Talk:Grant Morrison

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.


WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Objectivity

I feel like the entire article is littered with negative bias towards him and his work.

[edit] Gaps?

It seems like there's a big chunk missing. It goes from talking about The Invisibiles and his (relatively) early DC work to quite recent stuff; in one paragraph, JLA and X-Men are still ahead of him, in the next they're already in the past, with no discussion of the period when he was actually doing them. Since this is probably his best-known work - it's certainly his most commercially successful, if nothing else - this seems like a pretty big oversight. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the man to do these sections right.

I've expanded the biography but more work needs to be done-his non comics work for example needs to be added.Logan1138 16:00, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Later for Vertigo, Morrison would write Flex Mentallo (a Doom Patrol spin off) with artist Frank Quitely and Aztek with co-writer Mark Millar

i could be wrong, but i am pretty sure that Aztek was NOT a Vertigo series...12.47.223.8 20:42, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

"Shortly afterwards, a character called "The Writer" appeared in an issue of the DC Comics title Suicide Squad (not written by Morrison), protesting that other "writers" had taken control of his fate now that he was part of "the continuity". The character was killed shortly afterwards."

How do we know that "The Writer" was intended to be a Morrison appearance?

[edit] Simpsons Comics appearance

I haven't read the Simpsons Comics in which Morrison makes an appearance, but why exactly is it "ironic" that the issue doesn't mention his work on Animal Man or The Mystery Play? The current parenthesis is a bit jarring and unexplained. I'm tempted to remove it entirely, guessing that it's sufficient to say that he's depicted arguing with Mark Millar about the X-Men titles. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:33, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The 1990s

I think "The Invisibles proved to be a huge impact on the counterculture" is a bit of an overstatement. Without specific examples of the series's influence, it's impossible to evaluate. Can we have some specifics there?

Also, the "Matrix" issue is controversial, and writing that Invisibles "is said to have been a major influence on The Matrix" begs the question: said by whom? Can we cite sources?

Update: On the advice of another user, I'm going to delete. Feel free to reinstate with specifics. Gabriel Roth 04:16, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I second Gabriel's concern that the "huge impact" ought to have a source of some sort--that's a pretty tall claim. And we should put in a link to the interview where Morrison talks about The Matrix--is that the Suicide Girls interview? Nareek 22:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Well i don't think you actually need to cite it, the huge impact is pretty obvious. Barbelith.com, Technoccult.com, Key23.com, all taken from morrisons work the invisibles. Pretty much everyone in Generation Hex was inspired by him. If you go around Europe in the hip spots you can still see "King Mob" graffiti.

Just want to remind folks that the edit summary box is a fine place to explain why you are putting something back in again or taking something back out again. Nareek 04:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I do think a mention of the Matrix is required. As mentioned it is the Suicde Girls interview [1] where he goes into this at length. (Emperor 01:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC))

Unfortunately, I don't think HIS claiming that the Matrix movies are clearly influenced by/stolen from his work counts as an even REMOTELY significant and/or unbiased source - especially since everything from Philip Dick to William Gibson to Mage: the Ascension have been suggested as "major influences" on the Matrix in the past. We're getting to the point where there are more major influences than there is actual movie! Unless we've actually got a source from the Wachowskis themselves admitting the influence, or someone at Warner Brothers cops to it, or even a more impartial third-party source for the info, I don't see this as anything more than his own delusions of grandeur and ego-wankery. Granted, however, it would be more than valid to mention in the article that HE thinks the Matrix was cribbed from his work. Hossenfeffer 17:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Thats all thats needed. Its mentioned in the Matrix entry (where they are unfortunately less critical of his statements) and so would need to be mentioned somewhere here. Given the whole Sophia Stewart business perhaps there should be an entry about everyone claiming the film nicked their ideas. (Emperor 13:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC))
The Wachowski Brothers kept copies of 'The Invisibles' on set for cast and crew during the filming of the first Matrix movie. I don't have any citations, but I remember reading that long ago. Es-won 23:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bibliography

shouldn't a bibliography be in chronological order, rather than alphabetical? or at least have dates of publication noted parenthetically? when i have some time, i will try to dig up dates to add & i'd encourage anyone else to do the same...69.181.121.40

