If I don't know a lot about comics but like Alan Moore's stuff, what else would you recommend

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

...

― def zep (calstars), Sunday, 5 March 2006 01:31 (nineteen years ago)

Be a little more specific: which Moore things do you like, and (more importantly) why?

― Douglas (Douglas), Sunday, 5 March 2006 02:10 (nineteen years ago)

You'd probably like some of the stuff written by Grant Morrison, as everyone else does. Have fun trying to sort out the GM wheat from the chaff.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Sunday, 5 March 2006 11:03 (nineteen years ago)

I'll also throw in: "Which Alan Moore do you like?" There's WATCHMEN/SWAMP THING Alan Moore, there's A SMALL KILLING/LOST GIRLS Alan Moore. There's FROM HELL Alan Moore. Not to mention all the Warrior/2000AD stuff. Most of which I like, but for various and differing reasons.

Try Grant Morrison, particularly his self-contained minis from the last year: SEAGUY, VIMANARAMA and WE3. Can't go wrong with ANIMAL MAN or DOOM PATROL, either. Try Peter Milligan too: HUMAN TARGET, ENIGMA, SHADE: THE CHANGING MAN (that was him, right?), or SKREEMER. Maybe, maybe Neil Gaiman would be up your alley. Give the first SANDMAN collection (PRELUDES AND NOCTURNES a try, as he was aping Moore heavily in that one--but it's very long and badly needed an editor by the end of things.) Writer wise, I'm not sure what else out there even comes close.

― Matt Maxwell (Matt M.), Sunday, 5 March 2006 15:56 (nineteen years ago)

Cerebus. I'm kind of reluctant to recommend it to anyone, as a Dave Sim addiction results in a lot of expense and frustration, but he really is a master of the form. Vols 2-5 are generally agreed to be essential, although I'd go as far as to say definitely stick with it up to Minds(vol 10). Everything else is pretty infuriating, moments of absolute brilliance interspersed with a lot of bizzare, objectionable and (most importantly) pretty dull stuff.

― chap who would dare to be slightly tipsy on the internet (chap), Monday, 6 March 2006 01:01 (nineteen years ago)

I must admit, I thought about suggesting Cerebus too.

a Dave Sim addiction results in a lot of expense and frustration

This may be one of the truest things ever said on ILC.

― aldo_cowpat (aldo_cowpat), Monday, 6 March 2006 09:24 (nineteen years ago)

Thankfully the supply has now been cut off at it's source. I'm being strong and not succumbing to the methadone of Following Cerebus.

― chap who would dare to be completely sober on the internet (chap), Monday, 6 March 2006 19:29 (nineteen years ago)

Following Cerebus is great!

― kit brash (kit brash), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 01:15 (nineteen years ago)

Is it Dave Sim-free? Because I'm sort of planning for the rest of my life to be Dave Sim-free.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 01:17 (nineteen years ago)

It's Dave Sim-INTENSIVE!

― kit brash (kit brash), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 06:59 (nineteen years ago)

A couple of the early issues are nearly Dave Sim-free.

― aldo_cowpat (aldo_cowpat), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 12:46 (nineteen years ago)

dave sim is such a nut :(

― Special Agent Gene Krupa (orion), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 19:16 (nineteen years ago)

By seeking Alan-ternatives you tempt His wrath!

― Gralan Mooreison, Thursday, 9 March 2006 08:11 (nineteen years ago)

there is a hell of a lot of Alan Moore stuff out there. i've been a huge fan for over 10 years, and I still haven't read all of it.

Actually, if ILC will indulge me for a minute I'm going to list the stuff I haven't read. Tell me what's good.

Supreme
Miracleman
Lost Girls
A Small Killing
That collected DC tales book

― chap who would dare to be completely sober on the internet (chap), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:04 (nineteen years ago)

The collected DC has some of his best stuff. I like "DR and Quinch" from 2000AD -- perfectly calibrated piece of juvenile 2000AD mentalism.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:11 (nineteen years ago)

i think supreme is great! although half of the art is kinda awful.

the dc tales book is pretty good too, some real winners and some stuff (like the vigilante story or the green arrow story) that's meh.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:11 (nineteen years ago)

I heard that they're bringing out some kind of mega edition featuring Killing Joke (which I've lost) and Man of Tomorrow (which I haven't read), so I think I'll wait for that.

― chap who would dare to be completely sober on the internet (chap), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:14 (nineteen years ago)

Supreme

The one issue I read was rubbish.

