Stormwatch
Dani Zweig
(at least to the extent that "It's not like most of the Image titles!"
counts as an enthusiastic review), so I went out and got the first two
issues. They're right, it *is* better than most of what Image is putting
out, but it's of the same class. This comic is competing for X-Force's
customers.
The art is attractive, but bad, if you'll pardon that juxtaposition.
While it's more polished than most of the Image art I've seen, it still
shares what I'm coming to think of as the house style: Almost every
frame consists of over-muscled (as in, how can this person move),
over-armed (as in, if he drops that gun on his foot, he'll lose several
toes), and/or over-endowed (actually, the women aren't so much big-
breasted as attenuated) characters in static poses. It's better done
than usual, though, and the coloring supports the artwork, rather than
competing with it.
(The Wolverine lookalike is lawsuit bait. What do they think they're up to?)
The first issue has a 9-page fight scene and a 5-page fight scene. The
second page only has a 9-page fight scene. That's the key. Yes, there's
characterization (even if much of it is metahuman Angst), and yes, there's
some good dialogue, and yes, there's a story being developed -- but all
that has to happen between or during fights and poses.
I would recommend this title as a step up for readers who enjoy the more
mindless and violent Marvel comics, which means that there are a lot
of people this comic should appeal to.
-----
Dani Zweig
da...@netcom.com
If you're going to write, don't pretend to write down. It's going to be the
best you can do, and it's the fact that it's the best you can do that kills
you! -- Dorothy Parker
David Hawkins
>A number of posters have been giving Stormwatch #2 enthusiastic reviews
I bought this one on all those reviews and Learned A Lesson.
Namely, there are those who are looking for something different in a
comic than what I want.
This looks like a book written by the artists. Sort of like the bit
in the Ambush Bug Nothing Special. All action, no plot. Whew!
later, david
--
David Hawkins dh...@netcom.com
'Tis by no means the least of life's rules: To let things alone.
-- Balthasar Gracian
Scott McMahan -- Genesis mailing list owner
Dani Zweig (da...@netcom.com) wrote:
: characters in static poses
Actually, Clark draws some serious dynamic poses, with a lot of action.
It's in the Marvel style (which is explained in the How To Draw Comics
The Marvel Way), but you can kind of understand that since
the Image 7 were hit Marvel artists first.
Clark puts a lot of cause and effect into the same panel, which
alone put his art way above a lot. Action is a lot more dramtic
when the sender and receiver are placed in physical proximity
to one another, and you can see the action take place.
: the coloring supports the artwork, rather than competing with it.
Did you miss the outer space scenes or something? That's breathtaking.
There aren't any other comics that I'm aware of that encorporate
actual photos of the Earth in their outer space shots.
: (The Wolverine lookalike is lawsuit bait. What do they think they're up to?)
There's a lot of 'em. One of the Bloodstrike dudes is *more* of a
Wolvie clone than this one. :)
: Yes, there's characterization (even if much of it is metahuman Angst)
I think it goes beyond just that, the theme behind Battalion is
that he has a crucial choice to make: is he willing to pay the
price to become a superhero? Does he have a choice, can he walk away,
or is it his destiny to be a hero and out of his control? The choice
of being all you can be and taking the risks involved with any
high achieving aspiration or not being all you can be and being
safe and happy is something that happens to everyone. He just
gets to do it in outerspace :)
And the young-and-coming guy ready to take his place, Canon, is
a very realistic thing. Canon was ready to leap into the situation he
was not prepared for just to prove how good he was. Battalion
knows what's ready to take his place! And in any situation, there's
someone waiting for you to screw up just to take your place.
There are a few things being totally overlooked here, perhaps
intentionally:
Stormwatch has people living and working in outer space, just
like it was a city on earth. That's a pretty optimistic look at
something that is a *long* way off from happening.
The international nature of the team is remarkable. This is the
first really international superhero team. There've been some
decidely second rate ones like The Global Guardians, but never
any that are this important. The commitment of Lee et al to
making the team international by integrating bits
of the language and culture of the team members, as opposed
to token phrases like Colossus and Nightcrawler used, is
remarkable. The international situations are being taken in
a realistic context, unlike the Justice League Task Force's
token use of "Canadian terrorists" and so forth. By presenting
this global team, it makes an impression on all the little zombie
fanboys, and just might help to eliminate a little prejudice.
