Morrison, Mamet, and storytelling in superhero comics.
29 Comments | Posted: October 27th, 2008 | Filed under: Thinking About Comics | Tags: david mamet, final crisis, grant morrison1.
A disproportionate number of existing superhero comic book readers – they who use the term “civilian” to describe those who don’t hit up their local establishments on weekly basis, as if they’re in the front lines in Iraq – want their stories spoon-fed to them, leading to an equivalent percentage of superhero comic book “stories” that aren’t worth the electricity it took to email the files to Quebecor.
2.
Obvious, I know, but I figured that the reiteration of the obvious is germaine to the discussion. I was just looking at a recent Hulk comic in which the first page served as a text recap: there’s two Hulks, one’s Green, one’s red, and the red one (given the idiotic portmanteau of “Rulk”) has done something really awful. The first page of the actual comic is narration: “Oh, hey, Bruce Banner here, I’m The Hulk! There’s another Hulk! He’s red! They call him the Rulk! He did something bad.” While I am, as regular readers know, all about making sure titles are as new-user friendly as possible, losing a page of storytelling at the front of a book (that’s cut into two halves right now, mind) to a recap means that you should go straight into the action.
3.
One of David Mamet’s better pieces of advice (and the man throws out many worth paying attention to) is that you can lose the first ten minutes of any movie, as they’re generally exposition and little else. By picking up a comic book or sitting into a seat at the multiplex, the audience has already said “I trust you. Give it to me.” Thus, by having Banner reiterate the situation, Jeph Loeb (a screenwriter by trade, it should be noted) oversells his goods and creates a moment where, consciously or not, the reader sees the puppet’s strings. Banner’s bemoaning the setup that’s just been recapped is the Marvel Comics equivalent of Jackie Chan making sure we see his face when he does those crazy stunts: it places the writer/performer ahead of the story. I’m more than happy to let Jackie Chan do his thing; that’s why I’m there. I’m not reading a Hulk comic to watch Jeph Loeb write dialogue circles.
4.
One of the reasons I enjoy Grant Morrison’s work with superheroes so much is that trusts the audience to follow along and very deliberately slices out narration and expository dialogue, letting the medium tell the story and exemplifying Mamet’s tenet. This is why Morrison’s reveals and relevatory moments are so memorable. “I can see you!” and “You’re Martians, aren’t you?” stand out because they’re organic and when they hit, chunks of the rest of the story suddenly make perfect sense. Morrison’s work may occasionally suffer due to artists who can’t quite pull off his scripts (Tony Daniel on Batman being an obvious example) but it’s obvious that he respects his audience more than contemporaries like Mark Millar.
5.
Morrison also trims the fat out of his stories whenever possible: rarely is someone seen walking out of a room or driving a car unless the narrative is furthered by it, and he’s fond of cutting off either end of those scenes to move to the next piece of the script. Very rarely do people sit and talk: they’re in motion. Witness the majority of “talky” scenes in his JLA run, or All-Star Superman #6, in which the Chronovore’s attack and the explanation of its importance to Superman’s life overlap, leading to a final moment that is better for the lack of outre sentimentality.
6.
Having to read and look at the art and think isn’t what the majority of the comic book audience wants to do, however. They’ll throw up any number of excuses or complaints, saying that it’s hard to follow or that they shouldn’t have to “work” to enjoy a story with Thor in it. I’m not going to say that Morrison is not without his opaque moments – his masturbatory opus The Filth, for example – but his superhero material places only the slightest of demands on the readers and is thus reviled by many, even as those in editorial (and snot-nosed, self-important bloggers) reward him for at least trying. When so little change is permanent in superhero comics, someone with the bravura of Morrison is to be admired. There’s a reason I’ll pick up anything with his name attached to it. Even when he makes storytelling choices I disagree with, it’s plain there’s thought behind them.
Shouldn’t Banner be “the Gulk,” by that logic?
Calling The Filth a ‘masturbatory opus’ works on several different levels.
It occurs to me that I have never read any of Mamet’s nonfiction, despite loving most of his output. What’s the best place to start?
