The usher looked at my ticket, blinked, looked back at me, back down at the ticket, back at me, and said, “The Spirit? Really?” Then he rolled his eyes, shrugged in a “it takes all kinds” manner and tore my ticket.
As bad omens go, the only thing that could have been worse would have been discovering Mike Nelson, Crow, and Tom Servo sitting in the front row.
The thing with Frank Miller is this: He’s a power hitter. He takes huge swings for the fences every time out. If he connects, he drives it out of the park. The problem with power hitters is that they strike out. A lot. And when they do, it can be monumental to watch. They don’t just stand there and watch a ball whiz by on the outside corner with their bat on their shoulder. No, they take huge hacks at it, swinging from the heels, and when they miss, they spin around, their legs twisted in knots and crossed at the ankles, and sometimes even fall flat on their ášš.
That’s pretty much what we’ve got here. A huge swing and a miss.
The truth is that, if you come at it from the point of view of viewing it as a surrealist comedy, it can be pretty entertaining. I’m going to focus on the positive aspects because (a) I am friends with most of the producers on the film, and (b) everyone else is dumping on Frank, so why pile on?
A) It’s the best film that Paul Levitz has ever appeared in. During one point as the Spirit is plummeting, Paul is visible in the crowd and is heard to say, “You’ll believe a man can’t fly.” Seriously. I’m not kidding. Go run Paul’s name through IMDB if you don’t believe me.
B) All the shots remained clearly in focus.
C) Everyone’s diction was really clear, and no one bumped into any furniture.
D) I could follow the action sequences, which is more than I can say for “Quantum of Solace.”
E) The Frank Miller illustrations over the final credits were pretty good. In fact, if this had been a four-issue Frank Miller comic book series instead of a movie, I think people would have liked it a lot better.
Here’s the main problem: The film is like “Ðìçk Tracy” on crack. The thing that made “Ðìçk Tracy”…well, not work, really, but work as much as it did…was, first, the vividness of the color palette and second, Al Pacino contrasted with Warren Beatty. Scenery chewer versus a guy who was little more than scenery himself. Here we have on the one hand Samuel Jackson, who apparently wanted to out-lousy-movie his “Pulp Fiction” co-star John Travolta. He failed; despite what others have said, “The Spirit” is NOT as bad as “Battlefield Earth.” On the other hand, we have Gabriel Macht as the Spirit, a character who desperately needed to have been played by Bruce Campbell. In fact, there’s nothing in this film that wouldn’t have been 110% better if Campbell had been in the lead, because he can carry off the balancing act that I think Frank was going for.
“The Spirit” is at war with itself: A color scheme mostly of muted black and white (a flashback of Denny Colt lying dead of gunshot wounds makes it look like he’s covered with pigeon crap rather than blood) is in conflict with the over-the-top script which is in conflict with the director’s vision (bad news since the director wrote the script) which is in conflict with the actors (bad news since the director directed them.) So you get a film that doesn’t know what it wants to be aside from a Frank Miller film. Lines that are intended to be funny fall flat; lines that are intended to be serious prompt laughs. Cloned disposable henchmen with their names on their t-shirts, apparently having wandered in from the 1960s “Batman” series, keep showing up in sequences that I suspect only Frank thought were amusing. In the sparsely attended hall where I saw it, the film garnered at various times reactions ranging from outright guffaws to incredulous shouts of “WHAT?” in reaction to some particularly absurd moment. Something tells me that isn’t what Frank Miller was going for. The truth is that Frank was given his head on this film, and now critics are handing it to him. Is it deserved? To quote “Unforgiven,” deserves has nothin’ to do with it.
Ultimately, is “The Spirit” THAT bad? No. It’s just THAT not good.
PAD
• 
Peter David: I think Marvel should do a book called All Star Hulk And Thor. Or DC should do a miniseries reuniting Green Lantern and Green Arrow, except they’re in civilian garb the whole time, so it’s All Star Hal/Oliver Limited Edition.
Luigi Novi: Thanks for the heads=up. Right after I read the first part of the above quote, and before I read the second, I was thinking that someone should do an All-Star Spider-Man, Hulk, Omega Sentinel, Lightning Lad, and Elongated Man. Great minds think alike. 🙂
Peter David: I think Marvel should do a book called All Star Hulk And Thor. Or DC should do a miniseries reuniting Green Lantern and Green Arrow, except they’re in civilian garb the whole time, so it’s All Star Hal/Oliver Limited Edition.