The *teamwork* aspect is very positive -- how people from
widely different backgrounds are willing to put aside
their differences and work together. Almost the antithesis of
the mindset of Americans :)
: I would recommend this title as a step up for readers who enjoy the more
: mindless and violent Marvel comics, which means that there are a lot
: of people this comic should appeal to.
This looks like more of a soapbox to look down at fanboys than any
kind of a look at Stormwatch. This ties into my definition of
the term "fanboy" nicely!
Scott
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
>
>Actually, Clark draws some serious dynamic poses, with a lot of action.
>It's in the Marvel style (which is explained in the How To Draw Comics
>The Marvel Way), but you can kind of understand that since
>the Image 7 were hit Marvel artists first.
There is no doubt in my mind that most of these people would never have
become "hot" artists without Marvel using TONS of hype on them. The only
one who probably would have gotten notoriety as an artist without the
hype would have been McFarlane because of his rather unusual style. Jim
Lee and Whilce Portacio have very pretty art, but most of it is quite
average compared to masters like BWS and Sienkiewicz.
>Did you miss the outer space scenes or something? That's breathtaking.
>There aren't any other comics that I'm aware of that encorporate
>actual photos of the Earth in their outer space shots.
In one issue of Harbinger, the artist used an actual photograph of
New York. Various other Valiants have used real photographs in their comics.
While I can't pinpoint the title or issue, I know that I have seen a
photo of the Earth in a Valiant comic.
---
Eric Jaron Stieglitz ej...@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
School: Coming next fall! "You ate the only thing I ever loved!"
Home: (401) 421-7479 -Seymour, LSoH
Dani Zweig
>>the coloring supports the artwork, rather than competing with it.
>Did you miss the outer space scenes or something? That's breathtaking.
Scott, you've become so accustomed to being the lone defender of Image
that you don't notice when a compliment passes by. Give it a break.
>>I would recommend this title as a step up for readers who enjoy the more
>>mindless and violent Marvel comics, which means that there are a lot
>>of people this comic should appeal to.
>
>This looks like more of a soapbox to look down at fanboys than any
>kind of a look at Stormwatch. This ties into my definition of
>the term "fanboy" nicely!
Take what I said at face value: Stormwatch is better than many of
Marvel's most popular titles. It isn't *trying* to be better than
Alan Moore's work or Neil Gaiman's. It isn't even trying to be
better than Hulk or Superman; it's competing for a different audience.
-----
Dani Zweig
da...@netcom.com
God helpe the man so wrapt in Errours endless traine -- Edmund Spenser
Slash Maraud
>Scott, you've become so accustomed to being the lone defender of Image
>that you don't notice when a compliment passes by. Give it a break.
<Please.>
>>This looks like more of a soapbox to look down at fanboys than any
>>kind of a look at Stormwatch. This ties into my definition of
>>the term "fanboy" nicely!
<Nope. His opinion, harsh words, but nothing particularly combative,
from my POV. Inhale, Scott. We don't hate you... Well, Steve does,
but most of us don't.>
Slash "God help me when every Steve on the net comes crashing down on
my mailbox" Maraud
--
MARAUD OUT>
Mimic Kid of the LNH, Ayla Ranzz of LegionMUSH, Jay Garrick of JusticeMUSH.
Multiple personalities, working together for a better tomorrow...
Always attribute your quotes, but ONLY if someone asks...
Peter Kreitchet
: In article Scott McMahan writes:
: >
: > ...but you can kind of understand that since the Image 7 were hit Marvel
: > artists first.
: ...these people would never have become "hot" artists without Marvel using
: TONS of hype on them.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Whoah! What 'hype' are we talking about?
I don't seem to recall Amazing Spide-man issues #298-226 (McFarlane) ever
being 'hyped'.
I don't recall a 'hyped' version of Uncanny X-Men #248 (Jim Lee).
(You know, the one that came triple-polybagged with 6 trading cards?) B)
X-Factor #63 and Punisher #10 (Whilce Portacio) had no holographic covers. B)
And I could almost swear that my copy of The New Mutants #87 (Rob Liefield)
is *not* embossed with any known metal! B)
Who am I forgetting? Oh yeah! Marc Silvestri! Who could forget all those
issues of The Uncanny X-Men that were flip issues? B) Boy, don't I feel dumb!
So I'm curious, Eric, what 'hype' are you referring to?
: The only one who probably would have gotten notoriety as an artist without
: the hype would have been McFarlane because of his rather unusual style.