Miracleman

It seeemed good at the time, but in retrospect it is over whingey and over wordy, particularly as it reaches the final moments. Some great superhero FITEs in it, and I suppose the whinginess does kind of have an operatic quality to it.

Lost Girls

High class smut.

A Small Killing

Never read it.

That collected DC tales book

Complete genius, buy buy buy.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:14 (nineteen years ago)

Supreme = Good-natured superman pastiche/90s comics output parody. Also with excellent Silver Age pastiches drawn by Veitch.

Miracleman = Absolutely classic reimagining of Captain Marvel (the DC one), and the chaos that real superheroes would throw the world into.

DC tales: essential if you don't have the Superman bits (I think it has "Whatever happened to Superman?" and "For the man who has everything", it definitely has the swampthing crossover), probably missable if you do. Actually, isn't there two collections of his DC stuff?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:17 (nineteen years ago)

Actually yes, my memories been jogged, the new one does (and the old one doesn't) contain Killing Joke and Whatever Happened?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:18 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, it's already out it is? To the comic shop!

― chap who would dare to be completely sober on the internet (chap), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:20 (nineteen years ago)

Miracleman is absolutely essential. It has a birth drawn in all its bloody glory!. And the final fight with Kid Miracleman has some fabulous gory details by Bissette and Totleben. Torsos! Heads on spikes! burned people!. You can't go wrong with head on spikes.

― Amadeo (Amadeo G.), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:34 (nineteen years ago)

"Whatever happened to Superman?" and "For the man who has Everything" are two of my favourite comics ever.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Thursday, 9 March 2006 18:24 (nineteen years ago)

A Small Killing = meh.
Miracleman = real inconsistent, and the 15 different artists don't help much, but the good bits are very good indeed
Lost Girls = the whole thing won't be published until this summer
Supreme = Moore in goofy/lightweight mode, channeling those late-'50s Superman stories
collected DC tales book = "For The Man Who Has Everything" and "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" are as good as everyone says, "The Killing Joke" has lovely Brian Bolland art but hasn't aged well, a lot of the rest is very minor indeed, although I do love "Mogo Doesn't Socialize."

― Douglas (Douglas), Thursday, 9 March 2006 18:57 (nineteen years ago)

what about 1963?

― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:04 (nineteen years ago)

i really liked 1963 when i was a kid - the stories and art are both excellent and i had never even heard of "silver age" style... it's almost completely redundant when compared to the essentials that marvel has been putting out, though

― dave k, Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:11 (nineteen years ago)

i think the killing joke has actually aged really well! i was really impressed when i re-read it.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:35 (nineteen years ago)

actually, the first time i re-read it i was a little meh (note: i was drunk), but the 2nd time i loved it!

funny that the artist, in the intro, seems to hate it though!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:36 (nineteen years ago)

I think Moore & Bolland have both been less-than-enthused about their work on The Killing Joke in recent years.

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:51 (nineteen years ago)

i think it's good!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:53 (nineteen years ago)

certainly better than that vigilante story!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:53 (nineteen years ago)

Moore, I can understand. It was a very mean and cynical comic. Bolland on the other hand, WTF? Has he even done anything but covers since then? And the art in TKJ was boffo!

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 9 March 2006 19:54 (nineteen years ago)

how is it mean and cynical?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:10 (nineteen years ago)

it laughs at my shortcomings

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:16 (nineteen years ago)

And also, the whole Barbara Gordon business. There's a comic where Barbara confronts Batman about the fact that immediately after she had been shot through the spine and had her body otherwise humiliated and degraded by the Joker, Batman and the Joker were palling around.

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:25 (nineteen years ago)

hahaha!

i don't really get that they're palling around so much as laughing-to-keep-from-crying kinda jobby.

i think the joker backstory is great, really affecting and sad.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:29 (nineteen years ago)

can we talk about why "mogo doesn't socialize" is kinda dumb?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:32 (nineteen years ago)

Moore's GL stories are all sorta O. Henry tribute/ripoffs, no?

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:33 (nineteen years ago)

the magi doesn't socialize?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:34 (nineteen years ago)

cute/ironic twist endings

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:35 (nineteen years ago)

i just don't get why dude didn't notice the lantern on the way down!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:38 (nineteen years ago)

I remember reading an interview with Moore in which he said he views TKJ as the worst of his major eighties works because it wasn't about anything except for the relationship between two fictional characters. And, as we all know, he's steered well clear of stories about stories ever since. Not a whiff of meta in Alan's work, no siree.