Luigi Novi: Thanks for the heads-up. Right after I read the first part of the above quote, and before I read the second, I was thinking that someone should do an All-Star Spider-Man, Hulk, Omega Sentinel, Lightning Lad, and Elongated Man. Great minds think alike. 🙂
Bill, it’s not only that his last works have been bad, it’s that they’re disturbing. I don’t very much like the glimpses I get from the mind behind them.
But I don’t think they diminish all the good stuff he has done in the past. I love all of Frank’s Daredevil work.
Only twice in my life have movie theatre ushers presumed to mock me for the films I held tickets to see. One film, Ken Russell’s WHØRÊ with Theresa Russell, was a fascinating failure. The other was the brilliant french skiffy film, DELICATESSEN, which I adore and now own on DVD. In both cases I looked at the usher and thought to myself, “Who the hëll are you and why should I care about your critical opinion?”
“Sean D. Martin, the name of the title character isn’t “Spirit.” It’s “The Spirit.””
Yes, but you wouldn’t say “The The Spirit movie.”
Just got back from the movies with my daughters. The Spirit wasn’t one of the options but I can vouch for both Valkyrie and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, with the caveat that with Button you had best be prepared for a long movie. Lay off the jumbo sized soft drink. Ironically, for a movie about a guy who grows younger, I was much much older by the time the film was over.
Valkyrie was well acted and as suspenseful as possible for a movie whose ending you already know.
Judging from Friday’s B.O. The Spirit was lucky to make the top 10. Of course, without knowing the budget it’s hard to know if this will be a genuine box office disaster or not–it could be one of those films that is huge overseas. (Sin City did well with the foreign BO).
But it doesn’t look like we’ll ever get the Spirit movie a lot of us dreamed of.
So, a regular “Fall Of The House Of Usher”?
One thought that kept occurring to me during the movie was, “What about writing and drawing comics teaches a man to direct dialogue?”
Because the delivery was from the George Lucas school of moviemaking. The bad George Lucas school, the one where everyone is held back every year.
Besides the “What’s ten minutes in a man’s life” line, there was the line Miller took from one of his own stories: “Nice piece of work . . . you shouldn’t have signed it.”
Let me preface my comment with this: I loved the “Punisher: War Zone” movie. Despite the complete critical and commercial disaster this movie was, I thought it was the best attempt at a “Punisher” movie to date. Too bad this is (barring a miracle) the stake thru the heart for this franchise.
That having been said, “The Spirit” was horrible. I can find nothing positive to say about it other than it had a beginning and (thankfully) and ending. Beyond that………well…….ugg.
But then again, what do I know? I liked “Punisher: War Zone”.
Rene: “Bill, it’s not only that his last works have been bad, it’s that they’re disturbing. I don’t very much like the glimpses I get from the mind behind them.”
For me, All-Star Batman & Robin the Boy Wonder, and Batman: The Dark Knight Strikes Again hit sour notes. Some aspects of the “Sin City” stories have left me cold, but I admire the craft with which the stories are told. I loved the mythic quality of 300 (the comic-book version; haven’t seen the movie). (Granted, that covers about over a decade’s worth of territory. I guess the older I get, the more I stretch the word “recent.”)
I’m curious as to what you mean by his “last works.” Have you found nothing of value in Miller’s work in the last ten years, or are you thinking of a shorter time-frame? Are you including movies with which he’s been involved, like 300 and Sin City? I’m not trying to draw you out for a fight; your subjective response to those works is something to which you’re entitled. I’m just curious.
As for his works being disturbing, yes, I find Miller’s penchant for drawing høøkër-warriors and stripper-goddesses in bizarre fetish costumes a bit… odd. I also wince at times as his ultra-violent heroes delight in the sounds and sensations of breaking bone and spilling blood. I guess I have a higher tolerance for that stuff than some; to me, it’s all fiction. No one’s actually getting hurt. Nevertheless, I can understand why someone would recoil at that stuff.
Still, I tend to be cautious about drawing conclusions about a creator based on his or her creations. Miller may simply be more willing to unleash his inner fantasies than most, but that doesn’t mean they’re more than just fantasies.
