What is your opinion of this character?
Posted by Uranus Lad on :
Miracleman was probably my favorite comic of all time (Alan Moore's revamped MM that is). Basically a deconstructed Captain Marvel with cosmic/godhood overtones. Absolutely amazing stuff. Neil Gaiman was just picking up speed when the series abruptly ended.
It's really too bad that ridiculous hack Tod McFarlane is still claiming rights to the property, he absolutely does not deserve it.
I still hold out hope it will get back in the hands it belongs in(i.e. Neil Gaiman & Mark Buckingham) eventually.
There's a pretty informative book called KIMOTA!The Miracleman Companion published a few years ago Amazon (yikes! kinda pricey!) the whole story of MM's rise, demise and subsequent unending court battle told through various interviews.
Posted by MLLASH on :
Wow... reading the Wiki entry sure does cock up any notion that McFarLAME was ever involved in creating IMAGE because of creators rights...
Posted by Uranus Lad on :
In amazingly coinciodental news:
My buddy at the CBS told me this the other day but I had to read it for myself. Apparently Marvel bought the rights from Marvel Man's original creator. He was redubbed Miracleman in the US because Marvel wouldn't let them use the name. Apparently this sidesteps the ongoing Miracleman rights wars (I have to admit, I prefer the name Miracleman but whatever). No announcement of a creative team so far but if they don't let Gaiman and Buckingham finish their run, it would be a crime.
The only thing that worries me is a potential Marvel Man/Wolvierine team up or some such stupid gimmick. Basically, if they would somehow incorporate him into the Marvel universe it would completely ruin the character for me.
interesting. this has been talked about for a long time, but now finally resolved, it seems.
the Macfarlane claims come about from his purchase of the intellectual property of Eclipse, the 80s indy that published the Miracleman version (Alan Moore/Neil Gaiman).
But Eclipse purchased it from Dez Skinn (or Skin. i forget), who had started the project (with Moore) in his British anthology series Warrior (if I recall correctly).
But the clincher is this: according to rumor, Skinn decided it was easier to tell everyone he had acquired the Marvelman rights from the original publisher (Mick Anglo) - but allegedly really never had. If so, he apparently successfully gambled that no one would bother to look into it.
So the real pickle is this: IF Skinn never bought the rights back in 1980/1 or thereabouts, does the publishing of the Moore/Gaiman run constitute a failure on Anglo's part to defend his ownership of the property? In US law, it would seem like enough for Anglo to lose his claim (or at least his exclusive claim). But British law - and international reciprocity on rights - are beyond my limited knowledge.
All that said, I hope Macfarlane loses and Marvel lets Gaiman/Buckingham resume.
Posted by Cobalt Kid on :
Like Lash, I have heard about Marvelman/Miracleman all my comic book reading life but have never really read anything about the character. I'd definitely be willing to check it out.
I also applaud Marvel's top execs for getting this done and hopefully in a way to circumvent McFarlane's dickhead move a few years ago. I think this could be a big win for comics in general, especially if Neil is involved.
I'd love to hear some memories / thoughts / etc. on the entire franchises history regarding stories, favorite moments, etc. from those who read it (and I'm looking at you Uranus Lad ).
Posted by rouge on :
Miracleman was some of Moore's best stuff.
Gaiman's "Golden Age" was uneven, but still good.
His "Silver Age" was shaping up to be fantastic, however.
Checking around recently I was shocked to find out how much my individual issues and TPBs are worth now. Holy cow!
Posted by He Who Wanders on :
Spoiler Warning * * * * * * When I think of Miracleman, one visual memory stands out.
MM's sidekick (Kid Miracleman, I believe), grown up and corrupted by his powers, lays waste to an entire hospital. When a nurse begs for her life, he at first shows mercy. But then, without lifting a finger, he causes her head above the jaw to disintigrate.
In Miracleman, Moore did for Captain Marvel (the Shazam hero) what he did for the Quality heroes in Watchmen--deconstruct the myth by saturating it with graphic violence and suggestive content. Other issues featured a beheading, fingers being amputated, and a dirty old man raping an unconscious female hero. Like most so-called adult comics of that time, such depictions were considered "real" and therefore good or at least better than mainstream, all-ages comics.
At the time, I thought Miracleman was one of the best comics out there, and it probably was. But what stands out in my memory after 20 years are the violent scenes moreso than the storyline itself. I don't think Miracleman made as strong a point as Watchmen did; much of the comic seemed to rely on shock value.
I also remember that Gaiman's tenure seemed to drift without much direction. MM becomes a god and presides over a world free from violence. In one telling scene, a father begs MM to save his dying little girl, but MM--inscrutible as any god--turns him down. It's clear that Gaiman transplanted some of the unfathomable quality of Morpheus into Miracleman. In any case, the quieter nature of this arc was hampered by delays between issues, sometimes up to a year.
