The discussion turns ugly over at CBR. After all, you don't go around talking smack about Frank f'n Miller, boy. Nuh-uh. What, you write a couple of "I CAN SEE YOU!!" stories and alluvasudden you're some hot s#!*? I don't think so.

1) Frank Miller is hardly up for criticism by Grant Morrison. Even in the mind-blowing category, I find the fast food wars in Martha Washington and Elektra Assasain a little more inventive than giving Man-Bat swords and being lauded a genius for it.

2) Grant Morrison's captions in the latest Batman were just as bad as anything Miller has written in the latest BATMAN. Sorry, Grant. The issue was OK though.

3) "Batdick" really didn't seem to be that overwhelming a problem to me until the antisocial Batman in Morrison's JLA showed up.

Uh. You're comparing Martha to the current Batman? That's a bit bendy, no? How about trying to compare her to oh, I dunno, THE INVISIBLES? or WE3? or Morrison's JLA? Or his Doom Patrol?

Morrison's writing makes Miller's look like it was done by a subliterate chimp using the pulp from various rotten fruits. No contest whatsoever.

Honestly, while I prefer Morrison over Miller any day of the week, Morrison doesnt bring anything new or different to the table... he just takes already existing ideas as reaps credit for them.

Not to slam the guy, but Grant will always be nothing more than a bargain bin Alan Moore wannabe who doesn't hold onto his principles like Moore does.

I'll take the "wannabe" who writes great stories and isn't a cocksucker than the guy who hold onto his principles and acts like a douchebag when someone soils his precious work.

I think he's referring to when Moore decided that he didn't want to have his name or royalties associated at all with the V For Vendetta film and then severed ties with DC after the Wachowski brothers falsely claimed that he was behind the film and DC had failed to secure an apology. After he which he asked that all his royalties go to his artist David Lloyd and his names be taken off his books. (The royalties thing happened, but not the name thing.)

Oh, that constant sniping at the Wachowskis for "stealing his ideas," plus some snarky comments about Moore, Claremont and the sweeping generalizations about mainstream comics writers as a whole, as if only he and a select few others that he likes are truly innovators (when some of his works are pretty derivative of other writer's concepts).

About the only one I remember his comment about the Wachowskis, and a joking jibe in Byrne's direction. However, I don't recall him making any other snarky swipes at the creators you mentioned. So I remain unconvinced.

And I fail to see how him being disappointed at the overall quality of writing in mainstream comics is in itself supposed to be a sign Morrison being full of himself. (Then again I find mainstream comics as a whole to be very dull and forgettable work, so maybe I just have a lot sympathy with his opinions.)

Keep in mind though that he's basically said he's no longer angry with the Wachowskis over using the Invisibles as inspiration though he was at one point. In fact he said he enjoyed the first film, but was really disappointed with how they handled the second and third ones. Heck look at his statement on the original back in 2001.

He's talked in a derisive manner about Alan Moore for years about everything from Promethea to Watchmen, and has said Moore is trying to be him.

Haven't seen any such statements like this myself. Got any examples?

Adam, I've noticed throughout this whole thread you need decisive proof right before your eyes...

I'm going to guess you wouldn't believe in aliens unless one abducted you aboard the mothership, correct?

Maybe, and honestly, you should make google your friend for a while and find these answers for yourself?

I shouldn't even have looked for this, Adam, but here you go... it is an interview with Morrison regarding Alan Moore:

>> I must admit I have no time for the '80s style "serious superheroes" books riding the retro wave; never resisting any chance to gratuitously stick the boot in, I thought Watchmen was self-conscious, derivative, and heavy-handed when it first appeared and time hasn't mellowed my opinion of this vastly overrated series - so the comics I dislike most of all at the moment are filled with unsexy '80s retro "superheroes-in-the-real-world" type stories. All these soldiers-in-tights comics seem miserly and lacking in wonder, surrealism or novelty. Even Alan Moore himself ran screaming from this kind of story and began an ungainly, 15-year long attempt to reinvent himself as me. So why anyone would look to the awkward pomposity of mid-'80s comics for inspiration is baffling. <<

I must admit I have no time for the '80s style "serious superheroes" books riding the retro wave; never resisting any chance to gratuitously stick the boot in, I thought Watchmen was self-conscious, derivative, and heavy-handed when it first appeared and time hasn't mellowed my opinion of this vastly overrated series - so the comics I dislike most of all at the moment are filled with unsexy '80s retro "superheroes-in-the-real-world" type stories. All these soldiers-in-tights comics seem miserly and lacking in wonder, surrealism or novelty. Even Alan Moore himself ran screaming from this kind of story and began an ungainly, 15-year long attempt to reinvent himself as me.

http://www.comicon.com/cgi-bin/ultim...&f=36&t=001597

One Example. I know when asked about Promethea, he sarcastically mentioned that it is "drawn well" as well as other comments over the years.

Oh man. It's as if Morrison is the Rock to Moore's Hulk Hogan and Miller's Ric Flair and Morrison just steel chaired those poor bastards right in the back. Ouch.

(Last image lifted from the sig of "ElvisH" from the JQ forums.)