Before the hate starts, Alan Moore can be a gigantic prick for all I care, the man shiats gold.

/he's 10ft tall with lightening bolts shooting out of his arse

I can't take seriously Alan Moore. Great mind for stories, but for anything concrete or useful, he's shiat.

ArcadianRefugee: I can't take seriously Alan Moore. Great mind for stories, but for anything concrete or useful, he's shiat.

Are you saying stories aren't useful?

/seriously?

Confabulat: I always hated "Dark Knight Returns." Not because of Frank Miller's writing, but because the goddamned thing is so UGLY. Who drew that crap?

Sure your not thinking of DK2? That was some horrible drawing.

GreenAdder: Jesus. I actually agree with Alan Moore about something.

I wouldnt tell too many people, agreeing with crazy hermits will get you locked up.


Frank Miller was right and Alan Moore is the crazy old hermit who refuses to live in reality

This looks like a good spot to get this off my chest.
Alan Moore is like Bob Dylan.
His work is better when it's covered/interpreted by someone else.

/I liked V for Vendetta the movie over the comic.
//I feel the same way about The Watchmen.
///That man ruined Swamp Thing
//Braces for retaliation
/Slashies!

steamingpile: GreenAdder: Jesus. I actually agree with Alan Moore about something.

I wouldnt tell too many people, agreeing with crazy hermits will get you locked up.


Frank Miller was right and Alan Moore is the crazy old hermit who refuses to live in reality

I prefer to keep reality out of my comic books

ArcadianRefugee: I can't take seriously Alan Moore. Great mind for stories, but for anything concrete or useful, he's shiat.

He writes comic books, dude. It's not freaking War and Peace.

steamingpile: GreenAdder: Jesus. I actually agree with Alan Moore about something.

I wouldnt tell too many people, agreeing with crazy hermits will get you locked up.


Frank Miller was right and Alan Moore is the crazy old hermit who refuses to live in reality



Have you taken a look at reality lately? Are you sure this is what you want it to be?

Rent Party: ArcadianRefugee: I can't take seriously Alan Moore. Great mind for stories, but for anything concrete or useful, he's shiat.

He writes comic books, dude. It's not freaking War and Peace.

Moore's writing may as well be War and Peace of you compare it to Miller.

Also, I would have money on Moore in a cage match against Miller. That old man may be scary crazy, but he also looks like the kind of guy who could fark someone up, and do it in a heartbeat without giving it a second thought.

/also, Rasputin's long lost love child
//that's all I'm saying. He's got the crazy and the talent

Occupy Gotham

Alan Moore is dead on here.

GreenAdder: WiteBuddha: /he's 10ft tall with lightening bolts shooting out of his arse

Now just leave Bill Brasky out of this.

Bill Brasky tells stories about Alan Moore..

adamgreeney: That's the best summation i've seen. Incredible.

And Miller Moore is incredibly over rated. Once you hit 25 or so you realize how awful his work is.
Works that way, too.

/Alan Moore really likes Alan Moore.

"had been a bunch of young, sociopathic vigilantes with Batman make-up on their faces, he'd be more in favour of it. We would definitely have to agree to differ on that one."

Every dream I had of becoming a sociopathic vigilante dressed as Batman who hung out with Alan Moore die in one sentence. What do I have now? What...?

"As far as I can see, the Occupy movement is just ordinary people reclaiming rights which should always have been theirs."

Mr. Moore, I agree with you, but how do you stop people from giving their rights away in a free society? If people aren't free to make bad choices, then they aren't free at all.
Yes, these rights should always have remained with the average people. But they traded them away for politicians' promises. Bad trade? Of course. But it's what the people wanted. It's really not fair to blame those who take advantage - they didn't put guns to anyone's heads, and you can't con an honest man. We deserve what we got, because we made it happen.

This is weird, just tweak it a little, and it sounds like he's talking about the Tea Partiers:

"As far as I can see, the Occupy movement is just ordinary people reclaiming rights which should always have been theirs. I can't think of any reason why as a population we should be expected to stand by and see a gross reduction in the living standards of ourselves and our kids, possibly for generations, when the people who have got us into this have been rewarded re-elected for it; they've certainly not been punished in any way because they're too big to fail think we work for them. I think that the Occupy movement is, in one sense, the public saying that they should be the ones to decide who too big to fail works for who. It's a completely justified howl of moral outrage and it seems to be handled in a very intelligent, non-violent way, which is probably another reason why Frank Miller would be less than pleased with it. I'm sure if it had been a bunch of young, sociopathic vigilantes with Batman make-up on their faces, he'd be more in favour of it. We would definitely have to agree to differ on that one."