I think now would be a great time to secure the license to a SPIRIT movie or TV series. The Frank Miller movie has a 16% rating at Rotten Tomatoes (with 54 critics weighing in), and it doesn’t look like it’s going to get any better. Once this movie leaves the theatres, the licensing fee for the SPIRIT will probably be rock-bottom. Perhaps DC-WARNER can license it and let Darwyn Cooke do an animated SPIRIT feature.
I think now would be a great time to secure the license to a SPIRIT movie or TV series. The Frank Miller movie has a 16% rating at Rotten Tomatoes (with 54 critics weighing in), and it doesn’t look like it’s going to get any better. Once this movie leaves the theatres, the licensing fee for the SPIRIT will probably be rock-bottom. Perhaps DC-WARNER can license it and let Darwyn Cooke do an animated SPIRIT feature.
“Still, I tend to be cautious about drawing conclusions about a creator based on his or her creations. Miller may simply be more willing to unleash his inner fantasies than most, but that doesn’t mean they’re more than just fantasies.”
Right. I considered that late Jack Chalker a pretty good friend, but i quit reading his SF because, while well-written and quite readable, it tended to revolve around fetishistic and dominance/submission themes rather too much.
Which is why i’ve pretty well stopped reading Miller.
I glanced at “Sin City” a few times, ditto for the first couple issues of ASBAR. Forget it.
And what i hear about this movie leads me to expect more of the same, wrapped in a visual style that absolutely antithetical to Eisner’s works.
Not about to spend $7 (plus gas) on something i’ll probably walk out of before it’s over (or walk out of wondering if the box office can refund my wasted time, as Starhelm said after we watched “Ðámņáŧìøņ Alley” all those years ago…).
Assuming i’m still subscribing to Netflix (or have a few extra bucks for Blockbuster) when it hits DVD, i’ll *try* to watch it. All indications so far seem to point to it being like “Moulin Rouge” and “Meet the Robinsons” – two films i couldn’t watch all the way through, even in small bites over the course of a full afternoon.
Hey, I LIKED Moulin Rouge! And i really didn’t think I would, grumpily sitting next to the wife. prepared for a chick flick.
On the other hand, my daughters made me watch one of their favorite horror movie last night; Queen of the Ðámņëd. What. The. Hëll. Where did I go wrong with their upbringing?
“And calling it by the full name at all times is vitally important. If you leave out “The World’s Greatest Comics Magazine” part out of “Fantastic Four”, it’s the same as punching Stan Lee in the face. And he’s old, why are you punching him? Bášŧárd.”
Today is Stan Lee’s birthday.
I found the last paragraph of this review interesting in the context of some of the things said here (by myself, among others): http://filmfreakcentral.net/screenreviews/thespirit.htm
Still holding at 16% with the “T-Meter Critics”, but at 6% with “TopCritics” (1 or 17 liked it) on RottenTomatoes.com
I defend the use of lower case when writing about the Spirit movie, but hope I would have used upper case if I had said something about “The Spirit”.
I also recognize that different forms of entertainment have different rules for the way they are mentioned on the written page–some are just typed, some are encased in quotation marks, and others are italicized. Most people don’t know these rules. I certainly don’t, but if Peter David puts ‘The Spirit’ inside quotation marks when speaking of the movie, I am going to assume that is the proper way to note a movie’s title.
====
I have no problem with people picking nits. It leads to many an in-depth discussion.
Bill, I was refering to ASBAR and DK2.
It seems like that desperate hyper-masculinity that has always been present in Frank’s work has grown with the years. Sin City has it too, but I didn’t remark on it at the time, because it sorta belonged there. Noir, hard-boiled crime stories seem like a good place for hyper-masculinity.
But then I read DK2 and thought “What the hëll?” And ASBAR just seemed to carry it that much further.
It’s not like I go out of my way to draw conclusions about the author, it’s just that sometimes this stuff just leaps at me and won’t let go. Miller just looks so much like a guy that has deadly doubts about his own manhood and is trying to compensate, that it stops being funny for me.
Maybe it is also because Miller’s fantasies just don’t appeal to me. I sorta liked Jack Chalker, mentioned by Mike Weber, and one favorite fantasy of his (the male protagonist that is forcibly turned into a woman), is sort of a turn-on for me, but Chalker’s books remain a guilty pleasure for me. Sexual fantasies alone can’t carry a book. Even when it’s my favorite sex fantasy. And Miller’s fantasies of hyper-masculinity are anything but favorites of mine, so it’s that much worse.
