What is it about this bastard being able to write the most inspiring...

What is it about this bastard being able to write the most inspiring, uplifting shit about horrible bastards doing disgusting things in shitty places?

Did you mean to post a picture of Ellis? Because that description fits Ellis waaaay better than Morrison.

Dude, four words: the Filth and Happy.

When has Ellis ever written something particularly inspiring and uplifting? If anything his forte is the exact opposite.

Two pieces that stand in pretty stark contrast to the rest of his work (All Star, JLA, Flex, etc.) as opposed to Ellis who has really ever only written one protagonist. The protagonist you described.

He's an occultist, it comes with the territory.

seaguy eternal when bald fuck

Transmetropolitan, Global Frequency, and Planetary off the top of my head. Stories about utter bastards changig society for the better, wanting to make the world a better place despite themselves. I'd argue the premise is inherently uplifting, though individual mileage on that may vary.

>Ellis
>inspiring and uplifting
Every character written by Ellis is the same cocky, smug British bastard. Ellis is the guy that made Captain America a torturer.

"Inspiring and uplifting"?

freakangels

>about horrible bastards doing disgusting things in shitty places

Did you only read half the sentence? Also:

is the point I'm trying to make here.

What is so uplifting about Captain America being a torturer?

Nothing? I haven't read those issues so I can't comment on it. But if we're focusing on one singular run then All Star Superman disproves OP's point quite handily. I'm talking about a general authorial tendency. Oeuvre, though it sounds a bit poncey. And Ellis does have a general tendency to end on a high note that while the individual he's focusing on may be a horrible bastard, the world is made a better place for it.

To expand, imagine a group of shitty, horrible bastards who want to better themselves and better the world using arcane means. Imagine a group of sexual deviants and narcissists larping as an ancient order of mages, who study the arts and the sciences in between orgies and lines of coke, all in an effort to illuminate their fellow man who spit on them for their lifestyles. Imagine that most of them are broken by the world and corrupted by power in the process. Imagine most of them know more about myth and lore and narrative and psychodrama and human psychology than most experts, because they themselves are experts.

This is who and what he is pulling from.

Even if we agree the premise is uplifting, it is the only part of it that is. Inspiration is never in the front and center of Ellis' writing like it is with Morrison, nor does it pack the same amount of punch.

his pure sci fi stuff like Ocean and Orbiter

Okay, maybe the disgusting protagonist isn’t endemic in his work, but with All-Star Superman as the only exception I can think of, Morrison’s worlds are fucking bleak in comparison to their subject and conclusion.

I agree that Morrison lands a bigger punch. His inspiring moments are typically grand, showy affairs (even when they're framed as small interpersonal moments). They're the tentpole moments.

Ellis is different. I'd say his "inspiration" moments come more organically, and most of it stems from making characters that seem more relatable (writing non-capes, or overtly toying with superohero tropes when he does to make them seem "down to earth").

Inspiring an audience with superman is hard, and Morrison does a damn good job of it, whereas Ellis take a different route, saying "if these shitheads can change the world, you can too"

>in comparison to their subject and conclusion.

Well yeah the man often deals with binary good v evil (Multiversity Gentry, Seven Soldiers, etc). The evil is evil and seems amplified as a result of stark contrast to the colorful bright heroes railing against it. I'm reminded of a line in the Loki 4 issue mini where he laments, "how best to make a hero? Set up a field of black against which his white will be yet more blinding."

Ellis tends to deal with harsher protagonists and arguably lower stakes, though I wouldn't ever argue the worlds are better than Morrison's. If nothing else, I'd say Ellis is significantly more interested in showing the personal side of a conflict (ie civillian casualties) than Morrison. Though we're also getting into debate about the subtle difference between bleak, dark, and gritty there, which I think is a factor in all this.

Fuck off

>Grant Morrison
>Edgy
Did I just bite bait?

No, OP is the edgy one.