Distracted by the link to this in the sidebar...

I saw an interview with Frank Miller once and he was obviously blitzed on coke. Ever since then everything he does and says makes more sense.

Confabulat: I always hated "Dark Knight Returns." Not because of Frank Miller's writing, but because the goddamned thing is so UGLY. Who drew that crap?

Um. Frank Miller drew it too.
/Did I just get "that's the joke 'd"?

toobsok: ArcadianRefugee: I can't take seriously Alan Moore. Great mind for stories, but for anything concrete or useful, he's shiat.

Are you saying stories aren't useful?

/seriously?

Well, frankly, yes. Unless you mean for entertainment. But when it comes right down to it, stories are second to a zillion other things.

Rent Party: ArcadianRefugee: I can't take seriously Alan Moore. Great mind for stories, but for anything concrete or useful, he's shiat.

He writes comic books, dude. It's not freaking War and Peace.

Uhm ... you're right?

/kinda-sorta my point

Dalek Caan's doomed mistress: /that's all I'm saying. He's got the crazy and the talent

Batshiat crazy, talented story teller, but I wouldn't take advice from him on any subjects other than story telling and being batshiat crazy.

untaken_name: "As far as I can see, the Occupy movement is just ordinary people reclaiming rights which should always have been theirs."

Mr. Moore, I agree with you, but how do you stop people from giving their rights away in a free society? If people aren't free to make bad choices, then they aren't free at all.
Yes, these rights should always have remained with the average people. But they traded them away for politicians' promises. Bad trade? Of course. But it's what the people wanted. It's really not fair to blame those who take advantage - they didn't put guns to anyone's heads, and you can't con an honest man. We deserve what we got, because we made it happen.

A crime is still a crime, even if it was preventable. You might as well say that car insurance companies never need pay out because it was the person's choice to be in that intersection at that moment the other guy decided to run a red light. Putting all the onus of blame on the victims doesn't make society safer or more free, it just creates more victims.

limboslam: This is weird, just tweak it a little, and it sounds like he's talking about the Tea Partiers:

"As far as I can see, the Occupy movement is just ordinary people reclaiming rights which should always have been theirs. I can't think of any reason why as a population we should be expected to stand by and see a gross reduction in the living standards of ourselves and our kids, possibly for generations, when the people who have got us into this have been rewarded re-elected for it; they've certainly not been punished in any way because they're too big to fail think we work for them. I think that the Occupy movement is, in one sense, the public saying that they should be the ones to decide who too big to fail works for who. It's a completely justified howl of moral outrage and it seems to be handled in a very intelligent, non-violent way, which is probably another reason why Frank Miller would be less than pleased with it. I'm sure if it had been a bunch of young, sociopathic vigilantes with Batman make-up on their faces, he'd be more in favour of it. We would definitely have to agree to differ on that one."

What rights were taken from the Tea Partiers that weren't also taken from the OWS folks? Really, what WAS the Tea Party message besides "taxes bad!" and "government bad!"?

burning_bridge: A crime is still a crime, even if it was preventable. You might as well say that car insurance companies never need pay out because it was the person's choice to be in that intersection at that moment the other guy decided to run a red light. Putting all the onus of blame on the victims doesn't make society safer or more free, it just creates more victims.

I didn't say you shouldn't prosecute people for breaking the law, I said you shouldn't blame people for taking advantage of idiots who thought they were pulling one over on "the man". Also, it's more like an insurance company not paying out for a fraudulent claim. You think they should pay on those? And lastly, I'm not putting ALL the blame or onus of blame, whatever that is, on any one group. There's plenty to go around. But look at it this way: If you buy a fake Rolex thinking it's cheap because it's stolen, who is to blame for the fact that you now have a fake Rolex?

untaken_name: If you buy a fake Rolex thinking it's cheap because it's stolen,

Should have read "if you buy a fake Rolex thinking it's real and that it's cheap because it's stolen"

I more or less agree with Alan Moore, though I consider myself center-right (though the Republican Party treats the idea of right wing as a moving target these days, so who farking knows?). Not that I think there should be a massive redistribution of wealth, but that the people have a valid reason to be angry, and to determine what's really "too big to fail."

That said, I sort of think the Occupy movement undercuts itself by acting too much like hippies. Didn't Occupy Denver nominate a dog as their spokesperson? I get being inclusive, but some voices really need to be kept out in the cold.

In terms of comics, I think both Frank Miller and Alan Moore are way past their prime. I respected Dark Knight Returns more than I liked it, but that's the only Frank Miller work that did much for me. Couldn't even get through 300, and I liked the Sin City movie far more than the comics.