I try to see movies in the theater with as clean a slate as possible. I try to avoid trailers, talk show interviews, and both newspaper and online articles about the movie. Before yesterday afternoon, I had not seen one ad nor trailer for “The Spirit” except the quick glance to see what the subject was so I could page down or go to another site. But I already knew that the reviews for “The Spirit” were not very good. Still, I will see it in the theater.
But I won’t be seeing the latest Tom Cruise movie. Tom Cruise rubs me the wrong way, so my perception of any movie he is in would be affected negatively. Why bother trying to pretend that I would have a clean slate before seeing one of his movies? Same, but considerably less so with Will Smith, for the following reason. I think Smith is a great movie star, but not a very good actor. I might eventually see his movie(s) on cable, but I won’t spend any additional money to see his movies in the theater.
I haven’t seen the movie of 300, but was disappointed with the book. I absolutely loved Sin City more than the books, but liked the books well enough. I thought Ronin was pretty good except for the last issue. I don’t think Miller is a god, but usually enjoy his work. But I don’t automatically love everything he does.
=====
Samuel L. Jackson turned 60 this weekend.
“I certainly don’t, but if Peter David puts ‘The Spirit’ inside quotation marks when speaking of the movie, I am going to assume that is the proper way to note a movie’s title.”
Movie titles are italicized.
“Today is Stan Lee’s birthday.”
Now to begin a debate on the morality of birthday punches.
I thought “Moulin Rouge” was brilliant as well.
Then again, in the interests of full disclosure, I also loved “Speed Racer.” I was thrilled to see a reviewer for “Time” name it as one of the ten best films of the year. I thought, “Wow, I wasn’t the only one.”
PAD
“On the other hand, my daughters made me watch one of their favorite horror movie last night; Queen of the Ðámņëd. What. The. Hëll. Where did I go wrong with their upbringing?”
Why did you have to go and remind us all of that… that… thing that I had worked so hard to forget. You must now go and watch five Uwe Bowl films in a row as your penace.
Rene: “Miller just looks so much like a guy that has deadly doubts about his own manhood and is trying to compensate…”
Looks can be deceiving, which is why I judge the creation rather than the creator. Unless, you know, the creator goes and commits a violent crime or something. Then all bets are off.
Robert Fuller: “Yes, but you wouldn’t say ‘The The Spirit movie.'”
No, you’d write, “I went to see The Spirit movie.” Articles at the beginning of a title or proper noun are capitalized, even in the middle of a sentence. If you don’t believe me, check out this article at About.com. Stylebooks differ about some issues related to capitalizing titles and proper nouns, but I have yet to see any variance about the capitalization of articles at the beginning of a title or proper noun.
Alan Coil: “I have no problem with people picking nits. It leads to many an in-depth discussion.”
My only point, Alan, was that it’s a bad idea to use hyperbole like “internet illiteracy” over something as small as a missing hyphen, particularly when you make a similar mistake in the very same comment. You corrected me in another thread in this forum, but you were nice about it. That’s why I thanked you.
Jerry Chandler: “You must now go and watch five Uwe Bowl films in a row as your penace.”
Actually, Jerry, it’s Uwe Boll. The only reason I point that out is: I like your spelling better. We could create a competition called The Uwe Bowl! Watch as contestants are forced to watch movie after movie from Uwe Boll! The last one to resist becoming violently ill or hoplessly catatonic wins a cameo role in BloodRayne 3!
I can’t help it, Bill, I try and put it and its “films” as far out of my mind as I can. Even remembering the correct spelling its name can cause too much pain.
Really? Because I just entered you into The Uwe Bowl as the first contestant, Jerry.
Fine. Enter me then. But there’s no way I’ll accept my prize for winning.
So there.
I just read ComicMix’s post “‘Thge Spirit’ Tanks at Box Office”, and i was particularly taken with this phrase describing reviews: “… horrified reviews from those familiar with the source material and poor reviews from everyone else …”
I haven’t seen The Spirit yet. I didn’t really like 300 and Sin City that much, and I’m not sufficiently familiar with Miller’s, so I’m not inclined to run and see it.
Still, there is a question that came to me when reading a review of this movie. Is it possible that he set of skills that make Miller, or someone else, a great comic writer/artist, is insufficient for movies? What are the skills the two media have in common, and which arethe ones where they diverge?
