Long gone are the days of "Dark Knight Returns" and "Batman: Year One". Even his recent "All Star Batman and Robin" is basically Sin City with a cape and mask. Which is a shame because we know he has writing chops, he just chooses not to use them.

Will Eisner's hero was created in 1940, as a comic book supplement to the Sunday paper. He was not a rookie cop, but a criminologist (Miller's version is the cop). Miller wanted this movie, pushed and paraded for it, arguing that has a friend of Will, he could best adapt Eisner's hero. He was wrong (he didn't really try to be the least bit true to the character Will created), and probably killed any interest in the Spirit as a film/tv/media property for decades. Why he didn't just go make Sin City 2 instead the lord only knows...

for any lover, obviously not steff, of true art and noir this is a MUST SEE

FEAST FOR THE EYES

IT TICKLES UR SOUL

IF U GOTS ONE

Decked out in traditional black!

The Spirit as created by Eisner was always a cartoon, a flat 2-dimensional figure. He didn't have much of a back story and he didn't have much of a front story. Eisner himself recognized this and often delegated the Spirit to a supporting role in his own strips. The focus of the strips was the beautiful and innovated artwork and the stories of the little people that were the victims of the crimes in the Spirit's world.

To make a successful movie focusing on the Spirit would have involved a lot of writing and creating on the part of Miller and his involvement as a first time director probably made that impossible.

Stephanie review is spot on save one thing: Eisner's Spirit had no superpowers. He was as tough and lucky as most noir cartoon detectives, but he still felt pain, got hurt and several plots involved a wounded Spirit trying fight crime while healing.

The Spirit was like Batman without gadgets and costume, more risk of getting hurt and a better sense of humor. This character would have been more suitable for the style Miller is attempting.

The result still might not please fans of Eisner's visual and writing style (and why make a Spirit movie if you aren't going to use those things), but at least it would stand as an original creation.

Giving the Spirit magical amounts of invulnerability and agility makes him too flat and absurd even for a campy film noir -- little more than Bugs Bunny having sex and removing bullets from his head. And the plot emphasizes this quest for magic powers, which is also ill-suited for Miller's writing and visuals.

In addition, Miller adds in some absurdities straight out of the old Batman TV show. If he were trying to do a Scary Movie style parody of Sin City it might make sense. But Miller just seems to throw random ideas at the screen, like this is a test reel of his special effects tools.

...Mickey Rourke was on screen. Otherwise, it was hollow and kitschy like I imagine The Spirit to be. Mickey Rourke was the heart and soul of that movie and were it not for him it too would have been a failure.

...Miller knew Eisner, and Eisner was a truly positive influence on his comics work from the very beginning. It's sad he couldn't do this most cinematic of comic strips justice. But I really don;t see how you can make the Spirit a movie without losing a lot of what it is. First thing, they were usually little self-contained 8-pagers. (It came as a separate comic section by itself in the Sunday paper) But you have to try to pack many together to make a feature. You have to pack too much in too small a space and can't let it breathe the way Eisner did. The Spirit was not designed as something in long doses.

Thing is, if a contemporary director back then had directed a movie of the strip, it wouldn't be any of Miller's noir heroes. It would be Frank Capra, maybe Howard Hawks. The Spirit walked this delicate line between warm and eerie, dark and friendly. But overall, it was never really very dark, certainly not seedy. And always humorous even in the darkest moments, just by virtue of the timbre of Eisner's style. His characters, too, coming out of his experiences in Yiddish theatre, really acted; he really detailed their movement and expression. And that's what a noir take misses. It's really supposed to be more screwball than noir.(and "noir" is such a cliche now.) An ideal Spirit would be someone like George Clooney, or a young James Garner.

Alan Moore and Rick Veitch actually showed a better understanding of the Spirit with their pastische GREYSHIRT, which is the Spirit in all but name(with a bit of Plastic Man thrown in).

An interview with Frank. Does he sound drunk?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98741609

Correction: the strip started in 39.