|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 2, 2024 2:12:54 GMT -5
Mark Millar I don't know his writing well enough to have a strong opinion. I've tried a few things here and there but nothing has left much of an impression - in fact, I suddenly realise that I'm not even sure which ones I've read and which I've only heard people talk about here and there (which for me means here on the Classic Comics and there on the old CBR). My general impression is of a talented writer with good technical ability but nothing much to say - which is probably totally unfair since I just finished saying I don't know his work very well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 2, 2024 4:00:48 GMT -5
I have to disagree with the Millar haters. His Ultimates, Kick ass, his Fantastic Four run from #554 on and Civil War all were great.
|
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 2, 2024 5:31:46 GMT -5
No hate against the person- he's not only made himself tens of millions of $$$, but when my friends recognised him in London one night he bought them all a round and chatted with them.
|
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 2, 2024 5:33:26 GMT -5
Kingsman, the first one, was a fun movie. Whereas 'The King's Man' is about as bad as a movie can conceivably be without me walking out of the room. Diabolical. Hope he had no hand in that 💩
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 2, 2024 7:09:35 GMT -5
Kingsman, the first one, was a fun movie. Whereas 'The King's Man' is about as bad as a movie can conceivably be without me walking out of the room. Diabolical. Hope he had no hand in that 💩 The films are down more to Mathew Vaughn than Millar, though. The whole Secret Service thing rose out of discussions they had, lamenting about the missing classic elements in the Bond films of the later days, vs the 60s, as well as other spy series. Millar took that and did his comic, but Vaughn did the movie his own way. |
|
|
|
Post by jtrw2024 on Nov 2, 2024 7:49:14 GMT -5
I really enjoyed Mark Millar's Marvel Knights: Spider-Man 1-12 from 2004. I thought it made good use of the supporting cast and villains, updated in a reasonable way to conform to the style of other popular comics of the time. The story worked within the established continuity, without any need to severely reboot or retcon things, and was an entertaining, accessible tale which could appeal to regular and casual fans of the character
|
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 2, 2024 7:54:01 GMT -5
Kingsman, the first one, was a fun movie. Whereas 'The King's Man' is about as bad as a movie can conceivably be without me walking out of the room. Diabolical. Hope he had no hand in that 💩 The films are down more to Mathew Vaughn than Millar, though. The whole Secret Service thing rose out of discussions they had, lamenting about the missing classic elements in the Bond films of the later days, vs the 60s, as well as other spy series. Millar took that and did his comic, but Vaughn did the movie his own way. Vaughn's an odd one. Started brilliantly with Layer Cake, but 90% garbage after that. Some shockers on his CV. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 2, 2024 18:09:58 GMT -5
The films are down more to Mathew Vaughn than Millar, though. The whole Secret Service thing rose out of discussions they had, lamenting about the missing classic elements in the Bond films of the later days, vs the 60s, as well as other spy series. Millar took that and did his comic, but Vaughn did the movie his own way. Vaughn's an odd one. Started brilliantly with Layer Cake, but 90% garbage after that. Some shockers on his CV. Well, Layer Cake was a British production. It starts getting weird when you start dealing with Hollywood. You see that with a lot of foreign directors, when they come to Hollywood. |
|
|
|
Post by commond on Nov 3, 2024 17:47:52 GMT -5
Man, {Spoiler: Click to show}Sean's death
in Hitman hit hard. People who think Ennis is only capable of gore and crass humour are dead wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 3, 2024 18:20:00 GMT -5
Man, {Spoiler: Click to show}Sean's death
in Hitman hit hard. People who think Ennis is only capable of gore and crass humour are dead wrong. Ennis? Anyone who can write Heartland is okay in my book! |
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 3, 2024 18:29:34 GMT -5
I always enjoyed Ennis consistently. He was less hit and miss than the other famous late 90s Brits of Millar, Ellis and Morrison, though sometimes it felt like he was trying too hard to be edgy.
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Nov 4, 2024 8:12:02 GMT -5
Fans of one era often don't appreciate the most celebrated creatives of a different era. It's a thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by rich on Nov 4, 2024 8:49:13 GMT -5
Fans of one era often don't appreciate the most celebrated creatives of a different era. It's a thing. Makes sense. Presumably the same applies to fans of cinema, literature, sports etc etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 4, 2024 10:32:07 GMT -5
It’s called recency bias.
|
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Nov 4, 2024 10:44:47 GMT -5
I enjoyed some of Millar's stuff, others I didn't. I really enjoyed his Ultimates 1 and 2. Jeph Loeb's Ultimates 3 was so bad I dropped it after 1 issue.
I enjoyed some of his creator owned stuff. The first Kick-Ass was pretty good, but I stopped enjoying it after. It was just torture porn, shitting all over the main character. I couldn't enjoy just seeing this kid ground into paste figuratively and physically all the time. His Wolverine was okay.
I mostly liked his "cinematic" approach which was novel at at the time.
Ennis can be great. I don't like when he goes too cartoony or preachy, but Preacher had some poignant moments. Punisher MAX was fantastic. The Boys was like using a sledgehammer to knock in a slightly loose pushpin.
Morrison was very hit or miss, and he couldn't stick landings for me. I loved his New X-MEN run. It was the most refreshing thing that had happened to the X-books in years, but you could tell when he was done, he just tossed it together and walked.
|
|
