Scans_Daily

IMHO, both authors manage to score a very debatable performance through this comparison, and that's because they've purposefully set the bar very, very low in these two stories.

Personally, I feel like I'm reading bad fanfiction on the net, of the "Juvenile humor meets strawman meets Marty Stu" sort, with a liberal dose of prejudice mixed in. There's no doubt Frank is Ennis' strawman in that cycle, and the same can be said for Tieri's depiction of Logan here, with the awful (and nonsensical) "U R Gay" innuendo stacked on top.

To me, both authors should have recognized things went too far, offering an apology to the audience (up to and including LGBT readers, of course) -and- to the original creators of the characters they were handling. Had I been, say, Len Wein or Claremont, I'd have felt pretty peeved.

The fact both have written better stuff shouldn't allow them to duck the issue. Because let's face it: Ennis recycled his Hitman vs. Lobo story, dialing the "add insult to injury" factor to the max, and Tieri in return went straight for the OMG MUSCLE MAGS U MUST BE HOMO rimshot.

I believe that such weak writing cannot be condoned with "Y'know, here I was CONSCIOUSLY trying to be edgy and stomping all over the place in true ultraviolent, over the top fashion, and besides those are Real Men characters" - an excuse you could hear from both.

Just my two cents, but Mark Millar isn't always alone in juggling that particular ball, as this instance seems to prove.