:
True, while his style was borderline *ugly* to look at on his first few issues
at Marvel, look at how much those issues go for nowadays! So, yes, Eric, I
agree with you on that point...Mr. McFarlane could've made it on his own...but
he is definetely NOT the 'only one' who could've made it on his own....
Oh, and let's not forget that it was none other than Mr. Eric Larsen that
followed-up as artist on whichever Spidey title Mr. McFarlane stopped
doing...again I ask, where's the 'hype'?
Could it be that comic fans just LIKED these issues? Or perhaps it was comic
store owners, and magazines (such as Wizard) who were actually doing the
'hyping'... we all remember what happened to the New Mutants Summer Special
that previewed Rob Liefield's first work for Marvel (nevermind the fact that
he had already done some stuff for DC....) Maybe it's a a little bit of both
of these factors that makes these issues popular....
Offhand, the only two 'hyped' issues that any of the Image 7 had anything to do
with were _Spiderman_ #1, and _X-Men_ #1...both setting sales records way into
the millions.... Hyped? HELL YES! Worth it to Marvel in sales revenue? YOU
BETTER BELIEVE IT!
Did you get your copy? (Not that it will ever be worth anything, but....)
Can you think of any others worth mentioning, Eric?
: Jim Lee and Whilce Portacio have very pretty art, but most of it is quite
: average compared to masters like BWS and Sienkiewicz.
:
Oh GAAAAWD! You had to go and say the 'S' word, didn't you? Ugh. Hey, to
each his own, I guess, but IMHO, Mr. Sienkiewicz is *not* a comic book artist.
BWS, however, is one of the best.
And as for your comment on Mr. Lee and Mr. Portacio, well, I'll let the
Portacio one slide, but HOLD THE PHONE with the Lee remark! You *are* joking,
right? Jim Lee's artwork, 'pretty'? Oh man, I can think of a LOT of
adjectives to describe Mr. Lee's artwork...all of them complimentary, and none
of them 'pretty'! Hell, I'll go on record, and say that Mr. Lee's artwork is
some of the best in the industry!
--
- Spidey pet...@acs.bu.edu
"...But does Peter know Physics?"
- Fox Trot
Ken Arromdee
>: The only one who probably would have gotten notoriety as an artist without
>: the hype would have been McFarlane because of his rather unusual style.
>True, while his style was borderline *ugly* to look at on his first few issues
>at Marvel, look at how much those issues go for nowadays! So, yes, Eric, I
>agree with you on that point...Mr. McFarlane could've made it on his own...but
>he is definetely NOT the 'only one' who could've made it on his own....
Actually, his first work for Marvel was the Scorpio Rose backup in Coyote,
and those issues hardly go for anything at all. Nor do the Spitfire or GI Joe
issues he did....
>Offhand, the only two 'hyped' issues that any of the Image 7 had anything to do
>with were _Spiderman_ #1, and _X-Men_ #1...both setting sales records way into
>the millions.... Hyped? HELL YES! Worth it to Marvel in sales revenue? YOU
>BETTER BELIEVE IT!
X-Force #1 was fairly hyped too.
--
"On the first day after Christmas my truelove served to me... Leftover Turkey!
On the second day after Christmas my truelove served to me... Turkey Casserole
that she made from Leftover Turkey.
[days 3-4 deleted] ... Flaming Turkey Wings! ...
-- Pizza Hut commercial (and M*tlu/A*gic bait)
Ken Arromdee (arro...@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
Scott McMahan -- Genesis mailing list owner
: In article Scott McMahan writes:
: >
: > ...but you can kind of understand that since the Image 7 were hit Marvel
: > artists first.
: ...these people would never have become "hot" artists without Marvel using
: TONS of hype on them.
Tons of hype, eh? Marvel treats artists like garbage. They don't even
put creator's names on the covers of the books (which DC does).
The hot artist became so on their own merits, by astounding people with
good drawing, and getting the backing of the fans. Then the editors did
everything himanly possible to make them want to leave. That's
close to the opposite of hype. The magazines and stuff *did* pay attention
to the artists, doing articles on them and raising people's awarenesses
of them.
The hype came *after* Marvel, when the cream rose to the top and the cream
went off and formed Image, because to survive as an independant
company you have to let people know you're out there. Without all
the fans buying Image books, they'd have been sunk.
I'd say Marc Silvestri is one of the *least* hyped artists out there.
He doesn't get a lot of hype in rags like Wizard, he doesn't have an
overbearing ego, and yet his comics still sell through the roof.
