SciFi put up an interesting interview today with Frank Miller, discussing The Spirit and Sin City 2. But here’s what stuck out for me:
“Will Eisner was my mentor, and The Spirit was so awesome a property that I at first thought I was not worthy to do it. And then I couldn’t think of anybody else who was, so I decided that I was the right man for the job.”
Now, I’m not quite sure how I feel about this. Frank Miller does have a reputation for making himself — we’ll say “larger than life” — when it comes to his already considerable skills as a comic book creator. (A debate might be whether his previous works, like The Dark Knight Returns, Daredevil, and Sin City balance against more recent works like All-Star Batman and Robin and The Dark Knight Strikes Again.) But part of me wonders: does this sort of comment belittle Eisner? Is this Miller acting presumptuous, taking the crown of comics’ master craftsman?
I mean, it’s true that Eisner was Miller’s mentor. It was the story of Sand Saref that Miller gleefully stripped “from top to bottom” to create the character of Elektra. But what sets off my Spider-Sense is the fact that this really isn’t Will Eisner’s Spirit. In my mind, based on what I’ve seen (and what I’ve read), this feels more like Frank Miller being Frank Miller, and just using these more-or-less sainted characters to act out his stylized (and one could argue, increasingly one-note) film noir repetoire. In other words: is this Will Eisner’s The Spirit? Or Frank Miller’s?
But one could also argue: as Eisner’s protege, even despite their arguments about how comics should work, could this be a legitimate passing of the torch? Is the Spirit a character that should be redefined by a master in every generation?
I’ll be honest. I don’t know. But I’ll bet you do. Let’s discuss.
December 18th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
I’ll let you know once I’ve seen the film. It’s not out for another week, so I have no idea whether The Spirit has been redefined other than changing coats and hats.
December 19th, 2008 at 2:14 am
I can’t really say much about the movie, other than I’m not impressed enough to rush to the theater. I’ll probably Netflix it when it comes out on DVD.
As for the comment, I think it reeks of ego.
December 19th, 2008 at 3:38 am
I’ve been on the fence about this movie since I hears Sam Jackson had a major part in it.
But, in the past month I’ve began to view this as a film version of a Spirit comic book / graphic novel that Frank Miller has wanted to do to pay tribute to Will Eisner, his hero and mentor. This is a way of passing the torch, as you said.
And, by creating a Spirit story on film, maybe Frank Miller is outright admitting that he could never create Spirit comics as good or true as Will Eisner’s, so he’ll give Will’s name most enduring character a presence in people’s minds through film, a medium that reaches MANY more people than comics have in over 50 years.
Also, Miller loves Eisner and Eisner’s work. Perhaps he felt that anyone else would just screw it up, real real bad.
I say the same thing about this movie that I say about all movies based on comics I love, I don’t care about who sees the movie, or how the movie even is… I just like how the movie gets people interested in the source material.
I worked in a comic store when the Daredevil movie came out, and I sold the hell out of Miller’s DD books, and the then-current Bendis Daredevils. People hated the movie, but always came back for the comics.
If Miller’s Spirit movie captures the essence of the source, and gets people interested in reading Eisner’s original Spirit work, then that’ll fill my quota for what I want from this movie.
As for being redefined by a master… That happened right below everyone’s noses in Darwyn Cooke’s Spirit comic books. It was a solid year of comics brilliance.
I don’t consider Miller a master in film, just yet. Hopefully, after seeing this film, I’ll feel he’s a little closer, at least…
December 19th, 2008 at 8:54 am
Arguably one note? Find me one Frank Miller story with a woman who isn’t a whore, a hero who isn’t a righteous barbarian tyrant, a religious leader who doesn’t molest children, and at least one sequence with homophobic overtones then maybe we can argue about whether Frank Miller can write more than his one twelve year old boy’s masturbatory fantasy.
As it stands? When you’re novel about the Battle of Thermopylae and any one of your neo-noir extravaganzas are practically interchangeable, you’ve got a problem… or maybe you just know your audience. Either way, Denny Colt growling “Somebody get me a tie and it sure as hell better be red!” is just one of a myriad of reasons I’m not wasting eight bucks on this crap.
December 19th, 2008 at 9:02 am
David,
While I haven’t seen the movie, I don’t really see this as Miller deeming himself Eisner’s heir. I read this comment as Miller saying that he’s discussed the character with Eisner and knows what Eisner considered sacrosanct and what he considered unimportant.
The Spirit had strong noir elements, so Miller’s not in the wrong there. The strip’s visuals were very stylized and ahead of the curve, but Eisner’s artwork can’t be directly laid onto the screen – so Miller has to make it visually dynamic for this new medium. Whether he’s bringing the visual style to the screen in the best way, we can debate forever, but he’s definitely not letting it look like any-old adventure flick.
The Spirit was also fairly colorful and humor-filled, at times, and from the previews, it seems the Miller’s going for humor, but it’s more of a bombastic, over-the-top humor. Again, maybe not the approach some fans want, but not necessarily a wrong approach.
None of this means the movie’s actually any good – I haven’t seen it and don’t intend to until I get some feedback from a few sources – but I don’t think it’s presumptuous of Miller to think he’s the right man for the job.
Ultimately, honestly, I wish Miller’d come back to making comics. Because comics rock harder.
December 19th, 2008 at 9:26 am
I see Frank Miller as the heir to Will Eisner’s Spirit era, but there’s nothing of Eisner’s later career in Frank Miller. And personally, I love Eisner’s original graphic novels more than The Spirit.
Frank Miller’s work lacks the humanity of Eisner and the soft touch.
December 19th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Great post Julian!Without question,Frank Millar is one of the most over rated creative people I’ve ever seen.I can’t wait to hear Buck Rogers sound like Marv…and Batman…and every other Millar character.
December 19th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Frank himself loves telling the story of how Will’s first meeeting with him consisted of him telling Miller everything he had done wrong in his Daredevil story.
Alas, Will is no longer alive to fill that role anymore. And apparently no one else has the stones to.
December 19th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
The way I look at it is this: I cannot see Frank Miller writing something like “The Story of Gerhard Shnobble.” He’s not interested in everyday schlubs, he’s interested in people who kick ass. Which is fine for superhero writing or Spartan war sagas, not so much for something as warm and humanist as Eisner.
December 19th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
“I decided that I was the right man for the job.”
Didn’t Dick Cheney say this in 2000?
December 21st, 2008 at 11:02 pm
hahah good one Egg Head..and yep he did
December 22nd, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Wasn’t Eisner everyone’s mentor?
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Miller needs an ass whipping.
And “I decided that I was the right man for the job!”