Miller versus Millar

Who?!?!


  • Total voters
    27

Dr.Strangefate

He Sees You When You're Sleeping. He Knows When Yo
Joined
Oct 24, 2004
Messages
10,075
Location
New York, NY
Frank Miller and Mark Millar

Who's better and why?

(Im finding more and more people who are vehemently anti-millar in all non-Ultimate things, and more and more reason to like Miller, since he wrote the two best Batman stories. Period.)

Just curious.
 

ProjectX2

Don't expect me to take you with me when I go to s
Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
25,007
The only thing I like Miller for is Sin City. FACT.

However, even though Millar is one of my favourite writers, I don't like some of his stuff.
 

Shihad

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
583
Location
New Zealand
I like both of them

Sin City is Great, just got all the books today :)

But Wolverine: enemy of the state, and Ultimates, are also Great reads

I would say, Millar cause i like Ultimates way to much
 
Last edited:

compound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2005
Messages
2,772
Location
Metro Manila, Philippines
Matter of personal taste, I guess... Both of them tell interesting, well-plotted stories, and I'll admit that Miller has a better handle on inter-character dynamics.

However, if we're talking entertainment value, and how much their individual books put a smile on my face, i'll have to go with Millar all the way.

Millar adresses grim subject matter with a healthy dose of dark humor, and a refusal to allow self-seriousness to creep into his work. He seems to write everything with tongue planted firmly in cheek (sometimes BUTT-cheek), and while that places certain limits on the kind of stories he writes, I find them eminently enjoyable.

Chosen -- until its final pages -- is a wonderful example of Millar being capable of doing strong, heartfelt, character-driven work.

Ultimates established that he can breath new life into staid icons, and give them an awe-inspiring larger-than-life quality, without ever losing sight of real-world social and geopolitical relations.

Heck, even for all its flaws, his UFF run has never been short of an exhilirating thrill ride.

In some ways, this is the antithesis of how Miller treats his stories, in which a sense of obsession and gravitas seeps through every page. It worked the first time around, on Dark Knight Returns. But after that, it all became a little heavy-handed and repetetive in tone, even if it was masterfully written. The man is clearly intelligent, articulate, and well-read, not to emntion a genuine lover of the medium, as Ourchair assured me, after he finished reading Eisner/Miller. But his work just strikes me as a little too, er, macho and angsty for its own good.
 
Last edited:

ourchair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
13,105
Location
Philippines
As a comic writer, I'd go with MillAr, for most of the reasons that Compound described suich as his lack of self-seriousness.

For some reason, he also pulls off his juvenile sensibilities in the best way possible that makes himself not look like an ***, even when he is in fact, being an ***. I've never seen someone disrespect African-American civil rights leaders and look INNOCENT while doing it.

Also, one thing I think that doesn't come up often enough when praising the Ultimates is his respect for the characters. Everyone celebrates the widescreen action, and the geopolitical themes (because you know THOSE are the qualities you can wave in the face of non-comic reader friends and Hollywood producers) but Millar really has this very misty-eyed reverence for the characters that shows even when they're spouting the most outrageous dialogue.

He loves Captain America. He loves Iron Man. He loves Black Widow. He loves Thor. It's totally there. Millar is the most soft-hearted loser of a writer to ever touch those cahracters. But I digress.

I'm not exactly a big fan of 'critically-acclaimed author of Dark Knight Returns and Sin City' Frank Miller. I find his narrative prose overwrought, and his social commentary too hamfisted. But 'passionate auteur and contemplative craftsman' Frank Miller? When he talks about how he approaches the business of comics, the art of publishing and the visceral intensity of creation I am in complete awe. That guy's really something.
 

ourchair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
13,105
Location
Philippines
TheManWithoutFear said:
Like I even need to justify my answer.
What was your answer?

My first thought was obviously MillAr for Ultimates. But then I remembered... Daredevil?
 

Victor Von Doom

Fist of teh Internets.
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
16,964
Location
On The Edge
I love Miller's "Sin City" series and his "300"........but other than that---not so much.

Millar's "Ultimates" have got to be my favorite comic in the past few years.
 

Friday

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
8,903
Location
Washington, PA
I'm flying high off finaly reading Chosen last night, and since I didn't enjoy DKR (Don't make me give the respect it speach, please) I had to go MillAr. He just seems to be able to do a wider varity of work, with diffrent tones, and I love a varity.
 

Bass

Nexus of the World
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
14,167
Location
Folkestone, UK
I think Miller is the better writer by a long way, but I prefer Millar's stories. I enjoyed Sin City and The Dark Knight Returns, but not as much as The Authority or The Ultimates or Superman Adventures. However, I think Miller's works are more consistent of a higher standard than Millar's as Wanted, Trouble, Chosen, and Ultimate Fantastic Four prove.
 

iceman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
1,030
Millar writes some good comic books.

Miller writes classics.
 

moonmaster

Without him, all of you would be lost souls roamin
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
13,670
Miller. He's written some of my favorite books of all time (DKR, Year One, Sin City). But I still think Millar is pretty great, too.
 

ourchair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
13,105
Location
Philippines
Bass said:
I think Miller is the better writer by a long way, but I prefer Millar's stories. I enjoyed Sin City and The Dark Knight Returns, but not as much as The Authority or The Ultimates or Superman Adventures. However, I think Miller's works are more consistent of a higher standard than Millar's as Wanted, Trouble, Chosen, and Ultimate Fantastic Four prove.
Truth.
 

plastikpulse

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
21
Frankly, I'm not a fan of either of these writers. Frank Miller has done some interesting stuff but he seems to write gritty, disturbing stuff just for the sake of being gritting and distrubing and dark and that bugs me. Now this is just a first impression, I really haven't read a ton of his stuff. That's the feeling I get from his Sin City and his Batman stuff. Now Mark Millar I think is terrible. He's a pop culture nightmare. He can't write decent characters or dialogue. His idea of being a good writer is to throw a very recent pop culture reference in there, totally taking characters out of character, but everyone is like "wow, he's so edgy and new!" I think he's utter rubbish.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top