Agreed. I have been through the bibliography and added in things that have arisen with sorting out 2000AD entries and I've expanded others and tried to track dates down (as well getting the formatting consistent). Its going to need a couple more goes through to get all the dates and formatitng spot on but then it should be an easy matter of switching it around. I'll return to this at some point but feel free to add any extra info you can and we'll see how the land lies and then sort it all chronologically. (Emperor 01:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC))
I think the alphabetical thing is kinda working (though I agree, it should have dates). With something like 'The Invisibles', in a chronological list, it would be split up through three different volumes; that seems to be unneccessarily complicating the information, especially when the early biography section discussing his important works covers it chronologically.
Imagine trying to go through a chronological list of Garth Ennis's work and pick out all the times he worked on The Punisher ... he's written so many permutations of that which span six years of publication dates ...just my two cents
[EDIT] and by "six", I naturally meant "eleven and counting". heh, I was a bit tired...
ThatGuamGuy 06:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)sean (TGG)
(Sorry in advance for my bad english writing, I'm spanish-speaking)
I've sorted the bibligraphy, by publisher and later by year, to make the presentation of the large quantity of data in the section more estructured, clear and easily readable. What do you think of the change?
The bibliography is detailed (which is good), specially his UK work (mainly short stories in anthologies), but with more info in the bibliography I think that also comes less usability if it isn't properly presented. I think that under some different sections, the Bibliography is more affordable, and it is more easy to read and to process the info, but without lossing any data of the previous Bibliography.
I think that a filmography/discography/comicography/ or similar is useful sorted in chronological order, to see the progresion of the author, and when did a work; it adds more info to the total presentation. I think that a alphabeticaly-sorted list of works of a writer/artist is only useful en checklist-type lists or reference lists, to help the collectors complete his collections (like the "price guide" of Wizard), or like a first step to later build a bibliography in chronological order.
I've let the "Batman", JLA and Flash tags-sub-sections untouched for now, to sort them later, if you are OK with the changes (If you don't like them, they may be easily reversed).
The info about the collected editions is very useful (it is more easy to a reader to find a collected edition -in Amazon, Barnes&Noble or other retailers- that the single comic-books that only are sold in comic shops), but to make the bibliography more usable, I think it would be a good idea to take the info about the collected editions of the comic-books (title, year of publication of the collected edition & ISBN) to another separated section in the bibliography, like it is done in the Brian Azzarello entry. If this change is done, I think that it would be later more clear to put all his US-work (DC, Marvel, Vertigo and others) under the same section, and let three sections in his bibliography (2000AD, other UK publishers and US publishers). What do you think?
Jose A. Serrano 00:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
If you split them up then it does become almost chronological so it makes sense to fiish the sorting. I would quibble about the placement of something things. I'd rather not split off a section on collected editions - it is handy to have the information all in one place otherwise you'd have to be checking up and down the page. (Emperor 01:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] New Doom Patrol?

I was just coming on to remove the bit about a Deep Throat of comics suggesting he will be doing a new Doom Patrol. His work commitments and the DP storyline pretty much preclude this (if not forever then for quite a time). If anyone adds that back in then they are going to have to state a source. (Emperor 14:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC))

[edit] picture?

ought this article not include a photo of the good looking man? alan moore, garth ennis and warren ellis all have their heads featured on respective article. surely grant morisson is as legendary

That's odd - it did have a piccie, its had a couple now I think about it. Its possible they have been removed because the copyright didn't allow their use. You'd need to dig through to find out what was removed when (i might have been just clumsy editting). Also if someone has a photo they took that would be the best solution (Emperor 12:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Plays

I believe has written a couple of plays - this from his homepage "Morrison is also the author of two stage plays Red King Rising’ and ‘Depravity’, which, between them, won a Fringe First Award, the Independent Theatre Award for 1989 and the Evening Standard Award for new drama at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival." [2] - can anyone dig out more information and drop something on these into the entry? (Emperor 12:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC))


[edit] Batman 659 and on

Morrison apparently didn't write Batman 659, nor is the story in 659 the Joker story teased at the end of 658. Instead, John Ostrander and Tom Mandrake started a new storyline, "Grotesk". I'll leave it to wiser and more wikiskilled hands to do the actual editing. --71.162.33.250 03:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that - it looks like its slipped. Updated now. [3] (Emperor 03:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Links and references

Things down there had started getting awfully confusing with 2 lots of reference sections wrapped around external links. All rather odd. What I've done is sorted it out (one of the "references" was really external links), added in a sectionfor external links that are interviews and made the actual reference section capabl of accepting footnotes. I'd suggest making more extensive use of this and not adding a lot of other links in (and possibly migrating some links up to be references for different points made in the entry). See: Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Footnotes. It should eventually help tighten up the whole entry and we can get rid of the links clean up tags. (Emperor 15:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Trivia

I try and avoid trivia as much as possible as the good stuff can usually be included in the biography and the other stuff is often not worth mentioning. In this case there is only one item and I'd suggest this would be better off in a section on awards: "Awards and recognition" possibly? (Emperor 19:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:All Star Superman Cover.jpg

Image:All Star Superman Cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Invisibles1.jpg

Image:Invisibles1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Demon Fighter

I heard that Grant Morrison says that he fought a demon when he was sixteen. Does anyone have any information on that? 151.198.233.92 12:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Jla-morrison1.jpg

Image:Jla-morrison1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:We3-1.jpg

Image:We3-1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Biblejohn.jpg

Image:Biblejohn.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)