Frankly, the reaction from some people to Final Crisis terrifies me. The trust people like Morrison places in their audience to understand what’s happening is entirely lost on them. I don’t see this complete inability to process information given to them in cinema, painting, TV or books. Why is it such a brick wall with comics? Ten seconds of having to think for yourself and it’s brainfarts all round. I don’t get it.
I’ve said the following elsewhere, but those reactions seem to say more about what we expect as an audience than the work that’s actually given to us. I’ve officially lost count of the number of people that I’ve seen coming out with “Batman is being turned into Darkseid, why would you think it’s Turpin”?
Amazing.
On Directing Film is the book I recommend to everyone interested in writing sharper comics. I linked to Bambi Vs Godzilla and Three Uses Of The Knife in the body as those were the most recent books by him that I’d read and enjoyed. The former, in particular, is insightful from a critical standpoint.
Hear, Hear. Morrison is throwing curve balls left and right and I for one, couldn’t be happier with the way Final Crisis is turning out. It’s big, loud and thoughtful.
Haven’t you heard? “Batman R.I.P.” results in Bruce Wayne turning into a balding, middle-aged man, so their confusion’s totally warranted.
I’m growing more impressed with Final Crisis as it continues, perhaps predictably because Morrison works tend to gel better as a whole rather than on an issue-by-issue basis. That having been said, there is such a thing as cutting a story too lean, and I think the first two issues of FC are good examples of that: I mean, I’m a pretty serious DC fanboy and I honestly couldn’t tell you a damn thing about Sonny Sumo, and not much more about Dan Turpin for that matter. A little nod to the needs of exposition in instances like this isn’t a sin; these aren’t familiar figures like Superman and the Justice League and shouldn’t be treated as such. A little Peter Jacksonish meandering through the valley of setting is just as valid an approach as Mamet’s cut-cut-cut; using atmosphere to convey tone is just as good an option as using plot and dialogue, especially in a setting as content-rich as the DC Universe, and there’s no hard and fast rule for the one being superior to the other; you use the tools that work for the job. Sometimes it’s Mamet, sometimes it’s Jackson. And that’s fine.
Also: these are, when you get down to it, kiddy books first and foremost, and should generally be written as such – that doesn’t mean pander to the stupid kiddies, but it does mean clarity should be considered a relative priority. Of course, Final Crisis has actually been easy to follow, that somewhat confusing and obtuse bit about Turpin starting his Darkseidy transformation in issue 2 aside.
Well, that and anything with the good New Gods showing up in new bodies. Which is about a fifth of the story so far. Oh dear. I’m sure Morrison will explain what’s going on there eventually – he’s too good a storyteller not to do that – but I want my comics to be accessible, not for my own sake but for those potential younger readers who are supposed to show up and keep the form viable in the long term.
Hence Kevin’s consternation, I think. Morrison builds stories like writers do in every single other medium out there, with the possible exception of episodic TV — he isn’t expected to give some payoff every 15 minutes; rather, he builds a larger story that pays off in bigger ways further down the road. For some reason, this is a Big Fucking Deal in comics, which says a lot of unflattering things about where the medium’s currently at.
Excellent points here, sir.
This is why I love reading a Morrison comic: it feels like actually fucking reading. I have to think, make leaps and guesses, suspend disbelief and questions in the trust that by the end–and with careful rereading–all will become clear.
Very few other writers can deliver that.
Turpin: A Detective
Sonny Sumo: A Celebrity Fighter
This is all I knew of them, all from the comics’ direct dialogue. I felt no lack whatsoever. Their Kirby Etymology is absolutely irrelevant.
Hello Kevin,
Interesting point regarding the Mamet quote and the analogy of moviegoers not needing summaries at the beginning. I can see your point — when movies start with a summary (with the exception of the original Star Wars films, I guess, which were homaging old TV serials), movies that start with a summary tend to be crappy.
However, I think television series may be a better analogy for ongoing comics (more episodic than movies). In TV dramas, “Previously on…” summaries have become fairly standard practice, and catch-up-the-new reader summation episodes have become common before season premiers. It may be a necessary evil, and I can somewhat see why — having dropped out of comics when I was a teenager in 1986, and jumped back in two years ago, I can tell you that having missed 20 years of story is daunting (almost prohibitively with some titles)…maybe like jumping into a TV drama like Lost on season four, or something.
