ABC Warriors...

[The Amstor Computer]

Well, if you only started at prog 800, I'm not surprised you don't have a high opinion of Mills' writing. You missed the glory years of strips like Nemesis and Slaine and came in when stuff like Dinosty & Finn was getting published.

His current work is light-years beyond that (even if Slaine still lets the side down badly...) but if you haven't seen his earlier work, I don't blame you for missing what readers see in him!

[Funt Solo]

"hasn't written anything good in 10 years" - that's simply an opinion, as opposed to being a fact.  Just because you say it, it doesn't make it true.  Personally, I've liked the majority of Pat's work:  there are times when I've found Slaine repetitive (although not the Books Of Invasion, which I love), and I thought Finn eventually got pretty tired.  Of course, that's just my opinion.  Just because I think it, it doesn't mean anyone or everyone has to agree with me.

"acts like a spoiled brat" - wouldn't you be pissed off if things that you created were abused without your say-so?  Try putting yourself in his shoes before you start the name calling.

Do any of you remember the story of how John Wagner walked into the manager's office, emptied a suitcase full of Dredd merchandise on the table and said "How much money do you think I've made out of this lot?"  The manager looked blank and Wagner said something along the lines of "Fuck all".  Does that make him petulant?  The fact that he was sticking up for his rights as a worker?

Personally I think that makes him brave.  So, Mills does the same thing, and he gets slagged off for it?  Can you spell "hypocritical"?

If even one of you critics could come up with a sensible and balanced argument I'd have lots more respect for your opinion.  If any one of you could write material that surpasses or even equals Mills, or come up with some kind of positive solution to whatever you consider the problem to be:  I'd have respect for you.

As it is, it just sounds like criticism for it's own sake.

[thinky]

If any one of you could write material that surpasses or even equals Mills

so you're saying that it's only okay to criticise if we can do better?

my footballing skills have seen better days, but if i pay to see my team and they play shite (which liverpool tend to do these days), i'm fully entitled to criticise. the same goes for *anything* (ie not just mills' work) in the prog or meg as i buy them both.

fwiw i have no problem with mills' standing up for himself and protecting his future work prospects, and i can see his point of view where this seems like a sensible approach

*but* slaine has been crap for ages. my opinion, i know, but it stinks. really.

thinky

[Krustabi]

I try to judge Mills on the basis of individual stories, but after Slaine (I quite like early Slaine BTW), Black Siddha (Started out promisingly, but went downhill, WAY downhill), and Blood of Satanus (It may of been a joke, but it shouldn't of ran to four episodes), I found it easy to mock Pat.

But then Savage (OK) came along, followed by the ABC Warriors which proved he is still an amazing writer. I wish he would do some things differently, but the general term "Pat Mills" is one I respect. Besides, it's well documented that Slaine fans often only read for Slaine.

[The Amstor Computer]

"Besides, it's well documented that Slaine fans often only read for Slaine."

Sarcasm?

[Krustabi]

No, It's just been said that there are a significant number of non-SF fans who only like Slaine. I'm sorry if I came across as thinking that all Slaine fans are weirdos.

[IndigoPrime]

While I agree that "hasn't written anything good in 10 years" is an opinion, it's hardly just my own (and, for the record, I don't like being misquoted, and what you wrote is not the same in terms of meaning as what I wrote)?plenty of people agree that Pat went through an extremely lean period, beginning with the third Horned God book, and largely continuing for another decade. I don't really care whether people agree with me or not, but it's hardly difficult to see why he gets such a hard time from readers, and although he has finally started writing fairly decent stuff now and again, he's still a long way from being consistent.

As for my "spoiled brat" comment, I *am* a writer, and plenty of my work gets repurposed on a very regular basis. Does it annoy me? To some extent, I suppose, but largely because I don't get paid for reprints. The thing is, Pat knew and knows how 2000 AD works. If he wants to own his creations, he should only do creator-owned stuff. As for his previous creations, he should let go?at least in some cases. It's hardly like Rennie "abused" Satanus in that story, is it? And, for the record, I've had ideas and columns appropriated, too, so I know what it's like. However, that is the reality of the writing industry, and if you don't like it, do something else!

Wagner's case is different. *If* Wagner threw a hissy fit any time another writer worked on Dredd, then you might have a point. But he doesn't. Sure, he doesn't consider many non-Wagner Dredds to be "canon", but that's a long way from slagging off an editor because he dared to take a character you created and commissioned another writer to build a story around it (and one that happened to be rather good, too).

[Oddboy]

A quick look at the "Whatever happened to..?" series from the Megazine last year...

All written by Mills, Rennie and Spurrier.
The only one written by the person who was involved with the creation of the characters involved was the 'Tweak' one.

Read too much into that if you like.

[Funt Solo]

It wasn't my intention to mis-quote anyone (despite my use of quotation marks) and in fact I was only para-phrasing because I was too lazy to read back through all the posts and make sure I was being uber-accurate.

Also, I wasn't implying that only published comics writers are allowed to criticise, although I can see how my sentence was ambiguous and could be read that way.  I did have an "or" in there.

My point, really, was just that if one is going to criticise, one should offer some positive solution or alternative.  Eg "Oi, ref - get some glasses!" is more helpful than "Oi, ref - you're crap!"  I know, I'm being facetious.

I find it interesting that in my ingnorance (of the politics surrounding Satanus) I rather enjoyed the recent story - in part due to Duke Mighten's artwork, which I really enjoyed.

I guess I'm just not aware (personally) of a 10-year lean period.  Eg. I liked Finn - I found the subject matter interesting.

