminist readers. Now, I can't prove this conclusively and Miller might say I was talking out my hat if someone asked him if I was right, but tell you can't can't see the POSSIBILITY of that being true.
ASBAR isn't just another Batman series. It isn't even just another Miller Batman series. It's Miller, basically, having the basic concept of Batman and using as his own personal playground to do pretty much whatever he pleases. I think that's the trust of the All-Star concept as a whole. The "superstars" of the industry playing with the icons and doing just about whatever they want with them. Mosrrison's All-Star Superman (I just can't bring myself to shorten it to it's first letters only) is the same. But where as Morrison has decided to pay reverence to Superman, while adding in some of the silver-age type concepts to play around with, Miller doesn't hold that same feeling with ASBAR. He's wants to do what he thinks people will least expect and have a lot of fun (and a good laugh) while doing it. He was banking on the expectations of readers when the series started and now is using their dismay, disbelief and outright disgust at what the series has been like to help fuel the craziness he is playing at. I, honestly, see the book as the ultimate statement on how harmful brand/character/craetor loyalty can be and how fan entitlement of these characters and concepts has become a monster in and of itself.
Miller might not be aspiring to any such lofty goals with the book, but it is a residual side-effect of his efforts nonetheless.
Like I said, I'm enjoying the ride and laughing right along with Miller (even if we might not be laughing at the same things for the same reasons). And I completely agree that it all biols down to do you find this entertaining of not. Fortunately, for me, being a fan of shows like Family Guy and South Park, which frequently poke fun at our "sacred cows and institutions", I can fully enjoy the parody of what Miller is doing without a problem. For those not so fortunate, there's always Batman and Detective Comics.
"Entitlement" is a word that's getting bandied about in relation to comic book fandom lately, and usually in a negative capacity - but the negative connotations seem to disregard that the fan IS entitled and empowered to a certain extent, as he or she has paid their money and is therefore 'entitled' to voice their opinion alongside others. Suggesting that they should sit down and shut up, or that they don't 'understand' what the writer is doing is slightly insulting to their patronage and custom.
ReplyDeleteWhile I accept there is room (and certainly, in the case of the Batman franchise, a great need) for subtext and depth, Miller is writing a book about a man dressed in leather who likes beating people up - I suspect subtext is not a friend to such a creature.
Meh. Whatever - at the end of the day, people will always like different things, but no-one should buy into the idea that fandom should be passive.
"Entitlement" is a word that's getting bandied about in relation to comic book fandom lately, and usually in a negative capacity - but the negative connotations seem to disregard that the fan IS entitled and empowered to a certain extent, as he or she has paid their money and is therefore 'entitled' to voice their opinion alongside others.
ReplyDeleteWell, let me explain my own take on how I was referring to "entitlement."
I agree that fans are "entitled" to an opinion on product they have bought. They are "entitled" to express that opinion, as well.
However, there is an invisible line between that kind of normal and health entitlement and the toxic kind which I was implying.
The toxic brand is not just a fans buy an issue of ASBAR, not liking it, saying so and then going to spend their money on something they might like better. They continue to buy the book (or, at the least, READ it), knowing they aren't going to like the work. Knowing that they plan to verbally rip it to shreads. While one might say that within their rights, as well, it is certainly very unhealthy and can become destructive.
It causes them to think that they can have sway over creators, publishers and the creations they work opn and/or own. That they have the right to belittle the craetors, publishers and fans who enjoy this work. It allows them the false illusion that they somehow know what's best for everyone and are the voice which should be adhered to, not the focres of the marketplace itself that dictate the "worthiness" of a product's right to exist.
It had become a dark and twisted verison of Dr. Wertham all over again. Only, instead of an outside of the hobby and inudstry doing it, it is being propogated by the very people for whom the hobby exists for. Sort like how the outragous taxes some Americans pay are no longer being pushed on them by England, but by her own government and people.
This "Toxic Entitlement" has become a real problem with the age of the Internet. When before such toic views has some level of controls on them (like editors who wouldn't run overly insulting letters in the old time letters pages of comics, for example), today this damaging flow of venomous opinion is allowed to flow completely unchecked.
No one with any amount of common sense would ever suggest fans "passively sit down and shut up." No one is saying they don't have the right to exclaim their dissatisfaction at something they have paid for. But there comes a point where your point has been stated. You opnion has been made known. And just because the reaction to it isn't want you want it to be, because the market forces don't fall into line with what you think is the right course, doesn't mean that you have the right to belittle others and continue to berate something over and over and over.
I liken it to the question of "does God really answer prayers?" When you look at all that is bad and harmful in the world today, it would be easy to think that God does not. Many would proclaim that God did not even hear their prayers. But what they fail to forget is that, just like ourselves, God has free will. God can choose to answer a prayer in whatever way it is deemed. And sometimes, the answer is "no." Not getting the answer or result you desire, does not equal a lack of being heard. It's no different with the comic industry.
Fans don't own the companies, they don't own the charcater concepts and they certainly don't own the creators making these works. Yet, to hear some of them, with their "toxic entitlement", you'd think they really did.
No, fandom shouldn't be made into a passive thing. But it also should become a place where one's own sense of what they think is right, is seen as some universal truth which everyone within the industry should follow. The market will decide what is right and worthy to exist. All a fan need do is decdie on what is right or worthy for THEM and on one else.
Thankfully, I've not come across the 'toxic entitlement' of which you speak in great enough quantity to have developed the ability to distinguish it from plain ol' bile for it's own sake - be it blowing off steam, or just a dismissive opinion. A lot of people like to bitch about stuff, and when that happens, and a counter opinion is offered and is well-made and articulated, then a further opinion is given in return - this is the simple flow and counter-flow, if not of reasoned debate, then at least of a good cold beer and a Knicks game.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that if you've made your point but you're still having the argument, it's time to stop, but I'd assume that both parties are equally to blame - one for instigating, and one for rising to the bait.
Of course fans don't own companies, but their feedback is essential, even if it does seem more rabid than usual on occasion. I'm reminded of the stories of the preview screenings of the Catwoman movie, where the guys running the test viewing went through all the questionnaires and discarded any and all with negative comments, regardless of any merit to the comments made. It's good to keep track of the opposing viewpoint in any business endeavor if you want a better product.
For what it's worth, the negative reviews of Miller's Batman I've read seem dismissive and full of gentle humor at his expense, usually dwelling on that Goddamn Catchphrase that will no doubt define the series long after it's come to it's conclusion (although, shockingly I never took that on board the first time I read through the book, suggesting that I'm not the guy to offer any great insight into the writing) - there seems precious little 'toxic entitlement' in evidence. Unless you've read stuff on the DC boards - I stay away from there.