Haha, oh man, am I glad to have missed this the first time round. Ever since I sat in on The Spirit panel at SDCC I have been embarrassed for LA Times' Geoff Boucher and his ass-kissing of Frank Miller. Seriously dude, enough with the man-crush. Calling Miller visionary is a bit like calling toaster strudels the greatest thing since sliced bread. Nice try, but we're not buying it.
Thankfully, someone who shares the sentiment has written a rebuttal to the article (
here if you dare) on Miller's upcoming Spirit movie:
There was a gentle human touch to the Spirit stories, with real humanistic connections, none of which shows up in any of Miller's writings over the past 20 years. If Miller has any humor, I would love to see the evidence.
Please do not hold All Star Batman and Robin as evidence, or you will make me cry.
The prime motivation in any Miller story is always revenge. The prime human emotion is always misfit anger leading to revenge. Not Eisner at all.
A-FREAKIN-MEN. Mr Letter-Writer, you are now my homeboy.
Anyway, I'm so over the Spirit movie. Thanks to the Eisner documentary I'm no longer tormented by whatever drivel Miller is planning to put out, and can zen out with the knowledge it will never be comparable to the original.