The Story is Key

I've read some recent reviews of Frank Miller's solo directorial debut the Spirit and it seems he should've spent another film or two working as an apprentice to really learn how to undertake working in this new medium for him. Another thing which I think may have been the problem with this film was the source material of a project like this. Eisner's run on his creation, the Spirit was marked by constant experimentation as well a range that ran all the way from the dramatic to the whimsical.

The previous adaptations of Miller's work were as good as they were because they had a strong story (or stories) working as their spine. In some cases the techniques which Miller had developed on the printed page after finally learning that "comics are more than just films on paper" fell flat on film, but the whole work itself was strong.

If you ask any fan of the Spirit they will tell you that the series' draw was the experimentation, like every installment was a clinic in storytelling in the comics medium. They also probably could not tell you which singular Spirit story they would call a "signature" story.

In a way this was probably the worst license to give Miller to "experiment with" however. Since there is no signature Spirit story offering Miller this film would be like one of the major publishing houses offering him someone like Spider-Man and simply saying "Make a movie."

The irony being that it would be substantially easier with a number of the major characters from Marvel or DC.

Spider-man has a fairly interesting origin story, even though it's a bit recycled since all major Marvel heroes share some variation on the same origin. But likewise the same could be said of each of his numerous interesting villains. On top of that there have been a number of great stories which could be mined to great benefit, such as: The death of Captain Stacy, the Death of Gwen Stacy, his courtship and marriage to Mary-Jane Watson, etc...

Batman has a laundry list of great stories, the origin of course which is a bit overused if for no other reason than being one of the first of its kind, each of his numerous villain's unique origins, but beyond that there have been a number of great stories which could be easily adapted, A Death in the Family, A lonely Place of Dying, The Killing Joke, Year One, The Long Halloween, Dark Victory, Venom, Knightfall/Knightquest/Knight's End.

You may think that Superman would have a similar amount of great stories behind him but he suffers from a fate similar to Mickey Mouse in that he's almost more of a logo than a character. Most of his great stories are unique re-tellings of his origin or stories of his end. Though because his supporting cast and world is so well established if it is respected it is very easy to create a great story. Just remember that Lois and Clark/Superman always have a great back and forth like any screwball romantic comedy pair whether Lois knows the secret or not (but she is a great reporter so don't make her look stupid). The rest you could probably figure out.

But for something like a film it isn't something which should be done on the fly which based on what Miller says his comic writing style is like as well as reviews of the film seem to indicate has happened. Hopefully Miller will get a chance to learn from his mistake. One thing that anyone can learn from this is the importance of a strong story as the core of a great film, because there's only so much that be covered by a unique visual style and a great cast... which are luxuries which many filmmakers cannot afford.

That's such a Rip-Off.

"The Machinist" is a total rip-off of "Fight Club." I mean it features a lead character who suffers from insomnia whose subconscious creates a trickster character as a delusion who tries to control the actions of the actual person.

It's just like in comics when they copied that character who was an orphan who through a strange combination of events (possibly involving an animal) gained some phenomenal abilities which he would later go on to use to fight injustice maybe in response to some personal loss. I'm trying to remember whose story that was, Superman, Batman, Spider-man or all of the above.

J. Michael Straczynski, creator of the show Babylon 5 and author of a good run on Amazing Spider-Man, made a point when discussing plagiarism. He gave the basic plot to a story which went like this:

Boy meets girl. Boy falls in love with girl. Boy runs into opposition to love for girl. Boy Dies.

He then proceeded to ask if this was a summary of Romeo and Juliet or King
Kong, to which he answered yes.


An interesting thing about the progression of human knowledge is how it actually works. Every advance is an accomplishment and an achievement in and of itself, but once it happens it becomes a tool which can be employed by others.

Artist Micheal Newberry made a great point about this:

Innovation is a funny thing in art. An artist could easily lose their way by attempting to be innovative in everything they do and lose sight of what their core belief and soul are. On the other hand there are plenty of artists that remain true to themselves and yet use the tools of art that they were simply taught. I view art history more like a palette of colors to tweak, as one of many means to breath freshness into the work; but the end point always comes out of my soul.

There's also a well known saying that "Good artists borrow, great artists steal." And it's rarely on better display than in examples like the ones I listed above. But this requires further explanation.

A film like "The Machinist" was often dismissed as a simple derivative work of "Fight Club." It used a number of the same narrative tools of "Fight Club" this includes: an unreliable narrator, a trickster character who later turns out to be a product of said narrator's imagination, and insomnia as a plot device.

What made it different was the manner in which those devices were used. In "Fight Club" the plot is driven by the emergence of the lead character's frustrated ego in the form of a separate personality named Tyler Durden who tries to drag the man's behavior deeper into madness, terrorism and nihilism. The insomnia facilitates this development in both stories. In "The Machinist" the events are similar but the motivation is in reverse. The trickster delusion in the Machinist serves the opposite purpose. In the Machinist Trevor Reznik is both trying desperately to discover an underlying mystery that will explain his insomnia, but at the same time he's deathly afraid to discover the secret. His delusion serves the purpose of keeping him focused on reality and facing his metaphorical demons no matter how hard. But it's also fair to mention that "The Machinist" takes at least as much from the Roman Polanski film "Repulsion" (a film which is frequently copied in its own right) as it does from Fight Club.

In the course of using a number of the same story elements something completely new and different was created. This is how great art is supposed to work. You learn to understand what made everything in a story work, and then learn to use it as a tool of your own. Just because something hasn't been done before doesn't mean that it's good, but the real secret is to learn how to use everything that's gone before you and add more than you took.