― chap who would dare to be completely sober on the internet (chap), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:49 (nineteen years ago)

what a weird reason to discount tkj!

that's why i like it so much!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:50 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, it's a nice tight, iconic story. Nothing like the rest of Alan Moore's stuff, but fine enough.

Would it be acceptable to say that I find Swamp Thing pretty unreadable?

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:58 (nineteen years ago)

i like swamp thing! most of it, at least.

the art can be pretty awful though... well, generally swampy HIMSELF and everything swampish looks great but the people look terrible.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:59 (nineteen years ago)

Swamp Thing was an absolute revelation when I read it aged 13 or so. I haven't really revisited it, which may be for the best.

― chap who would dare to be completely sober on the internet (chap), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:25 (nineteen years ago)

He was just on BBC 2 - the programme's on again at 11.20 apparently. One of those interviews where the subject gets the occasional soundbite and a couple of 30-second funny anecdotes and the rest of it is shots of him wandering Northampton to a theremin soundtrack cribbed from an old Dr Who episode. All framed in huge Lichtenstein-y comic panels...

― Vic F (Vic Fluro), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:36 (nineteen years ago)

The Culture Show thing's here, for anyone who may have missed it or has the misfortune to live to the west of the Atlantic:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/programmes/index.shtml?id=culture_show

He comes across as rather weird, self-regarding and petulant. Also they've smothered the whole thing in cheesily spooky ambiance for no apparent reason.

― chap who would dare to be completely sober on the internet (chap), Thursday, 9 March 2006 23:50 (nineteen years ago)

No mentions of Promothea?

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 10 March 2006 00:31 (nineteen years ago)

Alan Moore should totally have a street team called "Promothea."

― Austin Still (Austin, Still), Friday, 10 March 2006 01:08 (nineteen years ago)

Skipping 60 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

The last Moore WildCATs was after his run proper: in #50, silver chromium bulging cover and whatnot, I don't remember if there was a funeral but SPOILER FOR SLEEPER FANS it's the one where it turns out that Tao's not really dead so poss. not!

― kit brash (kit brash), Saturday, 18 March 2006 02:26 (nineteen years ago)

I like both V for Vendetta and Watchmen exactly because of their political and philosophical qualities, it's the plot intricacies that are sometimes a bit too much for me. And I think Moore is not that good depicting real, breathing human beings. Halo Jones and A Small Killing are my favourite of his works I've read, because those are the ones where he succeeds in that. I think the comparison between Moore and Kubrick is actually pretty apt: I find both of them absolute masters of their art, and among the best of comic or film-makers, but neither of them is among my favourites, because they seem to, for the most part, lack a heart.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Saturday, 18 March 2006 08:59 (nineteen years ago)

I think Moore's work has become less emotional and more calculated over time. Doesn't make it any better or worse necessarily. Whatever passion there was has been replaced with exacting cynicism. At least the standard as such hasn't slipped -- too many people who've been in comics for 25 years are, by that point, going through the motions, but Moore keeps digging for new angles. And quite often finds them.

― _chrissie (chrissie1068), Saturday, 18 March 2006 13:49 (nineteen years ago)

i don't think moore is heartless at all... and i have a hard time seeing how people think that! swamp thing! the movie star's life story in v for vendetta! nite owl and sally juspeczyk! the "gamer" issue of top 10!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 18 March 2006 15:11 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...

I just finished volume 1 of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, after having read volume 2 before, and I have to ask: what's so special about these? I mean, the premise and the characters were nice, and catching all the metafictional details was fun, but the plots were kinda dull - especially the endings (and I always thought endings Moore's strong point). Kevin O'Neill is superb of course, and generally I liked the second volume better because of the amazingly pretty Mars scenes and the giant mutant animals. But yeah, do people hold these in high regard, or do they like then exactly because they're a bit of fun and nothing more?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 11:14 (nineteen years ago)

For me, the latter.

― pixel farmer (Rock Hardy), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 11:19 (nineteen years ago)

They wear their craft pretty lightly, but I think they're pretty exceptional. I'm more ambivalent about the second volume, but the ending to the first was pretty epic, iirc.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 11:50 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't think the ending was that exceptional: it was basically a big aerial fight scene, even with some Hollywood clichés (Moriarty has knocked Mina down and is about to shoot Quatermain, but hold on, Mina has regained her consciousness and saves the day!). Sure, the stories were well crafted, but I think the big Moore epics (V, Watchmen, From Hell) got this tingling going through me, I couldn't wait to see what happens next, and that wasn't the case here.