I saw BloodRayne. Didn’t really understand it. It was kind of hollow. But I’ve experienced no longterm trauma that I’m aware of except for time lost. I may have seen Queen of the Ðámņëd. Similar sensation, I think.
“I saw BloodRayne. Didn’t really understand it. It was kind of hollow. But I’ve experienced no longterm trauma that I’m aware of except for time lost.”
You got off lucky, my friend.
His choices make sense if you notice that he seeks opportunities to violate the Comics Code Authority. His stories have prostitutes and knives pointed at eyes, but most people only notice the objectification of women and go by that.
To him, the marginialization of comics from the self-censorship may be justification for someone to pick up where EC crime comics left off, and there won’t be any pressure for him to change as long as no one else challenges him in occupying the top spot for that role. I only imagine that’s part of his sales pitch in selling DC on portraying Batman the way he has.
Mike, that’s not a bad point.
I think the problem is that people wanted Will Eisner’s The Spirit and they got Frank Miller’s The Spirit. I’m afraid that if, as reported, Miller does Buck Rogers next we will get Frank Miller’s Buck Rogers. Wilma Deering will dress like a høøkër and Killer Kane will wear a swastika.
(But if he manages to adapt the original novella Armageddon 2419 A.D. everything would be cool. He’d need to lose the stories yellow peril racism of course, but there’s a great story there waiting to be told.)
I’d much rather see Miller use his unique vision on realizing his own works instead of bending other people’s creations toward his style. But the unrestrained Miller-hate is really getting over the top.
“…Frank Miller’s Buck Rogers…”
As long as he includes Twiki and Dr. Thelopolis, I’m there.
BEEDEE-BEEDEE-BEEDEE.
“But the unrestrained Miller-hate is really getting over the top.”
At one time, the guy could do no wrong in many fans’ eyes (Daredevil, The Dark Knight Returns, Ronin, Batman: Year One). Unfortunately, it’s human nature to resent the very people you build up and to tear them down in response. It’s not a very nice aspect of human nature, mind you. But it’s an aspect nevertheless.
When Jack Kirby returned to Captain America, his creative choices were pretty controversial. If there had been an Internet back then, I suspect some of the chattering and nattering about Kirby might’ve been as petty, small, and nasty as the snipes against Miller are now.
Dr. THEOPOLIS. I meant to type Dr. THEOPOLIS.
BEEDEE-BEEDEE-BEEDEE, I think I popped a microchip, Buck!
Not at all looking forward to Miller doing Buck Rogers. That news made me more than a little queasy.
Twiki and?!?!?!
You’re a sick man, Myers. Now, if you had said that you wanted to see Hawk in there…
I’d actually like to see a remake of the Dino Delaurentis’ Flash Gordon with all the bad parts gone and all the good parts kept. Problem is, nobody seems to agree on what the good and bad parts are.
I’d actually like to see a remake of the Dino Delaurentis’ Flash Gordon with all the bad parts gone and all the good parts kept. Problem is, nobody seems to agree on what the good and bad parts are.
Good parts:
Music, for the most part.
Most of the casting (i.e. virtually everyone except Flash and Dale)
The generally winking tone
Bad parts:
The really forced sex-farce aspects
Much of the dialogue
Melody “GoFlashGo!” Anderson and Sam “out-acted by the scenery” Jones
Any other takers?
“No, you’d write, “I went to see The Spirit movie.” Articles at the beginning of a title or proper noun are capitalized, even in the middle of a sentence. If you don’t believe me, check out this article at About.com”
I believe you about that, but that’s not really what’s at issue here. In Alan’s original sentence, he wasn’t using the title of the movie, he was referring to the actual character. He said, “the Spirit movie,” i.e. the movie about the Spirit (as in “the James Bond movie.”) In this case, it’s okay to leave out the “the” in the Spirit’s name. Just like if you saw a movie about the Grand Canyon, you would say, “I saw the Grand Canyon movie,” even though it’s called “the Grand Canyon” rather than simply “Grand Canyon.”
“I’d actually like to see a remake of the Dino Delaurentis’ Flash Gordon with all the bad parts gone and all the good parts kept. Problem is, nobody seems to agree on what the good and bad parts are.”
There are no bad parts, because even the “bad parts” are good.
