Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by amdmiami, Sep 1, 2008.
Well it used to be post modern, so it's quite dated now-in to only now be considered modern.
His work on Martha Washington also stands the test of time.
I didn't read his work on Albion and Thunderbolt Jaxon but I just looked up some of his recent covers for action comics...
It's the clothes that those people are wearing and their hair which is dated, which is true with most things to come out of the 80s which were set in the 80s. I mean, the Princess Bride is beyond fabulous, but that electronic baseball game TINY Fred Savage on his sick bed is playing just gets more and more laughable every time I watch the movie.
That's more the subject being drawn than the art itself. If I drew in moderne style an image of Madonna as she appeared in 1985, would the art be dated?
I consider "Watchmen" to be one of the greatest animated books that I have ever read, but it didn't necessarily break new ground for comic books around the world, but only in America.
"Heavy Metal" and Manga were already for many years way ahead of the curb.
If you're ahead of the curb, doesn't that put you in the gutter?
If Columbus was the first to discover America....then, how do you explain all the Indians?
Where to start?
1. It's not animated. Animated means to move.
2. It broke ground for what it did in terms of the way it deconstructed the American superhero comic, which is not what Heavy Metal or manga did. They're different beasts.
3. That's "curve", as opposed to the thing your car parks against.
It would be a tragedy if no one studied literature.
If no one had ever studied Shakespeare or the Greek tragedies half of the great works of our time on the page and the screen may never have been told.
Often times it is through the study of things that we don't understad that we come to have a better understanding of them.
As for Watchmen...I haven't read many comics. But I did enjoy this one very much. I find it difficult to judge Watchmen unless you've read the entire comic because the end is a very important part of the tale.
While the writing is fantastic and yes, some of the best written (comic-wise), I find a lot of the artwork to be horribly dated and distracting to look at.
That's right.. I went THERE..
I always get tickled pink by things like this.
Put me solidly in the "sometimes a book is just a book" camp. I'm sorry, but if you're spending entire semesters of your life analyzing all the subtle (and apparently fully intended) nuances of something, especially a comic book, you're insane. Frank Miller and company did not put that much time and effort into the book, much like Shakespeare didn't put anywhere near the amount of effort into his works as all of those incredibly pretentious college professors seem to think he did.
I find it particularly amusing that these same people just gloss over the works of people who did put an extraordinary amount of time, thought and effort into their works.
Was Watchmen a good series? Yes, I enjoyed it immensely. Was it this nearly prophetic masterpiece of brilliance and insight that people apparently send large chunks of their lives contemplating? No. No it was not.
Frank Miller didn't write it. Alan Moore did.
And I remember Dave Gibbons saying that when the script for the first issue was dropped on his front porch his house shook. Every detail was included, from the position of the blood stain on the smiley pin (5 minutes to midnight) to the characters in the background.
And no one who analyzes literature believes that the author put all those nuances in intentionally. That's the first thing they teach you.
<pssst...that's not a blood stain>
Note that Ozymandias isn't the only person assuming that the strategic situation was leading to catastrophe; the excerpt from "Super-Powers and the Superpowers" makes this clear, and foreshadows Ozymandias' plan. Granted, the reasoning doesn't make all that much sense. A lot of talk in the 80s about nuclear weapons also made no sense. I'm sure you remember all the nonsense about the nuclear freeze and cruise missiles.
Edit: I've got no idea if Moore meant the threat to be real or not. The unreal threat from the pirate comic might not be an intentional parallel with the main plot situation.
Meaning that Ozzy would kill them? I don't see it. He hadn't demonstrated any such intention before they agree to go along with his plan. Is he supposed to change his mind later?
As for the ending, Moore said that he preferred to leave it in an indeterminate state, but that given where the name Ozymandias comes from, it's highly likely that all Veidt's works and plans would come to nothing. For whatever authorial intent is worth.
Separate names with a comma.