Something something death of the artist.
If more people saw the silhouette backwards than forwards, does it even matter what Miller originally intended?
Someone, I assume some frickwit influencer or a statistical eddy or wherever it is idiots get their opinions, brought the term to Cinemaphile's attention recently and now it's a meaningless buzzphrase. I don't think I've ever seen anyone on here use it correctly.
I mean yeah it kind of does matter if you are going to debate it because you are debating how the guy drew it you fricking moron.
What is more interesting is the fact that it's unclear intended or not by the author it makes the piece much more interesting and helps show batman as that mythical figure goons see him ass when he jumps through the shadows
miller is a moron, if he wanted us to face front, he should make it more obvious, the way the angle of the shadows shows, it does look like he has his head turn really hard down, as if he was jumping straight to the enemy
I guess I always had this image in mind as well, so I never took it as anything but a front shot. didn't even know this was a debate...
If Batman was bigger on the image on the cover, I might see it as forward facing. Big and coming at you. With the figure being smaller I see it as back facing, it doesn't help that the way the cape looks makes the back look more natural
The left silhouette trace looks better so that's probably why most went with it.
Backman
Back looks cooler so it’s back facing
>inb4 armchair psychology over what angle you choose says about you as a person
+1 upvote
That's Batman?
I thought it was some kind of piranha plant. Never made any sense to me, but Miller's writing doesn't either.
I always thought it was meant to almost be one of those body building angles that points, something like this Arnie pic
it always looked to me like a downward sieg heil and made me suspicious of miller's motivations in writing that
kek damn it carlos!
I always thought it was front facing, but seriously, who cares? It's a shit cover either way
It's quite literally the most iconic comic cover in history
You're responding to bait.
>something being popular = good
when did Cinemaphile become this much of bootlickers?
2015ish.
It was good before it became popular, tardo
It's away, otherwise you'd see the eyes.
Check and mate.
I thought he was facing down.
If it wasn't clear, it's the artist's fault. We want a comic cover not some ink blot psych test.
I’ve always seen backward, front facing isn’t as cool.
Zach Snyder also saw it as backward lol
Which pretty much confirms its not supposed to be backward
miller's own fricking sketch so lmao.
back facers on denial and literally wrong.
Turns one of the coolest covers ever into your everyday run of the mill Batman image. Sad.
dunno i like how many of Miller's idiosyncrasies are there, a lot to take in and imagine, back then he did it like nobody else.
since then, better artists happened. not to mention that I'M #teamAdams. to say that miller is overrated is to say that water is wet
>everyday run of the mill Batman image
more like run of the miller Batman image
Counterpoint: Miller's a frickwit and a shit artist.
>artist so shit he can't even manage to convey what he meant to convey to the majority of people who look at it
Something something death of the artist.
If more people saw the silhouette backwards than forwards, does it even matter what Miller originally intended?
not quite how death of the author works
Someone, I assume some frickwit influencer or a statistical eddy or wherever it is idiots get their opinions, brought the term to Cinemaphile's attention recently and now it's a meaningless buzzphrase. I don't think I've ever seen anyone on here use it correctly.
no
of course it matters
if you and a bunch of your friends heard song lyrics wrong, it doesn't supersede the actual song writer's lyrics
it does make the original lyrics technically crap, though
I mean yeah it kind of does matter if you are going to debate it because you are debating how the guy drew it you fricking moron.
What is more interesting is the fact that it's unclear intended or not by the author it makes the piece much more interesting and helps show batman as that mythical figure goons see him ass when he jumps through the shadows
miller is a moron, if he wanted us to face front, he should make it more obvious, the way the angle of the shadows shows, it does look like he has his head turn really hard down, as if he was jumping straight to the enemy
frick miller
If Batman was bigger on the image on the cover, I might see it as forward facing. Big and coming at you. With the figure being smaller I see it as back facing, it doesn't help that the way the cape looks makes the back look more natural
WHO THE HELL'S MILLER?
Backward is what makes it iconic. That pose, raw power.
I guess I always had this image in mind as well, so I never took it as anything but a front shot. didn't even know this was a debate...
well, now you can say you've learned something new on Cinemaphile
lol, really? that's kinda gay
this however, is not gay
I love you so much (no homo)
Because comic book covers always show the BACK of the heroic pose...
idiots.
That’s what makes this cover special, or at least what did.
It's like this.
I hate you so much.
I never understood why his cape has a cut in the middle.
he’s the batman
Miller is a shit artist. People only like him because it was their first ''mature'' comic.
Sure thing, midwit
When did Cinemaphile turn against Miller? I understand not liking his recent work, but his old work is great.
It's just the same midwit seething about his old work
>is Flash sucking Bruce's dick or ass?