Bill, I’ve never been a big fan of Miller’s. Just being honest here. TDKR is one of the best things he did, and I did like his take on Daredevil. I loved the Sin City movie. But…
In his comics work, he had to answer to an editor who reined him back somewhat. For Sin City, he worked with someone else who could temper him somewhat.
No, I haven’t seen the movie, and as I’m severely unemployed, I doubt that I’ll get to unless I get a job at a theater in the next month. The trailers and the website gave me a pretty good idea of what’s been done, along with reviews from people like Roger Ebert, who I trust to always give me an honest opinion.
Put it this way. If this had been done on the cheap, by a director who has a reputation for turning out bad movies, would you be so forgiving? Yes, Frank has done some great things, but this, by all reports, is not one of them.
I would like to see his take on Buck Rogers, if he goes back to the original source material and is faithful to it. But if he does what he did here, I’ll have to do the same thing; wait until the library gets the DVD.
Also, take a look at the last line of my earlier post. When I’m caffeine-deficient, I’m not rational. So I do have a vague excuse for my ranting.
Miles
From Bill Myers: “I didn’t realize Miller was friends with Eisner.”
Not only were they friends, but Dark Horse published a book of them discussing various facets of comics (Eisner/Miller). Unfortunately Eisner didn’t live to see the book published, but it’s an incredible read, and their friendship allowed them to touch about various areas quite smoothly. I can’t comment on the film, not having seen it, but having read Eisner/Miller, I’m almost certain that Miller wanted to make a film that, rightly or wrongly, he thought Eisner would have approved of. I recommend the book regardless of one’s thoughts on Miller’s recent writing.
Good Parts:
The casting other than our three Earth heroes.
So-Bad-They-Could-Be-Good Parts:
The music.
Bad Parts:
Every other freaking thing about the film.
Frank Miller could do no wrong = He used to write good stories.
Human nature to tear down people we build up = He’s coasting along on his laurels.
Enough. Forget this POS and take comfort in The Spirit tv movie from 1987 starring Sam Jones. Though badly maligned by most fans, I think most people will appreciate now in comparison to the “box office spectacular” we received a few days ago.
“The Spirit” movie was a disjointed, schizophrenic, self-indulgent mess.
I had high hopes for this film, and to say I was disappointed is an understatement of Brobdingnagian proportions.
At times, I felt like I was watching a big budget Ed Wood film.
Oh, the humanity.
Miles Vorkosigan: “Put it this way. If this had been done on the cheap, by a director who has a reputation for turning out bad movies, would you be so forgiving?”
Forgiveness has nothing to do with it. I never said people should go easy on Miller because of his past accomplishments. If Miller made a bad film, people have a right to say so. That doesn’t make him a bad person, though. Nor should it define his entire career.
I’m sorry to hear you’re unemployed. At the moment, so am I. It’s unfortunate that you can’t afford to see the movie right now, but the fact remains you can’t judge a film you haven’t seen.
I haven’t actually judged the film, by the way. I’m reserving judgment until I’ve seen it.
Andy E. Nystrom, thanks for the recommendation. It sounds like a book worth reading.
I never said Frank Miller was a bad person. I just said he was a creepy person. Very different. And it’s not a matter of “proof” or “certainty” or making a conscious decision to judge somebody.
It’s something I just can’t avoid. You can’t avoid it when you just find someone creepy.
At one time, the guy could do no wrong in many fans’ eyes (Daredevil, The Dark Knight Returns, Ronin, Batman: Year One).
Back up there, Bill. I’ll give you the others, but Ronin? We didn’t have quite the pervasive internet community of modern time in those days, but I had a lot of access to retailers, and they bìŧçhëd ENDLESSLY about it. They said it wasn’t remotely what they expected based upon “Daredevil,” that sales were disappointing, that customers despised it. It was the first time Frank embarked upon an endeavor that was outside the coz comforts of established characters, and as I recall, it was NOT well received by many.
PAD
Point taken, PAD. I remember Ronin being hailed as a groundbreaking work in a couple of books I’d read on the craft behind writing/drawing comics. I unconsciously conflated that with commercial success, but they’re not the same thing.
Rene: “It’s something I just can’t avoid. You can’t avoid it when you just find someone creepy.”
You can’t avoid a gut feeling, no. You have a choice, however, about whether or not to voice that emotion or act on it.
rich said, “Forget this POS.”
Hey, what did Miller ever do to offend you so badly? He must have done something worse than simply craft a piece of fiction you didn’t like for you to be so angry.