« Iron Man Sequels and Avengers Confirmed
My Name Is Bruce! »

Frank Miller, “This Movie is NOT a Tribute to Will Eisner…”

Thursday, October 30th, 2008 at 9:19 am by Jami

Frank Miller's Spirit

“… it’s a tribute to my EGO!”

AZM Ally Kensei Dave sent along this little video interview with Frank Miller on the origin of his Spirit movie. There’s a touch of arrogance in the way Miller talks about his relationship with Will Eisner. It’s clear he’s approaching this project as if he had Eisner’s blessing. And yet every bit of this film is devoid of anything remotely resembling Eisner’s Spirit, both literally and figuratively. This is not Will Eisner’s Spirit. This is Frank Miller’s Spirit. His last statement pretty much says it all, “This movie is not a tribute to Will Eisner. It’s a tribute to the Spirit.”

Ugh.

So it’s pretty clear that I think this movie is a crock of shit, even if it features Chesty Johansson who I quite like in pretty much everything. The question is, does Miller owe it to Eisner to portray the Spirit as originally conceived or is he doing things right by taking the concept and making it his own? Can a modern interpretation of the Spirit stay faithful to Eisner’s original or must it be bloodied up to make it relevant with a contemporary audience? Pure shit or absolute genius?

[Via Yahoo Movies]

Share This

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 30th, 2008 at 9:19 am and is filed under Movies, Comic Book Flicks, Comics, Dumb Ass, Indy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

4 Responses to “Frank Miller, “This Movie is NOT a Tribute to Will Eisner…””

  1. AvatarDrezz
    Posted: Oct 30th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
    1

    I don’t necessarily agree with Miller’s statement that his version is a tribute to the Spirit - its more of his interpretation of what he feels the Spirit is. If it was a tribute, he’s be staying as true to Eisner’s vision - not injecting his own style and ego into it. There’s nothing “tribute-like” about this, since it rings more like “If I did the Spirit, this is how I woulda done it.”

    I don’t mind, to be honest. Its going to be interesting - if you treat it with a grain of salt, knowing full well that this is a Frank Millered version of Eisner’s Spirit, then it will be way easier to take.

    But to have the arrogance to think that THIS is how the Spirit is, is just bold on Miller’s part. The only person who really knows the spirit of The Spirit is Eisner himself.

  2. AvatarKevin Bahrt
    Posted: Oct 30th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
    2

    I seem to recall a previous post that reinterpreting stuff is how a lot of people express them selves. It’s not necessarily evil, it’s just a way of expression. If the objective is expressing themselves it’s not really all that horrible. Think of what happened with Batman and the like. They each get a modern interpretation and it speaks to us better. Imagine if they tried to do a thirties Batman with that level of tech and culture, and nobody got the point. Some movies are meant to send a message, others are meant to tell a story. Sometimes stories get old and could benefit from a revamp. I never read comics at all as a child so this all pretty new to me so I can appreciate it as a simple story.

    And Samuel Mother Fucking Jackson looks like he had a really good time in this roll.

  3. AvatarLurklen
    Posted: Oct 30th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
    3

    I dunno I think of it as more of a reimagining than a true tribute, and I think thats to be expected when Miller writes something no matter what he tends to turn it into his own world wich obays it’s own rules and becomes whatever he thinks it should. Odds are that there are gonna be alot of people who’ve never read The Spirit but will love the film because they like Miller’s style.

    So really it’s about whether you like Miller’s style or not more then if this is a good reflection of Eisner’s Spirit.

  4. AvatarSkaOreo
    Posted: Oct 30th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
    4

    I am kind of tired of all the nerd rage that is surrounding this film. This is Miller’s own interpretation of The Spirit, and I have absolutely no problems with that. As a fan of Eisner’s work I would find it insulting if Miller(or any other person) tried to replicate Eisner’s style. It’s impossible. Only Eisner could do that, it would be foolish for Miller to try to attempt it.

    I am excited about this movie and it pains me that there will be tons of people who already know they are going to hate this movie, go see it just so they can hate on it on some online blog.

SexyComments by BorkWeb
Close
E-mail It