Also, I think LoEG supports about what I said earlier about Moore: when it comes to his characters, they usually feel cold and detached (maybe deliberately so). I guess Mina and Quatermain were supposed to be sympathetic, but I didn't really care for any of the characters. The only exception was the scenes between Mina and Hyde.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:00 (nineteen years ago)

Also, this is a minor point, but what's up with the rather crude stereotypes of Chinese and Arabs in volume 1? Were they supposed to refect the pulpy nature of the story? Moore puts some harsh criticism of the British empire in Nemo's mouth, so why reproduce its stereotypes?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:03 (nineteen years ago)

The ending to the first is probably less annoying when it's not six months or so late just for 'and there was a big fite the end'.

That said, the plots aren't the best point, everything else is. The characterisation, the cleverness, the art, the interest people might have in imagining 'what happens next/before'.

I thought the backup strips in LOEG2 were woeful, though. Just print a list of the books you've read and charge us 2 pages less, Mr Moore.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:15 (nineteen years ago)

There's also rather crude stereotypes of the British all through both books as well. Indeed Quartermain himself is one. It is as you say the pulp nature.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:16 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I agree - though wasn't it the same kinda "spot my references" thing the main stories did, only in a condensed form? :)

(x-post)

Yeah, but the Britishes were at least fleshed out.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:19 (nineteen years ago)

Also, stereotypes of those in power is not the same as those not in power. But as I said, this is a minor complaint.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:21 (nineteen years ago)

Yes, I didn't bother to read the text stuff, thankfully.
I think the stereotyping is just plain old satire of old Haggard and Sapper-type stories -- Nemo is obviously supposed to undercut it.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:23 (nineteen years ago)

(I recently read King Solomon's Mines, btw, and it's ripping stuff, well recommended if you like LOEG -- his prose is much better than Moore's.)

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:25 (nineteen years ago)

If the third edition is based on the end notes of the second one, I'd still want to read it, as some of the reference points in there sounded more interesting than those in the comics. Especially the stuff about magical underground kingdoms - I've always had a special place in my heart for those. And I hope the League stumbles upon Moomin Valley!

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:26 (nineteen years ago)

I'd love to see Moomins drawn by Kevin O'Neill.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:27 (nineteen years ago)

All the chinese stuff was specifically based on the Fu Manchu novels, which feature much orientalist hoo ha and cliche. They were still in copywright though, so the evil chinese crime lord was called something else.

― Mark C (Markco), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:29 (nineteen years ago)

Surely in your crude stereotype of Hollywood, the roles would be reversed? Women saving men, indeed!

xpost - not really. The people in the train carriage that gets smashed in the second volume are just twits. They get more dialogue than the average Manchu henchman, but I don't think they come off any better. Also the point of view of both series is English looking out - Moore could have done something else, but I don't really require that everything I read subverts all the unpleasant aspects of its influences.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:30 (nineteen years ago)

I sort of see the second one as Alan Moore's revenge on the LXG filmmakers -- sort of a dare to film it as a sequel (i.e. lots of arguing, sex, protoganists are observers rather than participators) -- which is also sort of why the second volume doesn't work so well. On the other hand, the Invisible Man's death is about as memorable as anything I've read in Moore (and, therefore, comics in general).

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:31 (nineteen years ago)

Haha also how is Fu Manchu not in power? He runs half of London!

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:32 (nineteen years ago)

But if you're going to flesh out the characters in the League, why not do that to the Fu Manchu people as well?

(xx-post)

Andrew, I'm talking about what was the situation in real life.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:33 (nineteen years ago)

Um, I think it's most probable that Moore thinks the old-fashioned racism is just a good wheeze and a laugh. It's English people poking fun at their own credulity (which we like to do) for believing the sterotypes in the first place.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:38 (nineteen years ago)

Hmm, maybe, but I didn't see much satire in the depictions of the Arabs and the Chinese. They were just the others of the story - the British villain was at least given a character.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:44 (nineteen years ago)

On the other hand, the Invisible Man's death is about as memorable as anything I've read in Moore (and, therefore, comics in general).

I'd prefer both the death after that (and I can't believe I didn't see the joke about 'Serpentine Park' coming!) and the two scenes with Mina and Hyde, the one in between the two deaths, and the first one in the inn just after the first invasion. The latter is probably my favourite scene from the two series.