Scott
Peter Kreitchet
: In article Spidey wrote:
: > True, while his style was borderline *ugly* to look at on his first few
: > issues at Marvel, look at how much those issues go for nowadays!
: Actually, his first work for Marvel was the Scorpio Rose backup in Coyote,
: and those issues hardly go for anything at all.
: Nor do the Spitfire or GI Joe issues he did....
:
Ken brings up a great point here. True, Mr, McFarlane did do these issues.
They had actually slipped my mind (can you believe that? :) Now these issues
aren't worth didley, right? And why would that be, hmmm? I would guess that
it has something to do with the fact that Venom doesn't appear for the first
time in any of them, and also that some of this early work that Mr. McFarlane
did for Marvel was (IMHO) utter *crap*. But, be that as it may, the issue
here, I think, is still centered on the 'hype' question.
: > Offhand, the only two 'hyped' issues that any of the Image 7 had anything
: > to do with were _Spiderman_ #1, and _X-Men_ #1...both setting sales
: > records way into the millions.... Hyped? HELL YES! Worth it to Marvel
: > in sales revenue? YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!
: X-Force #1 was fairly hyped too.
:
Like I said, 'offhand', those were the only two issues I could think of.
Again, Ken, thank you. That makes three 'hyped' titles...Eric, would you
care to go for four? ;)
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
>: In article Scott McMahan writes:
>: >
>: > ...but you can kind of understand that since the Image 7 were hit Marvel
>: > artists first.
>
>: ...these people would never have become "hot" artists without Marvel using
>: TONS of hype on them.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Whoah! What 'hype' are we talking about?
>I don't seem to recall Amazing Spide-man issues #298-226 (McFarlane) ever
>being 'hyped'.
As I said, McFarlane had enough talent to probably become well-known
without the hype.
>I don't recall a 'hyped' version of Uncanny X-Men #248 (Jim Lee).
>(You know, the one that came triple-polybagged with 6 trading cards?) B)
>X-Factor #63 and Punisher #10 (Whilce Portacio) had no holographic covers. B)
>And I could almost swear that my copy of The New Mutants #87 (Rob Liefield)
>is *not* embossed with any known metal! B)
>Who am I forgetting? Oh yeah! Marc Silvestri! Who could forget all those
>issues of The Uncanny X-Men that were flip issues? B) Boy, don't I feel
>dumb!
>So I'm curious, Eric, what 'hype' are you referring to?
I'm pretty sure that Jim Lee was a fill-in artist on #248. Recall that this
issue didn't actually skyrocket in price until long after he took over
Uncanny X-Men. Also, back then, comic companies could easily hype their
books without resorting to bagged issues, silver foil issues, and other
gimmicks. The only gimmick that I can think of from that period is the
crossover. Because most comic sales were still story-dependant until 1988 or
1989, the companies would hype books by saying "Look at this hot crossover!"
or proclaiming that a well-known creative person would be working on the
book.
Therefore, there was really no need to use a gimmick, because they hadn't
yet become needed. Only when Marvel saw that they could only hype so many
artists, crossovers, and characters (did anyone notice the lack of the word
"writer"?) did they actually begin thinking of other marketting gimmicks.
New Mutants #87 was hyped in the best way that Marvel could do it at the time.
Rob Liefeld received pages of interviews in Marvel Age, and readers were warned
of a new direction for the group and a new leader. According to the interview,
Rob had created Cable. I was on the verge of dropping New Mutants, and I
thought that I would give this "hot new artist" a try.
Only later did Marvel realize that the comic industry could only support
so many "hot new artists," so they decided to try something different. With
the success of Spiderman #1, came Silver Foil on Silver Surfer and glow-in-
the-dark covers on Ghost Rider. Being a naive 14-year old, I thought that
these gimmicks were rather cool, and bought them. I never thought that the
cover might actually have been an atempt to conceal the fact that there
was very little of substance inside. At this point, Marvel realized that
people would buy these "collector's items" for no other reason than the
fact that they would go up in value. This was the beginning of the speculator
craze.
>
>Oh, and let's not forget that it was none other than Mr. Eric Larsen that
>followed-up as artist on whichever Spidey title Mr. McFarlane stopped
>doing...again I ask, where's the 'hype'?
After McFarlane left Spiderman, Larsen took over for 6 issues. These issues
contained some of the worst stories I have ever seen in a comic, yet fans
bought it because of the hype. Without the hype, the issues would probably
have barely sold. (Note that these 6 issues contained "guest appearances" by
almost everyone in the Marvel universe.