So for longtime readers, it is probably a wasted page. And let’s face it — how many new readers are really being brought in at this point? But I guess they gotta keep trying–and so they keep offering these “this is an easy jumping-on-point” moments, as Marvel has done somewhat, especially in conjunction with movies.
I read more Marvel than DC, so I am not sure, but it seems like DC does not make as much of an effort. That is probably a double-edged sword. It is probably a better experience for longtime readers. But it may play a role in the sales trends as well (Marvel’s increasing sales dominance).
I’m not sure — you have a lot more knowledge of these things than I do. I am interested in more of your thoughts on this.
Which is the problem, because comics are more like episodic TV than they are like movies. It’s a serial format. That’s why they have, you know, issue numbers – each comic should be able to stand alone on its own merits as well as part of the larger contiguous whole. Morrison is fantastic at larger contiguous whole; in terms of individual issues he’s very hit and miss.
Don’t get me wrong: I think the serial format of comics is inherently limiting and would have preferred to see Final Crisis released as a single big-ass book, as opposed to seven issues, because I’m positive it’ll read much better that way. But Morrison got the form he either chose or was forced to abide by (depending on how much creative control you think he has), and he’s not really writing for it, and that’s a problem when it’s supposed to be DC’s BIG EVENT COMIC.
It’s a DC Universe BIG EVENT COMIC, all caps required for emphasis. If you’re going to shove Superman and Batman off to one side in favour of Green Arrow, the Tattooed Man and the Ray – to say nothing of Sonny Sumo, Dan Turpin and Most Excellent Superbat – I want a little more than “detective” and “celebrity fighter guy” taking their place; you have to give me a reason to say “whoa” when they show up. There definitely wasn’t any delivery of that with Turpin and barely any with Sonny Sumo. This isn’t something that’s difficult or takes a lot of storytelling time. (Another good example of this: Mr. Miracle’s appearance in issue 3 and “death” in issue 4. A little more build, that’s all I ask.)
mightygodking, perhaps a more apt comparison for Final Crisis would be a network miniseries.
I really wouldn’t expect an “event comic” to read like an episode of law and order.
I wouldn’t agree with that entirely. After The Wire, the constant interruption of ads (or, if Tivo-ed, how a show is structured on constant fat of reminders and exposition, basic act structures, basic beats etc) always bugged me. Comics makes tv shows look like books. If one picks up a talking-heads scene from whatever Bendis book or Millar’s, the closest equivalent would be if an 5-10 seconds ad entered every 6-8 lines of dialogue (and those ads would be made in order to be very similar to the scene it interrupted or made into those pop-up formats that occupy 45% of the screen). Every issue feels like almost a few scenes. So it’s a bit like watching 6 tiny scenes of dialogue in Lost and having to wait two months for the next 6 scenes.
Is it a fair point that it might be a revealing bit concerning comic book readers’ reading habits? If Morrison was aiming at some form of pastiche using literary shorthands, I could begin to understand (what you could see in Flex Mentallo, Invisibles, ASS at times, Zenith and others). But that violent superficiality and lack of any attempt to interest readers in those figures doesn’t strike me as “no lack whatsoever”. I keep hearing the scene between the couple of heroes this issue — “Green Arrow” and, as creepily called by the hero, his “pretty bird” — was supposed to be touching. But why is that? I only knew he was a angry sort of left-leaning bloke (even if his line in #3 was a nice nod to the current state of superhero fiction), and she apparently was pretty much his boss — apparently through her delightful lingerie we saw last issue. Or the returning Flash scene, as another example. It all strikes me as very Playstation’s cutscene-ish.
I feel people complaining about the comic aren’t being able to transmit their perspective properly to those who are enjoying it (and I think it’s happening the other way around). They complain it’s too insular and very little “civillian”-friendly. Then people who are liking it frame those people as too insular and too much into the lowest aspects of comic books. Even places like Mindless Ones, which usually has a very high standard of reviews just goes the “oh fuck those who don’t like it, if they can’t understand awesomeness, there’s no convincing those people! I just like it, that’s all!” route.
(and I just find utterly strange seeing someone call The Filth wankery while praising Final Crisis).
I’m waiting that, like Batman RIP, this will be great in trade format.