Miracleman is worth checking out, but don't expect a lost treasure.
Posted by Uranus Lad on :
quote: But then, without lifting a finger, he causes her head above the jaw to disintigrate.
Actually, I read that visually as him slamming his hand into/through her head, I think there are some motion lines to indicate that.
...
quote:deconstruct the myth by saturating it with graphic violence and suggestive content.
Moore deconstructs a relatively simplistic 2 dimensional character and comic by creating a believable back story (however improbable), realistic characters and realistic situations(again however improbable) and weaving it into a sort of believable meta-mythology. The violence and "suggestive content" are completely ancillary to the story, not the point itself.
I find this a puzzling viewpoint and feel I sorry for you if that's all you took from it, because it's a really good story. Different than Watchmen sure, but no less significant save for it's venue avery small publisher).
Violence is a super-hero's milieu really. The only difference in this being that the violence Moore depicts has consequences in Moore's REconstruction. In early MM stories, the characters, merrily fly around, cap volcanoes, beat up a few bad guys, toss them in jail or send them back to their home planet and everything is back where it began, all happy and shiny, nobody hurt. Well, that's fine for simplistic children's stories I suppose. But to keep most adults attention, you have to make it "real", add complexity, depth. In the real world, if you punch someone in the nose, they bleed. BUT you don't punch someone just because you think they're a "bad guy". If you're a superbeing, created by a government program using salvaged alien technology, who was raised in a happy-go-lucky computer-generated fantasy-land with your best pals, who suddenly finds himself a lone superbeing in the real world full of vastly inferior beings and it drives you insane, you go on a mass-killing spree. Yes there is quite a lot of violence in MM but it is not without a point.
Miracleman was groundbreaking in many ways, it took the classic super-hero to it's penultimate point wherein the superhero remakes the world in his own image. To say it used violence for violence's sake or was even particularly gratuitous is doing a a damn good piece of art a horrible disservice. There any number of comics one could easily say this about(look no further than the aforementioned Tod McFarlane's work -a fine example of basic adolescent male power-fantasy (mixed with a splash of horror) drek), but saying that about Miracleman would be missing the point completely.
As for Gaiman's run, he wasn't exactly "drifting with no direction" he was examining what it was like to live in this "Utopian" world that MM created(at least throughout the Golden Age and Apocrypha). It was much more about the people who occupied the world than the gods who created and watched over it. I still hope to see the conclusion to the Silver Age some day.
And did I mention the beautiful art in the issues John Totleben penciled? Well, they are really quite lovely. Buckingham's too as well as a handful of other completely competent artists.
So basically, I would have to contradict He Who Wanders and say; if you haven't read it, you SHOULD definitely expect a lost treasure in Miracleman (If you can afford and are lucky enough to find the back issues and/or TPBs). because at this point, who knows if Marvel actually has or will have rights to reprint them.
Posted by He Who Wanders on :
Uranus Lad--
You're probably right about the manner in which Kid Miracleman kills the nurse. As I said, I'm recalling this from memory.
I'm also glad that you see the series differently than I do, as that gives Cobie and others a chance to get two different perspectives on it. Was the violence, et al., too much? Your mileage may vary.
I agree that stories aimed at adults need "complexity [and] depth." But those terms do not automatically translate into graphic violence and sexual content. Really, when I see comics with these features nowadays, I wonder if the target audience is adults or adolescents, who are more apt to find such things shocking and titilating.
Comics have complexity and depth when they have well-rounded characters and stories that say something meaningful or original (beyond, for example, good overcomes evil or, more commonly nowadays, there's no distinction between good guys and bad guys). If you say MM had these qualities, I'll take your word for it. (I still have the issues, but they're packed away.) Sex and violence can be part of the equation, but, just as equally, they do not have to be. They are not a central issue (or they shouldn't be) when it comes to comics aimed at adults.
Moore and his collaborators were certainly not the first to show what the "real" consequences of super-hero violence would be, nor were they the last. That, too, is an ancillary issue, as far as I'm concerned.
In other words, I reject the notion that super-hero comics have basically two options: "shiny, happy" stories where "nobody gets hurt" and ultra-violent stories where the "real" consequences of super-hero battles are shown (an oxymoron, by the way). The Silver Age Legion stories did a much better job, in my opinion, of showing such consequences (Lightning Lad loses an arm, Ferro Lad dies, Star Boy kills then gets expelled, etc.), all without gore.
Anyway, Cobie was asking for our memories and thoughts on MM, and those are mine. I stand by them. They are what I took away from the series after 20 years. No need to feel sorry for me.
(I agree about the art, by the way. Totleben and Garry Leach both did outstanding work.)