In fact, this is partly why people love the series is that they are to pulp novels what Watchmen was to comics, they sit down and ask "yes, but these people that did this, what would they be like"? And they come up with obvious and non-obvious answers: Hyde would be more and more the dominant monster and also capable of being surprised by one last thing in himself, Mina would be an outcast and also possessed of a completely iron will and self-posession, Quartermain would be an opium-addled sot and also an adventure junkie in a world that he thought had outgrown him, The Invisible man (name forgot, sorry) would be a capricious rumour and also a complete psychopath. Nemo gets a little short-changed, he's a terrifying outsider who trades off his reputation and also right at the end a noble savage disgusted to find out he was right about the whiteys all along.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:47 (nineteen years ago)

But if you're going to flesh out the characters in the League, why not do that to the Fu Manchu people as well?

I think I've made it clear that I have no interest in this question.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:51 (nineteen years ago)

the whole thing reminded me a lot of Michael Moorcock's Oswald Bastable stories

― Mark C (Markco), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 12:53 (nineteen years ago)

The point, surely, is that they AREN'T fleshed out.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 13:00 (nineteen years ago)

i really liked the (text) story in vol. 1! the quatermain-meets-lovecraft thingamabob!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 15:19 (nineteen years ago)

ha, you should read K.S.M., then! you could probably polish the whole book off before breakfast. it's good fun.

― Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 15:41 (nineteen years ago)

i really really should huh

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 15:44 (nineteen years ago)

Tuomas, while I and my people (the Chinese, natch) appreciate your sensitivity to racial typing, there are times when a roisterous narrative is sufficient to entertain and thrill -- politicks be d-mned. (And it doesn't hurt that from what I'm aware of Mr. Moore, he doesn't believe in said typing. But that is neither here nor there.)

― c(''c) (Leee), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 17:44 (nineteen years ago)

the plots aren't the best point, everything else is

Vol 1 is remarkably tightly plotted, in a slightly old-fashioned way. It has a perfect three act structure.

― chap who would dare to be a stone cold thug (chap), Wednesday, 5 April 2006 18:01 (nineteen years ago)

there are times when a roisterous narrative is sufficient to entertain and thrill

Yeah, as I said it was a minor point, and I didn't want to bring in another heated debate. The stereotypes didn't ruin my pleasure, but that doesn't mean they're not problematic at all. As I said, it's kinda interesting how Moore choses to bring a new life into certain archetypes, but not to others. This is most obvious in the beginning of volume 1, where Quatermain saves Mina from being raped by the beastly Arabs. Now, if this was a satire, both Quatermain and the Arabs migth be presented as stereotypes: Quatermain as the gallant hero rushing to save the damsel in distress, the Arabs as evil rapists. The problem, however, is that the equation is only partial here. Quatermain is presented in a realistic light: he is a weak, opium-addicted old man. The Arabs, however, remain stereotypical. So, while I think there are many ways you can use ethnic and other stereotypes in an interesting manner, Moore's way of doing it is problematic because it's rather half-hearted.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 6 April 2006 09:28 (nineteen years ago)

I want to be on here the day Tuomas reveals he ever liked anything that's identifiably a comic, ever.

― aldo_cowpat (aldo_cowpat), Thursday, 6 April 2006 09:35 (nineteen years ago)

Dude, he started ILC, in the first week, with a long list of comics he loves!

Top 100 comics of all time.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 6 April 2006 09:49 (nineteen years ago)

Having re-read that list, I'm curious now that considering the problems he has with Superhero nazism, bizarre female bodyshapes and objectification, lazy stereotyping etc Frank Miller still makes his list.

― aldo_cowpat (aldo_cowpat), Thursday, 6 April 2006 09:57 (nineteen years ago)

Hey, I said I liked it mostly, and that the stereotype thing mentioned was a minor point. Anyway, my main criticism with both volumes of LoEG is that the plots are kinda conventional and not particularly innovative. They serve their purpose though.

If I was to rewrite the top 100, it would be quite different, but I guess it gives you a general view on my tastes. The reason I may sound overtly critical here is that most of the stuff I absolutely love isn't discussed here that often (but let's not go into that again, it isn't ILC's fault rather than mere a difference between my tastes and what comics are generally being discussed here). Still, I hope you don't mind me occasionally joining the threads here, even if I have negative things to say.

