The politics of Frank Miller

[fpb]

Well, well, well. It seems that my rooted detestation of Frank Miller and all his criminal works roused more interest among my friends than any other controversial idea I could toss at them. Well, then, on your own heads be it.

I have a deep, personal, vindictive hatred for Frank Miller, the cartoonist who originated 300

Comments

[fpb]

I am a historian too - and while I am not as well known as Mr.Hanson, I am better qualified to assess Miller's work, being a cartoonist as well. And the content of Fort Knox could not have paid me to endorse it as he did. He did so because he felt it had a politically convenient message.

[fpb]

I read a considerable amount of Mr.Hanson's occasional pieces. I don't think he is a whore. I do think, however, that he has a very strong viewpoint that dominates his writings.

[fpb]

This is sweet and typical of you - the person who gives hedonism a good name. But you miss the context of the poll. In the last few months, I have seen the need of a number of posts with unwelcome and unpleasant messages (though no other, I hope, will be quite as angry as this one) which have been piling up because of my innate laziness and instinctive reluctance to take controversial positions. For instance; one friend of mine asked me about homosexuality and the Church; the Virginia Tech crimes brought up the issue of the Second Amendment, where I had left a debate with some American friends unfinished; the fiftieth anniversary of the Suez crisis and the failed revolt of Hungary, last November, gave rise to thoughts about American foreign policy, which I did not write down; etc. Everything on that list was something that I had been thinking about recently, that I had a call to write about, but that I shied from because it would hurt or annoy people. There was a genuine logjam of important but negative things that needed to be

[fpb]

And I think you are a shameless flirt whose boyfriend had better have a strong and shock-proof heart muscle! Just kidding.

[redcoast]

He does not revel, like the classic Fascist, in visions of clean and pure strapping young lads in unbesmirched uniforms: his violence is crude, muddy and nasty.

Dude! He so does! You totally need to see 300!

[fpb]

Does he now? As I said, much of the critical part of that article came from one I had written about 1995, and in some ways it was bound to be out of date. I really should have deleted that bit, since in fact I was familiar with the perverted stylishness of Sin City. Even so, what you describe is one step forwards, and it might possibly have to do with the director as much as with Miller. The few sketches of his comic that I saw did not strike me as fluidly handsome, and I have little desire to see more.

[redcoast]

To tell the truth, I'm far more familiar with the movies than the original work, but the film lovingly showed many, many angles of oiled abs and fluttering capes. One of the reasons (okay, the reason) I liked the film was because of its attention to the male form.

(What I didn't like about it, besides more or less what you're talking about, was all the macho bullshit, so there's a conundrum.)

Fictional History for Fun & Profit

[patchworkmind]

That's the reason I've not had nor believe I shall come into possession of a desire to see the film. It's one thing to take license for the purpose of drama, but it's another thing entirely to use that simply make shit up because, well, you think it's cooler than the real thing.

The post was an enjoyable and enlightening read, as always.

[asakiyume]

fascinating. I've felt uneasy about this 300, and here I can see a good reason to feel that way.