I find that the more of Frank's work you read, the more you realize how samey most of his work is. The same dialogue, character types and inner monologue.
His best stuff, however, is definitely Daredevil Born Again and Batman Year One.
And I actually liked Superman's portrayal in The Dark Knight Returns. It just seems that Miller has something of a dislike for Super Powers in general. Notice how just about all his heroes are Badass Normals.
edited 3rd Nov '11 3:38:47 PM by Kentok
You can get what you want and still not be very happy.Frankly, I always found myself unimpressed even by the "good" elements of Miller's work (Yes, he can work up some good film noir atmosphere. You know who else can do that? Darwyn Cooke. And Cooke can do it without constantly fighting the urge to turn every female character into a stripper.) I'm underwhelmed even by his best work.
edited 14th Dec '11 3:15:58 PM by Sparkysharps
I have to admit, for the crap that Miller has written like The Dark Knight Strikes Again and All-Star Batman and Robin recently, the guy has also written some really good stories in the past like Daredevil: Born Again and both Batman: Year One and The Dark Knight Returns. The guy had a really good handle on these characters for a while.
That being said, I find him to be a genre writer. Whether good or bad, his stories always usually have elements of the genre and, aside from stories like 300 and The Big Guy and Rusty, the man rarely steps outside of it. Funnily enough, Sin City his most celebrated tribute to Noir has little interest for me.
Theres sex and death and human grime in monochrome for one thin dime and at least the trains all run on time but they dont go anywhere.You people are all looking at Miller's work from a story perspective. Miller is held in such a high regard, especially by other comic book writers, not because of his characters or plot or story, but because he tailors the technical aspects of the comic to reinforce any moods or themes present. He is an artisan of the form, one who understands the difference between every perspective, every cut type, every sequence and shade and line. He's one of the best comic writers since Eisner, and I know appeal to authority is a fallacy, but Moore and Ellis would back me up on this in a heartbeat.
Technically the man is brilliant, I agree with you there. You could easily adapt The Dark Knight Returns and use the comic proper as storyboards for a live action film. I still think that the breakdown scene in TDKR is easily one of the best and most memorable in comic history. All I'm saying is that the stories, well some of them at least, leave such a bad taste in your mouth you can't really appreciate it. A prime example would be with the Black Canary's introduction in AS:Ba R. I get what he's trying to accomplish, I really do, but what purpose does it serve to the story?
As for his artwork I have to say I am a fan.
Theres sex and death and human grime in monochrome for one thin dime and at least the trains all run on time but they dont go anywhere.I dunno what to think about Frank. I've heard good things about Sin City, I enjoyed the movie version of 300, and Batman Year One, Daredevil Born Again, and The Dark Knight Returns are among the greatest comics I've ever read. Those last three I love unconditionally.
But then you have stuff like All Star Batman And Robin and The Dark Knight Strikes Again. Did Frank forget why those comics were so great to begin with and just stick to the violence and hookers? I mean, what happened there?
Well, one thing that has been all but outright stated from several sources is that Miller has suffered the terrible Creator Breakdown. Consider this...he witnessed the September 11, 2001 attacks with his own eyes. Then he started releasing The Dark Knight Strikes Again one month after this event. That's right, one month! It is likely that he was in the middle of this breakdown when he was writing that story.
Oh, yeah, and here's a little something straight from the Fallen Creator section:
It is very debatable whether Miller's writing has actually turned worse. Others would simply call it more self-satirizing and True Art Is Offensive going by his latest Batman run, and an (excited?) quote about his upcoming al-Qaeda story "being bound to offend just about anyone", but his mainstream appeal has never been greater, given his collaboration with highly efficient choreographic filmmaker Zack Snyder. Although while this may technically be the more extreme sentiment, {{300}} has received more flack for perceptions of heavy anti-Iranian undertones, especially considering interview statements from Miller regarding Islam. Fellow writer Grant Morrison even stated, in a review of Miller's upcoming "propaganda" piece, that Miller should go out and fight in the desert himself, rather than spouting super-jingoistic rhetoric stateside.
I bet Morrison wants to grab Miller by the shoulders, shake him, and give him a What the Hell, Hero? speech.
edited 4th Nov '11 7:20:25 AM by TiggersAreGreat
Oh, Equestria, we stand on guard for thee!The only comics I've enjoyed by him for being good anyways were his Daredevil runs. Those were godly tales.
edited 4th Nov '11 7:48:24 AM by SilentlyHonest
I've only ever read The Dark Knight Returns. I thought it was good, but it never really did anything for me; I did like his artwork though.