(x-post)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 6 April 2006 10:02 (nineteen years ago)

After having re-read Sin City I'm not sure if I'd put it into the list again. There's sort of disrepancy between the undeniable visceral impact it made when I first read it as a teenager, and the diminishing returns I've gotten out of Miller's work ever since. I guess it could be on the list merely because of it's undeniable stylistic strength. Note that DKR isn't on the list though, because with that I was always more distracted by the politics than enchanted with Miller's craft.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 6 April 2006 10:08 (nineteen years ago)

I think Tuomas tends to bother people on this board not because he's critical or anti-comics, but because his criticisms tend to be rather dogmatic--looking from the outside down, rather than nuanced and immanent. With these stereotyping issues, I don't think it's helpful just to say that LOEG is racist, etc. I think it'd be more accurate to say that this type of anti-humanist flattening of characters is what happens when you use pastiche, because you're not sampling people from an empirical reality, but sampling people from already flattened fictional works. (A better example of this wouldn't be LOEG, but that ABC special where Moore redoes Little Nemo without the Zulu stereotype, but with a charming young scamp named Chinky!) The overall problem isn't that Moore is racially insensitive, but that we as a culture tend to believe that racial sensitivity isn't necessary in so-called ironic discourses.

― kenchen, Thursday, 6 April 2006 16:08 (nineteen years ago)

good point kenchen!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 6 April 2006 16:10 (nineteen years ago)

also i think it needs to be asked how much the art we enjoy needs to absolutely reflect our political convictions... i guess some people want art to be a mirror, but personally it doesn't bother me that much if the author of a work has a different viewpoint than i do. in fact that is one of the best things about art.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 6 April 2006 16:12 (nineteen years ago)

in fact that is one of the best things about art

In fact, isn't this the most critical thing about art? BLATANT art-qua-socio/politico mirror tends to be Highway to Heaven at its most benign and, y'know, Liberality For All at its most amateurishly whateverest.

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 6 April 2006 16:43 (nineteen years ago)

that ABC special where Moore redoes Little Nemo without the Zulu stereotype

wrong Moore.

― kit brash (kit brash), Thursday, 6 April 2006 23:57 (nineteen years ago)

Whoops! You're right. But the point still applies whether it's written by Steve or Alan.

― kenche, Friday, 7 April 2006 03:40 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't meant to claim Moore or LoeG is racist, nor that this would be a major flaw in the text - as I said, it was a minor observation. I just thought there was a curious asymmetry how Moore brought some of his archetypes into life, whereas some of them he didn't (see also: the girl school scene in volume 1, the Martians as your typical space monsters in volume 2).

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Friday, 7 April 2006 08:43 (nineteen years ago)

Now, if this was a satire, both Quatermain and the Arabs migth be presented as stereotypes

Wouldn't that have been antithetical to Moore's humanist aims in writing stories, Tuomas? Presenting both as self-conscious stereotypes seems like it would have come off as an easy swipe at his source material, whereas the OTT orcishness of the villains in LOEG makes the obvious comment on the source material in a subtle way while also being a celebration of it, and he still gets to tell a story about human beings instead of doing a MAD Magazine pisstake (the sort of thing that's better left to his First American).

Oh wait-- reading on, I realize that that's what Chuck and kenchen already said in response. Ah well. Hey, Nemo's not a stereotype! Doesn't his "they were only British" scene make up for Moore's supposed flaws in telling the story?

― Chris Freiberg (Chris F.), Thursday, 13 April 2006 05:40 (nineteen years ago)

two months pass...

unimpressive; idiotic; racist, March 13, 2004
Reviewer: A customer (Los Angeles, CA USA)
Having enjoyed reading Alan Moore's "Watchmen," I looked to League of Extraordinary Gentlement hoping to find more intelligent writing and deep plots. I found neither in this piece of [expletive deleted]. Filled with racist tones and needless violence, this [expletive deleted] book is complete and total [expletive deleted] compared to The Watchmen. What the [expletive deleted] wass Alan Moore thinking when he wrote this? It's as if he wiped his [expletive deleted] and handed the resulting [expletive deleted] to the publisher, thereby resulting in this book-bound [expletive deleted] being sold.

Most likely this book will be enjoyed by teenage fanboys around the world who wouldn't know good writing from their left [expletive deleted].

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 6 July 2006 04:00 (eighteen years ago)

I thought the right [expletive deleted] was the creative side, tho!

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 6 July 2006 12:14 (eighteen years ago)

Drunken Tuomas!

― c(''c) (Leee), Thursday, 6 July 2006 16:09 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.