ARG spam?
Soooo, did you like the Hulk?
Hence its deletion when I saw it!
Which is why, of course, he’s undoing one of the few “permanent” changes ever in superhero comics, by reviving Barry Allen.
I’m sure that has nothing to do with Geoff Johns or editorial.
So the things you approve of in FC are all Morrison, and the things that don’t fit your thesis are someone else’s fault?
Not that Geoff Johns isn’t well-nigh-unto-omnipotent at DC these days. But once the “blame editorial” meme is used to justify one of THE major plot points of the series, well, haven’t you reduced the “bravura” of Morrison to “hired hand telling somebody else’s story points?” Because after all, who’s to say that much of what you’re enjoying in FC didn’t also come from Geoff Johns and editorial?
I didn’t blame editorial at all, but I figured your snarky comment deserved a snarky response. Furthermore, I didn’t address specific plot points, instead choosing to discuss Morrison’s methods and storytelling technique, which I find more compelling and interesting than anyone else at DC. Barry Allen’s return has been handled well enough, and as I said in my last paragraph: Even when he makes storytelling choices I disagree with, it’s plain there’s thought behind them. Any major “event comic” is going to have an editorial hand in it. Morrison tends to work with editors versus fighting with them, giving them what they want done his way.
Also, I’ll point out that it’s Geoff Johns and Ethan Van Sciver that are doing The Flash: Rebirth, not Grant Morrison and Cameron Stewart.
Well, right there. My point is made. Again. It’s all in the text. They were in bed together in #3. Undoubtedly to lay the newb groundwork for the scene in #4. End of story.
I prefer a comic that feels like a circus, not a ballet. Matter of taste.
But, Benjamin, surely that isn’t enough to pull the strings of the unfamiliar reader’s heart, right? Or to even give them the feeling that the attention given to those two is justified (sure, that can perhaps be better filled in the future, but so far…).
It’s all rather thin and quite blunt, no? “Man says to wife: ‘Ah goddamn militaristic authoritarian bullshit!’”. “There, all they need to know in order for those future scenes to be very emotional”?
It didn’t really strike me as cheap stock characters, but extremely badly written cheap stock characters you’d see in some Michael Bay WWII movie that had two minutes of screen time, but were pounded on the note they’re very significant and emblematic of all the tragedies we don’t have time to see.
It seems strange for that to be your point.
To the majority of readers of the book that’s not the case, though. These are established characters who have had a long-running romance in the DC Universe at large. I don’t even think the nigh-mythical “new reader” who picks up Final Crisis cold could miss the significance of two members of the JLA who sleep together being forced to part under less-than-ideal conditions.
At this point, guys, it’s just haters be hatin’. You’d get further trying to explain quantum mechanics to a dog.
Kevin – good points throughout.
As for #6: There’s “hard to follow” and there’s bad storytelling.
Although Morrison can be challenging at times, I think that’s as much a problem with the penciler not having the chops necessary to tell the story Morrison is writing.
Personally, I can’t think of many artists who can pick up on what Morrison is doing or where he’s going with the story other than Quitely — unless his scripts for Quitely have been better written than those for artists like Howard Porter or Val Semieks.
PS. not to be a dork, but are the “dialogue circles” in #1 the same thing as word balloons?
MGK – did you move? I get “http://capella.hostpapa.com/suspended.page/” when I go to mightygodking.com and ”
Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible.” appears on the page instead of the Rex header.
Nah, I was referring to the way that Loeb’s dialogue circles around and around for the sake of noodling, like a bad trumpet solo from the guy that plays the jazz brunch at your grandmother’s favorite post-church destination.
The choice of examples is very uneven here, I have to note. Loeb is, after all, writing Hulk as a tongue-in-cheek comic on purpose. You could similarly attack the Marx Brothers for the incessant inclusion of musical numbers. It’s vaudeville, that’s what they do.
I agree that Morrison can be one of the best writers in the business but his best works are behind him currently. I also think that the attacks on those who don’t like Final Crisis as being somehow inferior creatures is a but brash, don’t you think? I’m also troubled by the need to feel superior to other comic book fans as being obsessive subhumans lacking reading comprehension.
Surely there’s a better way to get your point across.