Alan Moore is certainly very creative and intelligent. I loved Watchmen, but seeing his recent output makes me think he's lost his touch. Any of the League books after Volume 2 (which was sort of wobbly itself) are absolutely terrible. I mean it; Black Dossier and Century are extended postmodern masturbation sessions. I guess he spends the rest of his time drawing porn where Peter Pan and Dorothy Gale fark Queen Elizabeth I or something. Oh, and there was also Neonomicon, which made me feel embarrassed for him (the In the Courtyard section was okay, but everything after... blech).

I'm not exactly far left myself, but it's beyond me how one can see NO legitimacy to the OWS movement. Actually, it's not beyond me to see: They're so blinded by partisanship that they have to belittle anything that challenges their view.

A bunch of Wall Street execs got away with murder. The fed gave away trillions of dollars to them. There's enough here to piss everybody off. It's not a rejection of the free market to say what happened here was wrong. People are angry, and people are protesting, as they should be.

There are some crazy and misguided elements to OWS. You could say the same thing about the Tea Party. To my mind, both are essentially the same, even though partisanship has cut sharp line where a blurrier one exists. We're not actually nearly as far apart on this as we seem to think we are.

untaken_name:
Mr. Moore, I agree with you, but how do you stop people from giving their rights away in a free society? If people aren't free to make bad choices, then they aren't free at all.
Yes, these rights should always have remained with the average people. But they traded them away for politicians' promises. Bad trade? Of course. But it's what the people wanted. It's really not fair to blame those who take advantage - they didn't put guns to anyone's heads, and you can't con an honest man. We deserve what we got, because we made it happen.

The philosophical foundation of our country states that one cannot give away their rights, one simply does not have the power to do so; they cannot be signed, traded, or taken away. You are born with them, you will die with them, and everyone has them, everywhere, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. They are inalienable and inherent human rights. The framers of the US Constitution were fearful of listing out those rights because it could give the impression that the Constitution/Government gave them, and hence that the Constitution/Government could take them away, which is why they were included later through amendment (at least one state, I think Rhode Island, refused to ratify the Constitution without an express listing of rights). Now, governments don't necessarily have to respect those rights, nor protect them, but that is why the US Government is set up to protect the rights of the citizens not only from the government itself but from the citizens themselves as well.

Primitive Screwhead: This looks like a good spot to get this off my chest.
Alan Moore is like Bob Dylan.
His work is better when it's covered/interpreted by someone else.

/I liked V for Vendetta the movie over the comic.
//I feel the same way about The Watchmen.
///That man ruined Swamp Thing
//Braces for retaliation
/Slashies!

At first I was like, "Ah yes, just like Bob Dylan. Visionary, able to change the norm, sets standards few can live up to." Then I read the next sentence and was like, "Oh, this f*cktard listens to f*cking Peter Paul & Mary and thinks it's good."
And the Watchmen comic was WAY better than the movie.

/Yeah, I know you saw it coming.
//No one else said it, so it had to be me.
///Dylan was best as Dylan.

Primitive Screwhead: This looks like a good spot to get this off my chest.
Alan Moore is like Bob Dylan.
His work is better when it's covered/interpreted by someone else.

/I liked V for Vendetta the movie over the comic.
//I feel the same way about The Watchmen.
///That man ruined Swamp Thing
//Braces for retaliation
/Slashies!


"///That man ruined Swamp Thing"

Funniest thing I have heard in years.....

//obvious troll is etc,,,,,,

In Frank Miller's universe Robin is almost forced to hunt and eat rats to survive in the Batcave, and also called a goddamned retard by Batman.

In Paul Dini's universe Robin is forbidden from assisting Batman hunt down the gangster who killed the Graysons. Not out of fear that Robin would kill him, but instead Batman was terrified Robin would get killed.

DKR was needed to removed Batman from his image of the 60s, but Diniverse Batman is the real one.

What person in their right mind cares what guys who write funny books for a living think?

The differences between the two men are obvious in their "exchange". Miller is reactionary, bordering on juvenile; Moore has some humanity in him, and is wickedly clever.

ck1938: What person in their right mind cares what guys who write funny books for a living think?

This.
I doubt Id agree with either 100%. This idea that everybody deserves an equal outcome in life, and that the distress of individuals always translates to a need for politicians to intervene and redistribute, isnt right either.
But we should be angry when the system we have rewards individuals who take advantage of the financial system without producing anything.

In the end, these guys sell books with pictures and tell stories. They could have been propagandists in another time and place.