>Could it be that comic fans just LIKED these issues? Or perhaps it was comic
>store owners, and magazines (such as Wizard) who were actually doing the
>'hyping'... we all remember what happened to the New Mutants Summer Special
>that previewed Rob Liefield's first work for Marvel (nevermind the fact that
>he had already done some stuff for DC....) Maybe it's a a little bit of both
>of these factors that makes these issues
I stand by my belief that without hype, most of these artists would have
never become household names. By creating thee demigogues, Marvel attempted
to hype their product so that speculators would purchase hundreds of copies
of essentially worthless books. Whilce Portacio had some interviews before
he took over X-Factor. Until their runs on X-books, I had never heard of
these "hot" artists. Suddenly, I saw massive hype that these hot artists, most
of whom I had never heard of, would be working on comics which I had once
loved, but which had dropped dramatically in quality. At that age, how could I
have known that massive hype != good quality? I bought 6 copies of Ghost
Rider #15 and 8 copies of X-Force #1. Later, I realized that I'd been swindled.
>Offhand, the only two 'hyped' issues that any of the Image 7 had anything to
>do with were _Spiderman_ #1, and _X-Men_ #1...both setting sales records way
>into the millions.... Hyped? HELL YES! Worth it to Marvel in sales revenue?
>YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!
>
>Did you get your copy? (Not that it will ever be worth anything, but....)
See above. Unfortunately, I got my copy. More than one.
>Can you think of any others worth mentioning, Eric?
X-Force #1, X-Men #281, New Mutants #87, X-Factor #63 (or whatever Whilce's
first issue was).
>: Jim Lee and Whilce Portacio have very pretty art, but most of it is quite
>: average compared to masters like BWS and Sienkiewicz.
>:
>Oh GAAAAWD! You had to go and say the 'S' word, didn't you? Ugh. Hey, to
>each his own, I guess, but IMHO, Mr. Sienkiewicz is *not* a comic book artist.
In Big Numbers (Issue #3, where are you....) Sinkiewicz shows the full
measure of his talent. Many of his drawings are quite abstract, but many also
shine of realism. The true test of an artist (to quote Byrne and others)
is his ability to draw real people and real scenes. Bill can do it. Rob can't.
>BWS, however, is one of the best.
Agreed.
>And as for your comment on Mr. Lee and Mr. Portacio, well, I'll let the
>Portacio one slide, but HOLD THE PHONE with the Lee remark! You *are* joking,
>right? Jim Lee's artwork, 'pretty'? Oh man, I can think of a LOT of
>adjectives to describe Mr. Lee's artwork...all of them complimentary, and none
>of them 'pretty'! Hell, I'll go on record, and say that Mr. Lee's artwork is
>some of the best in the industry!
In Hellblazer #37, the artists (Steve Pugh, I think), shows Mercury wandering
through a wilderness while showing a wide range of emotions. Notice that she
is drawn as a realistic female, without any exaggerated body parts. I truly
doubt that Rob Liefeld could have ever drawn such a scene. While Lee could
probably have handled most of it, he would have probably given her highly
accented female proportions. Yes, Lee can draw very nicely but I don't think
that he is one of the most talented people in the field. All this IMHO and
looking forward to a reply.
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
> Eric Jaron Stieglitz wrote:
>
> : TONS of hype on them.
>
>Tons of hype, eh? Marvel treats artists like garbage. They don't even
>put creator's names on the covers of the books (which DC does).
How does Marvel treat its artists like garbage? While I have heard plenty
of horror stories about how writers at Marvel are treated like second class
citizens, I have yet to hear a single one about artists. If anything, editors
like Bob Harras give their artists free reign on the books, while writers
like PAD, Claremont, and Simonson are told to abandon all their
characterization. Marvel created Spiderman, X-Men, and X-Force so that
McFarlane, Lee, and Liefeld would have their own books. Guess which writers
were displaced on the latter two books so that the "hot" artists could wreak
havok with what used to be some of the best books on the market?
On the other hand, I would prefer it if Marvel put the creator's name on the
books. DC has the right idea with doing this.
>The hot artist became so on their own merits, by astounding people with
>good drawing, and getting the backing of the fans. Then the editors did
>everything himanly possible to make them want to leave.
Rob Liefeld would never have become a "hot artist" without the hype.