Posted by DrakeB3004 on :
I only ever bought one issue of "MiracleMan" and it happened to be the one where Kid MiracleMan goes ape$#!t ... very powerful, but it left me feeling that I had missed a lot and I wasn't motivated to find out what was really going on.
Posted by He Who Wanders on :
Regarding Gaiman's run, it occurred to me that he was writing the same kind of stories he often wrote in Sandman: tales about one-shot characters and how their lives were impacted by the god-like hero. While this approach was the crux of what Sandman was all about, it didn't satisfy me with Miracleman because, well, I wanted to read about the title hero, not characters who would never appear again and with whom I had no emotional investment.
It was a very daring form of storytelling, and it might have worked had MM been published more often or had those stories been offered in special editions instead of the main series.
[ August 04, 2009, 10:50 PM: Message edited by: He Who Wanders ]
Posted by Emily Sivana on :
Did Marvel ever publish anything pertaining to Marvelman or are they just going to sit on the coypright?
Posted by Dev Em on :
I think all they have done is some reprints of pre Alan Moore stuff...that's it.
Posted by Dave Hackett on :
All they have is rights to the early Mick Angelo stuff. All the Moore era work (and after) is still in a legal grey area. It seems everyone was trading in rights that Dez Skinn may not have "legally" acquired in the first place. I think it's still a while before this gets sorted out properly.
Posted by Sonnie on :
I read all the Marvelman books as a kid and they terrified and delighted me in equal measure! They'll probably still be in my parents loft somewhere, must look them out and have a reread, I'll probably enjoy them even more now....
Posted by profh0011 on :
Isn't it amazing how MARVELMAN really started? the UK publisher found out Fawcett was getting out of the comics biz, but wanted to continue, so, they just changed the names & costumes, and continued on their way! What nerve.
Then again, I understand a South American publisher did the same thing-- except, THEY didn't bother changing the names & costumes.
I wonder if anyone, anywhere, will ever reprint any of that material?
Posted by Emily Sivana on :
It's really complicated with all the Marvel rights business (should be a topic in of itself!), but here is the breakdown:
DC sued Fawcett for many years and finally won. They got the copyrights to the original Captain Marvel because it was considered a clone of Superman.
Foreign publishers don't know/don't care and keep publishing. I can't speak for England, but South America was undergoing some interesting and violent political changes around this time. If you could give me the exact country I could give you more detail (writing a lovely 10-15 page paper about colonial Brazil right now).
The copyright for Captain Marvel falls into disuse, Marvel Comics takes this opportunity to create Captain Marvel. I got to admit that The Death of Captain Marvel is my favorite graphic novel. And Noh-Varr is gorgeous...so I guess now that they have this copyrights there will be more good-looking bricks in the Marvel Universe. That's not always a bad thing.
Posted by Dev Em on :
Read all the Moore/Gaiman stuff a few years ago. It's good, and I wouldn't mind seeing it in a affordable format someday. Too many egos involved at this point though...so I am not getting my hopes up.
The Marvel thing has turned out just like I thought it would...a big fat dud.
Posted by profh0011 on :
I've read about this so many times... My impression is, while DC sued Fawcett repeatedly, and kept harrassing them for at least a decade (nothing pissed DC off more than the fact that Captain Marvel was SELLING MORE than Superman!!). By the early 50's sales of all comics were starting to fall. Fawcett decided to settle out of court, and agreed not to publish CM anymore (in fact they'd decided to drop out of comics publishing entirely!), nor to allow anyone else to do so.
I guess on the UK and South American things, they didn't follow thru too well... heh.
I believe in the early 60's, the fanzine ALTER EGO was prevented from doing much CAPTAIN MARVEL stuff, because of the agreement. I forget if I heard that Fawcett actually sent them a "cease and desist" letter after AE did one issue focused on CM.
Jules Feiffer's book THE GREAT COMIC BOOK HEROES (1965) was prevented from so much as reprinting a single CM story because of the agreement, and only managed ONE PAGE, for reference.
But then Myron Fass put out a comic called "CAPTAIN MARVEL" about a red-clothed android (created by Carl Burgos-- gee, where have we heard that name before?), and it pissed off Martin Goodman, because he felt readers would mistake it for one of HIS "Marvel Comics".
The M.F. Enterprises series didn't last... and before long, Martin Goodman told Stan Lee to create a character called "CAPTAIN MARVEL" so MARVEL could publish it. Before long, he secured the Trademark for the magazine title, so NOBODY else could put one out with that name.
A few years later, DC LICENSED the original character from Fawcett (who still owned it), but, prevented from using "CM" as a magazine title, put "CM" out in a book titled "SHAZAM!"
Years later, DC bought the character outright from Fawcett.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
).