I saw Batman: Year One, which is supposed to be just like the stroy Miller wrote, and found it to be really enjoyable.
edited 4th Nov '11 11:38:11 AM by NULLcHiLD27
I've heard it said that Miller opposes naturalism in comic art. In one interview, he said this:
"People are attempting to bring a superficial reality to superheroes which is rather stupid. They work best as the flamboyant fantasies they are. I mean, these are characters that are broad and big. I don't need to see sweat patches under Superman's arms. I want to see him fly."
You want to know something funny? To my knowledge, no Comic Book writer has ever put sweat patches (whatever those are supposed to be) anywhere on Superman's body, and every comic book writer wants to see him fly. What's more, practically nobody liked the comic art (which certainly opposes naturalism) put into The Dark Knight Strikes Again and least one person said that the art (which looks pretty natural and most likely not done by Miller) of All Star Batman And Robin was it's only redeeming quality.
I personally don't know if naturalism is good thing or not for Comic Books. Miller might have a point about opposing naturalism. However, the minute you examine his arguments closely and think about the works he wrote is the minute you start wondering if someone else should have made arguments against naturalism. Am I wrong here?
Oh, Equestria, we stand on guard for thee!The art in All-Star was done by Jim Lee, and anyone with taste (me and people that agree with me) thinks it's thoroughly mediocre.
The best thing about All-Star is that it confirms that the Batman of the Millerverse (Year One, All-Star, DKR, DKSA) is and always was totally insane.
edited 9th Nov '11 9:43:31 PM by Canondorf
Well dressing up like a bat to beat up criminals is a tad on the kooky side, but Miller took it too ludicrous level. Glad I'm not the only one whose not a fan of Jim Lee's art work. I hate how he draws The Joker.
Theres sex and death and human grime in monochrome for one thin dime and at least the trains all run on time but they dont go anywhere.I just want a cool story set during the Point of Divergence between the millerverse and the DCU what changed? How did one Post-Year One Bats become the Morrisonian ubermensch hero of the universe and the other become a grizzled old Cyborg of a man. Kind aliek what The JSA dd in The Kingdom.
Let's make a TCG!There is no point of divergence between the Millerverse and the main verse. In the Millerverse Demon Knights and the Storm Watch tradition never existed, nor did Adam-One or the New Gods. There're just some isolated points of synchronicity.
Year on happened in both verses and Miller never established any backstory pre-Year One so yeah there would be one.
Let's make a TCG!Yes they did, they shared a commonality in Year One. Which remain in canon in both Universes even post-Luthor and Mind.
Let's make a TCG!One thing I find interesting is how Frank Miller had planned to make a story titled Holy Terror Batman, which has Batman go up against Al Qaeda. Now, he's going to change it to remove Batman from the story.
Miller clearly was having fun with the phrase "Holy X, Batman!" Really, you could insert just about anything into X, and practically create an Internet Meme out of it. In fact, I am rather astonished that no one has gone around saying "Holy $#1+, Batman!"
Oh, sorry, I didn't know that it got released - and just last month, apparently!
Well, I'm not surprised that it became universally reviled. Miller even said straight out that it was a propaganda piece. The problem with saying something like that is you're not quite endearing people to your work if you call it propaganda. It sounds to me like Miller is still trying to work out his feelings with 9/11 and Al Qaeda.

Frank Miller is certainly controversial when it comes to Comic Books.
Let's take a lot at three storylines he wrote, shall we? Those are the All Star Batman And Robin, The Dark Knight Returns, and The Dark Knight Strikes Again stories.
I have had the pleasure of reading The Dark Knight Returns. Miller was certainly in fine form when he wrote that one. I have not read The Dark Knight Strikes Again or All Star Batman And Robin, but I have definitely read up on them and seen several pictures of them. Miller seemed to be in some weird moods when he wrote them.
For starters, Miller certainly has a fetish for prostitutes and women who act like them. That makes me wonder if it okay for a comic book writer to broadcast hir (his/her) fetishes in hir stories. I wonder this because Miller's fetish is disturbing or skewed at best and misogynistic at worst in my opinion. What are yours?
The personalities of the characters across the stories...are bizarre. Superman goes from Stupid Good to Lawful Stupid to...Lawful Evil, perhaps? One thing that stayed consistent about Superman in the stories is that he comes off as the village idiot. How do Superman fans feel about that? Batman himself...well! He goes from a murderous psycho to a man struggling to maintain his sanity to a man who has either gone dangerously senile or gone murderous psycho again. The Gotham police go from Dirty Cop (who have no qualms about hurting women and murdering a 12 year old boy) to Police Are Useless (even though they are trying to be helpful) to...actually, I'm not sure they appeared in the third story at all!
I know that there are gaps of years that occur between the three stories, but I find it difficult to swallow that one character could completely change hir personality like that. At times, I find myself seriously wondering if the characters are suffering from some sort of Bipolar Disorder.
What do you think?
Oh, Equestria, we stand on guard for thee!