I truly doubt that anyone would have praised him for drawing well if he
had not worked on New Mutants. Marvel created a huge speculator market with
the artists and began to depend more on their hype than substance. I truly
doubt that even Bob Harras would be so stupid as to WANT them to leave
while they were still at the peak of their popularity.
>That's
>close to the opposite of hype. The magazines and stuff *did* pay attention
>to the artists, doing articles on them and raising people's awarenesses
>of them.
Magazines like Wizard could not possibly have existed without the hype.
Instead of people becoming popular by their own merits, these magazines
tell readers which artists are hot. Therefore, the whole "hot artist" market
is completely generated. I sincerely believe that if there had not been so much
hype surrounding these people, that the readers would have treated them
no differently than other people who worked on the titles, and that they
would have faded into obscurity. I'm sure that the story quality would not have
dipped so much.
>The hype came *after* Marvel, when the cream rose to the top and the cream
>went off and formed Image, because to survive as an independant
>company you have to let people know you're out there. Without all
>the fans buying Image books, they'd have been sunk.
True, and once all the speculators leave the market most of them will
be sunk.
>I'd say Marc Silvestri is one of the *least* hyped artists out there.
>He doesn't get a lot of hype in rags like Wizard, he doesn't have an
>overbearing ego, and yet his comics still sell through the roof.
This is somewhat true. I didn't enjoy his X-Men work, his work on Wolverine
was quite nice. He actually does have a certain amount of talent, and I
wish him luck once Image goes kerplunk.
>Scott
-Eric, yep, I'm days behind...
Tom Galloway
> Rob Liefeld would never have become a "hot artist" without the hype.
> I truly doubt that anyone would have praised him for drawing well if he
> had not worked on New Mutants. Marvel created a huge speculator market with
Um, hate to say this, but there were a number of people, including myself,
who were actually looking forward to Liefeld taking over the art on New
Mutants. This was for two reasons; first, it appeared from the outside
that he'd done a very good job on the Hawk & Dove mini-series for DC.
Later revisions to this are that Rob's art seems to be declining with each
appearance (hmm, maybe this is where McFarlane got the idea for Spawn's
limited power?), that he apparently turned in the art for the last issue
done for a horizontal layout rather than vertical based on a whim and
the editor had to do some serious cutting and pasting, and finally that
known good inker Karl Kesel inked that H&D mini-series. Second reason is
that many people really disliked Bret Blevins art on NM; nicknames for
him on the net and at MIT at the time were Bret "Anorexic Brigade" Blevins
and Bret "Kissy Face" Blevins based on how he was drawing them. Also,
it sounded like Liefeld had some interesting ideas for the team, but as
we all know, Liefeld has serious problems executing said ideas.
"No one can stop me, Zach!! I'm gonna torch this trash right now!!"
"But, Max! I *love* this one! It's so *cute*!"
"**CUTE**??? MY GOD, IT'S WORSE THAN I THOUGHT!!" --Max and Jenny
tyg t...@hq.ileaf.com
Scott McMahan -- Genesis mailing list owner
: never become household names. By creating thee demigogues, Marvel attempted
: to hype their product so that speculators would purchase hundreds of copies
: of essentially worthless books.
These artists are a lot of things, but they're not demigogues.
: At that age, how could I
: have known that massive hype != good quality?
By someone telling you? Well, at least you learned your lesson.
(I hope you did...:))
: In Hellblazer #37, the artists (Steve Pugh, I think), shows
: Mercury wandering
: through a wilderness while showing a wide range of emotions. Notice that she
: is drawn as a realistic female, without any exaggerated body parts. I truly
: doubt that Rob Liefeld could have ever drawn such a scene. While Lee could
: probably have handled most of it, he would have probably given her highly
: accented female proportions. Yes, Lee can draw very nicely but I don't think
: that he is one of the most talented people in the field. All this IMHO and
: looking forward to a reply.
What people fail to understand is that Liefeld and Lee have no
interest in drawing realistically! They could if they wanted
to. They don't. They have a style of art that they use in their
books, based in some part on the Marvel Style, but it's gone
beyond that.
If you like that style of drawing, you probably like them. If you
don't, you don't like them. But it isn't good to say that you don't
like them because they don't draw realistically because of a
lack of ability.
They have a grasp of the basics, and from they they have developed their
own styles of art, which has made them popular.
