| |
|
And so, because he's dead, Grant Morrison gets to give his tired old concepts a makeover for him. How presumptuous. Sorry, say what you like, but to me, this whole affair reeks of arrogance and disrespect. GM isn't honouring this man's work, he's showing us all how it should have been done in the first place.
What a silly statement. Is that what GM said? Can you read his mind, his intent? If you're going by that argument, then most of Marvel and DC should be accused of the same thing. If you don't like what's being done to the characters, that's fine. If you think the story's crap, that's also fine. You're entitled to your preference. But to say that the author is being presumptuous/arrogant/disrespectful by making changes to a corporate property that he was hired to deal with is pretty unfair, given that this has been how the industry has operated for a very long time.
Sure, we can go on about creators rights, etc., and some purists may say that only the creator has the right to deal with his or her own creations, but the fact is that DC owns these properties, and will do with them what they want. If there's anyone you should be irritated at, it's DC. And if you don't like this behavior, then you shouldn't be reading Marvel or DC comics, because this is what they've been doing forever. Heck, you shouldn't even be watching Disney. Disney's dead, too.
If you like your Kirby exactly the way it was, you can still pick up collections of the original material. Otherwise, if you expect Kirby creations perfectly preserved in your ongoing comics, you won't get that, whether Grant Morrison writes it or not. If you want someone to honor his works through comics then chances are no one's gonna be able to do it the way you want except you.
Me, I just want crazy action stories with fascinating characters backed against the wall. I want human struggle with outrageous concepts and beautiful imagery. That's the original appeal of Kirby to me, and Final Crisis, while not perfect, has been delivering that so far. |
|
|
