|
Post by Red Impact on Dec 22, 2009 20:42:52 GMT -5
Not sure how this became a debate... But I'll explain what I meant and leave it at that. I said...and I quote..."But for right now, I think he (Frank) just needs to step back a moment and perhaps take a hiatus." Which is what Cameron did. Which is what I'm suggesting Frank do. I'm not going to argue whether or not Frank's relevant, since I never took a stand on that one way or the other. I only tried to explain why, perhaps, he's treated so harshly by news sites and fans as opposed to someone like James Cameron. Dude, you totally are contradicting yourself. You say that the media/news only focuses on current accomplishments and not old ones, yet at the same time say that people like Miller, who have grown a little long in the tooth, need to take a hiatus? The f***?! If they take a hiatus, then they won't have any current accomplishments, only old ones. I mean your argument makes sense, except for that one little part. And I am still greatly confused. You can't take a hiatus and have current accomplishments. By the time you'd come back, your return would be bolstered because of your old accomplishments. I think his point was more along the lines of "you're only as good as the last thing you do" combined with a bit of "absence makes the heart go fonder." Where Miller got acclaim early on, then did a bunch of crap and has kept doing it, Cameron did crap early on, hit gold, disappeared for a while, then came back. So Cameron has gotten a lot of positive press because the last thing he did came out so well.
|
|
|
Post by Hulkshi Tanahashi on Dec 22, 2009 21:51:34 GMT -5
Not sure how this became a debate... But I'll explain what I meant and leave it at that. I said...and I quote..."But for right now, I think he (Frank) just needs to step back a moment and perhaps take a hiatus." Which is what Cameron did. Which is what I'm suggesting Frank do. I'm not going to argue whether or not Frank's relevant, since I never took a stand on that one way or the other. I only tried to explain why, perhaps, he's treated so harshly by news sites and fans as opposed to someone like James Cameron. Dude, you totally are contradicting yourself. You say that the media/news only focuses on current accomplishments and not old ones, yet at the same time say that people like Miller, who have grown a little long in the tooth, need to take a hiatus? The f***?! If they take a hiatus, then they won't have any current accomplishments, only old ones. I mean your argument makes sense, except for that one little part. And I am still greatly confused. You can't take a hiatus and have current accomplishments. By the time you'd come back, your return would be bolstered because of your old accomplishments. He's not saying that. What he's saying is that if Frank Miller were to take a 12 hiatus like James Cameron did and come out with a new book, then people would be excited for it like they are for Cameron's "Avatar." That's all.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on Dec 23, 2009 1:45:32 GMT -5
Dude, you totally are contradicting yourself. You say that the media/news only focuses on current accomplishments and not old ones, yet at the same time say that people like Miller, who have grown a little long in the tooth, need to take a hiatus? The f***?! If they take a hiatus, then they won't have any current accomplishments, only old ones. I mean your argument makes sense, except for that one little part. And I am still greatly confused. You can't take a hiatus and have current accomplishments. By the time you'd come back, your return would be bolstered because of your old accomplishments. He's not saying that. What he's saying is that if Frank Miller were to take a 12 hiatus like James Cameron did and come out with a new book, then people would be excited for it like they are for Cameron's "Avatar." That's all. No, I understand that part. What I don't understand is him first saying the media focuses on current accomplishments over old ones, and THEN saying Miller should take time off. Taking time off would mean the media would have to focus on his old accomplishments when he came back. Same with Cameron. The media spent as much time talking about Cameron's past work as they did Avatar leading up to the film's release. That right there contradicts his whole, "the media focuses on current accomplishments." thing. You take that section about the current accomplishments vs. old accomplishments, and his entire post makes sense, but that section being in there throws the whole thing off.
|
|
The Line
Patti Mayonnaise
Real Name: Bumkiss. Stanley Bumkiss.
Peanut Butter & JAAAAAMMMM!
Posts: 36,698
|
Post by The Line on Dec 23, 2009 14:25:22 GMT -5
I think what he's saying is basically
Miller did great stuff a long time ago, but since then has done shit, so the most recent thing in the public's memory of his is shit.
Cameron did great stuff a long time ago, but then quit doing anything. So the most recent thing that he did is still good. Also, since it was a longer time ago, more chance of the rose-colored lenses to be peered through.
So, the public is basing their opinion each man's most recent endeavor(some of which aren't so recent).
|
|
Triple Kelly
Vegeta
Not once, twice, but three times a Kelly
Posts: 9,470
|
Post by Triple Kelly on Dec 23, 2009 14:41:29 GMT -5
I will say that most of Miller's newer stuff gives me some enjoyment, if only how crazy it is. Seriously, the Spirit pulls me in just for the sheer insanity and hilarity of it. Plus, I don't mind All Star, due to 1) Jim Lee's FANTASTIC art and 2) I enjoy the fact that Batman pretty much IS that insane. That wasn't Batman! That was "Crazy Steve" dressed up as Batman! And I am disappointed Linkara did not further his "Bruce Wayne: Agent of NAMBLA" claim by showing the part where Dick Grayson calls Crazy Steve "nuts" and Crazy Steve responds with, "I'll show you NUTS!" ...good lord, Mr. Miller...
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on Dec 24, 2009 10:00:40 GMT -5
|
|