Just for a perspective on it, read Deathblow #1, and look carefully
at the use of negative space. Then look at the picture of Voodoo
on the trading cards ad. See the *incredible* difference in
styles? Jim Lee is trying out something different. Both the
Frank "I Love Negative Space" Miller Sin City rip off style
and the overdone Marvel Style are two ways Jim Lee draws. He's
probably done still life pictures, but they wouldn't sell for
millions to fanboys and specualtors and make him rich.
There are many realistic artists. John Byrne is an example.
George Perez. If that's what you like, there's a lot of people
who draw in that way making plenty of comics.
Contrastingly, the style of Bill Sinkiewicz is *very* stylized
and isn't terribly realistic. He's just taken it in a different
vector away from realism. Keith Giffen, too. Larry Stroman.
Generally, artists are encouraged to master the basics, and then
draw very realistically, and then finally to develop beyond that
into their own styles, in such things as university art departments.
How far they take it is up to them.
Scott
Dani Zweig
>Um, hate to say this, but there were a number of people, including myself,
>who were actually looking forward to Liefeld taking over the art on New
>Mutants.
The anticipation, in my case, was short-lived. At first I liked the idea
of *anyone* taking it over from LS, but shortly after it was announced,
Comic Shop News ran an interview with Liefeld, in which he described the
changes that he was planning. It was with a sinking feeling that I realized
that 90% of the changes he was describing were *costume* changes.
David Goldfarb
)What people fail to understand is that Liefeld and Lee have no
)interest in drawing realistically! They could if they wanted to.
This may be true of Lee, although I have my doubts. I flatly
refuse to believe it of Liefeld until I actually see something drawn
by him in a photorealist style. (Little things like backgrounds and
composition would be nice too.)
David Goldfarb |
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | "It's not called 'The Net of a Million Lies'
gold...@UCBOCF.BITNET | for nothing."
gold...@soda.berkeley.edu | -- Vernor Vinge, _A Fire Upon the Deep_
Ken Small
>
>interest in drawing realistically! They could if they wanted
>to. They don't. They have a style of art that they use in their
>books, based in some part on the Marvel Style, but it's gone
>beyond that.
I disagree. Lee seems to have the basics down, but Liefeld doesn't.
Good drawing is much more than "drawing realistically," it involves
compositional skills, storytelling skills, and a sense of when to bring
those skills to bear. Liefeld seems to have used his popularity to
free himself from any of the restraints that made him put effort
into his work, and it shows.
>If you like that style of drawing, you probably like them. If you
>don't, you don't like them. But it isn't good to say that you don't
>like them because they don't draw realistically because of a
>lack of ability.
It's not just a matter of style, it's a matter of skill. ...and almost
no comics are drawn realistically, except relative to one another.
[stuff deleted]
>There are many realistic artists. John Byrne is an example.
>George Perez. If that's what you like, there's a lot of people
>who draw in that way making plenty of comics.
Neither of these guys are particularly realistic. They're both closer
to realism in the anatomy department, but they're both heavily stylized.
>Generally, artists are encouraged to master the basics, and then
>draw very realistically, and then finally to develop beyond that
>into their own styles, in such things as university art departments.
>How far they take it is up to them.
This is true. However, it shouldn't mean "anything goes." Every artist
draws pictures (in comics anyway) in order to represent some thing or
person most of the time. Any stylization ought to contribute to that
representation, or to the artist's other goals (if any) in drawing the
comic. Liefeld's shoddy work doesn't do *either*, and I think his
popularity comes from his choice of subject matter rather than how he draws
it.
--
Ken Small ke...@umich.edu
I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused.
Scott McMahan -- Genesis mailing list owner
I think *Liefled* has the basics down, but is just a lazy son of
a ----- who doesn't do ---- when he draws.
: Liefeld's shoddy work doesn't do *either*, and I think his
: popularity comes from his choice of subject matter rather than how he draws
: it.
Liefeld has really, really, REALLY gotten S L O P P Y recently --
Strikefile #1 was terrible. He's slacking off in such a major way.
He's really good at plotting, he's gotten new talents like Fraga,
Mychaels, Stephenson to carry out his ideas.
He needs to:
1. quit drawing and become a manager, an idea man, the spiritual leader
of extreme studios, the guy tutoring all the new talents, the convention
man, the movie maker, the whole ----ing thing.
2. quit being the idea man, et al and go back to drawing, and really
devote time to it.
Liefeld's popularity is also a lot of his *past* image -- what he used
to do, and now he just ain't doing it anymore, and it really shows.
He can coast on that up to a point, but it'll get him eventually.
He has talent, but it just isn't being used or even developed.