Also, I suppose, my politics are such that I like to side with the underdog.  The argument (and here I quote correctly) that "if you don't like it, do something else" is hardly of succour to someone who's whole life is "it" and has no skill or experience of "something else".

Still, you (as a group) have risen to my challenge of positing a reasonable argument and at least now I can see where you're coming from, whereas before it just seemed like a tide of unfounded resentment.  Thanks for taking the time to explain your relative positions.

[Oddboy]

For my part (and as I said above: I'm liking the majority of Mills' current output) it's just lots of little niggles that 'annoy' about Mills - and annoy is totally too strong a word.
There is a lot of (real or imagined) sexist/homophobic references/occurances in Mills scripts. They are definitely there, but who can say how they were intended other than Pat himself: maybe they're jokes, maybe they're un-PC "shock" (devil's advocate) opinions, or maybe they're Mills' actual opinions - I don't know.
The point is, they do crop up regularly. So when they do, my reaction is "*groan* oh Pat, again?".
I think of him as "the loveable elderly relative who often says embarrassing or offence things" of the comics world. You know, like when my grandad starts off about 'I don't know what I fought the Germans for - there's no law & order in this country anymore' etc. You ignore the 'Daily Mail' rants & drink your tea politely. Doesn't mean you like him any less! (NB. I'm not saying Mills is a DailyMail ranter - it's only a loose simile.)

It's that, combined with a tendency for people to compare his stuff with his early stuff - which is pretty much unarguably hugely better, and the fact that a lot of people are bored with Sl?ine now.

Of course, every time Mills does one of these, we talk about it here on the board. Therefore this type of discussion comes up regularly: with people saying "Stop having a go at Mills, you've always got it in for Mills!" blowing the whole thing out of proportion.


Oddboy,
Hopefully being reasonable.

[IndigoPrime]

Heh! Pat Mills?the Prince Philip of the comics world!

[IndigoPrime]

Fair enough, and I appreciate the clarification regarding quoting. I suppose the "lean" period is down to personal taste, but having come from 2000 AD's "classic" 300 era, I got gradually more annoyed with the strips from 700ish onwards, including Mills' output. I never liked Finn in Third World War, so was hardly thrilled to see him in 2000 AD. The stories weren't appalling, in my opinion, but it always read like a second-rate Slaine to me. His Nemesis stuff around that time was pretty poor (with the exception of the Weston one in that winter special), and after Horned God, Slaine became a running joke. Dinosty was shockingly bad, even if taken as a straight parody ("Religion is bad," says Pat), and I never thought much of "Legend of Shamana".

Of late, I've found Mills' output variable, to say the least. I thought Savage was all right, but hardly the near classic some are suggesting, and ABC Warriors is good old-fashioned fun. His Dredd in the Meg was, frankly, embarrassing, and I just find Slaine is really, really boring these days, which never used to be the case. Then again, it's never as much fun to read something the third time round.

It's not all bad?it never was. I guess I just expect too much from such a comics icon. For what it's worth, Grant's 2000 AD output is just as disappointing to me these days.

[Tordelbach]

Wow.  You stop reading the board for a few days and the Mills Bomb blows up again...

My own humble thoughts:

Mills is one of the Greats of the 2000AD Pantheon, an out-and-out comics genius, part of the Holy Trinity of Tooth, beside whom even Moore is merely a great prophet, and Morrison, Morrison, Abnett and Rennie (great name for a law firm) merely disciples.  As such there is a certain pointlessness to the readership criticising him - like Wagner and Grant, he IS 2000AD, its tone, its style.  If you like the comic, there is a good chance you like SOMETHING that is mostly Mills' creation.  

But...

His writing has been at times the best thing and the worst thing in the comic, sometimes in the same Prog  - in short, his output is uneven.  Thus, he sometimes disappoints people's expectations, falling short (in our eyes) of his own standards. This is the first reason he attracts flak, including my own (Blood of Satanus II, anyone?).

More than any other 2000AD writer, he deliberately and overtly works with political, social and gender themes, and uses them to often radically change and develop his existing much beloved characters and strips.  Even while changing and rewok his own back catalogue he also vocally protects his characters from other writers, who it mght be suggested might treat them in a more popular and straightforward way (Rennie's excellent Satanus Unchained, anyone?).  This is the other reason he is much dumped-upon in forums like this - much of his stuff by its nature invites debate and invective.

So while Mills IS a vital and wonderful part of the 2000AD experience, and deserves bucketfuls of respect from all Squaxx for his contribution, it's pretty inevitable that he's going to ruffle feathers - he goes out of his way to do so.

Where I personally draw the line is where this understandable crirticism seems to constantly invoke aspects of his personal and professional life well outside the arena of his writing.  

Mills has EARNED our respect a dozen times over - we don't have to like everything he does, but as fans of Tooth we DO have to respect him as a creator.

[Art]

Well, this is probbaly all my fault... really I only wanted to make the observation that HAmmerstein, Mek-Quake and Rojaws seem to actually be house characters (which is actually pretty usefull information if you're interested in small press stuff etc...) but I put it in an overly snarky way, and for that I apologise, it really wasn't necessary for me to drag this thread into this whole damn Pat Mills dissing/defence thing again...

So, Warren Ellis, he's a fat lazy bastard who talks himself up a lot while being noticibly less good than he used to be, isn't he?

[Leigh S]

Actually, can I partially stand up for Dinosty...?

I thought the unsubtle Dinosaurs as ruling classes (or vice versa), was great fun - it was only the Elder Gods bits that sent it off track for me...