X-Force was a time when he got his style together, and YB could be
the really good thing he does, but instead of coming into his
own, he's overextending himself, and then the art suffers big time.
If he got into it, and really learned about comics, and even
studied under Kirby, he could be a force to be reckoned with.
(Hey, whatever happened to whatever he was inking of Kirby's?)
He does seem to be a people person, a charismatic Stan Lee type leader,
so he being Editor in Chief of Image -- or Extreme -- would be
cool, so long as he doesn't try to also draw 5 monthly books.
At least he's no longer holding up Brigade.
Scott
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
>: never become household names. By creating thee demigogues, Marvel attempted
>: to hype their product so that speculators would purchase hundreds of copies
>: of essentially worthless books.
>
>These artists are a lot of things, but they're not demigogues.
Tell that to the crowd of fans that stormed the Image booth at various
conventions when Image started tossing free books into the air. Because of
massive hype from both Marvel and magazines, the "Image-7" became folk heroes.
They had DARED to quit their jobs at Marvel (except for Rob who I heard was
fired), and attempted to make their own mark on the comic industry. This, by
itself, is not a bad thing, but they handled their instant fame quite poorly.
>: At that age, how could I
>: have known that massive hype != good quality?
>
>By someone telling you? Well, at least you learned your lesson.
>(I hope you did...:))
Thankfully, I have (I think :-).
>: In Hellblazer #37, the artists (Steve Pugh, I think), shows
>: Mercury wandering
>: through a wilderness while showing a wide range of emotions. Notice that she
>: is drawn as a realistic female, without any exaggerated body parts. I truly
>: doubt that Rob Liefeld could have ever drawn such a scene. While Lee could
>: probably have handled most of it, he would have probably given her highly
>: accented female proportions. Yes, Lee can draw very nicely but I don't think
>: that he is one of the most talented people in the field. All this IMHO and
>: looking forward to a reply.
>
>What people fail to understand is that Liefeld and Lee have no
>interest in drawing realistically! They could if they wanted
>to. They don't. They have a style of art that they use in their
>books, based in some part on the Marvel Style, but it's gone
>beyond that.
"They could if they wanted to. They don't." First, read Byrne's
column in an early issue of JBNM where he flames McFarlane (whom he calls
"The Toddler"). While Byrne can be somewhat pompous in these essays, he
makes some very good points about drawing and comic art. I believe that
Jim Lee can draw realistically, if he tries to. Unfortunately (IMHO), he
chooses to exagerate certain portions of the human anatomy. I believe that
he actually posseses a certain amount of skill in drawing comics. On the other
hand, Rob Liefeld has consistently shown a lack of knowledge of human
anatomy in his drawings. Not everyone has big bulging muscles. His
preview art of Bloodshot and Younglood (the ad that has appeared in many books)
makes me realize how little skill he has - his portrayal of Bloodshot
completely runied the character. Before someone can draw abstract art,
they need to learn how to draw reality. Jim Lee can do it. Rob can't.
>If you like that style of drawing, you probably like them. If you
>don't, you don't like them. But it isn't good to say that you don't
>like them because they don't draw realistically because of a
>lack of ability.
Once again, Rob draw horrible human figures either because he never learned
to draw correctly or doesn't bother putting any real effort into his work.
The numerous inconsistencies in Strikefile #1 leads me to believe that
he both doesn't have any talent, and doesn't bother making what talent
he has look good. WHile I have only glanced at Jim Lee's current work, I
did enjoy his run on X-Men. I just got somewhat tired of his heavily-musceled
men and designer-figure women.
>They have a grasp of the basics, and from they they have developed their
>own styles of art, which has made them popular.
Again, read Byrne's column. Rob Liefeld does not have a good sense of the
basics, and probably never did. Show me a scene where he draws normal-
proportioned people in a normal every-day scene.
>There are many realistic artists. John Byrne is an example.
>George Perez. If that's what you like, there's a lot of people
>who draw in that way making plenty of comics.
These two are able to draw normal scenes. Not many people have approached
their level of ability.
>Contrastingly, the style of Bill Sinkiewicz is *very* stylized
>and isn't terribly realistic. He's just taken it in a different
>vector away from realism. Keith Giffen, too. Larry Stroman.
Sinkiewicz also knows when to use realism. If you look at Big Numbers
and his New Mutants run, you will see plenty of instances where he does
not abstract his art.
>Generally, artists are encouraged to master the basics, and then
>draw very realistically, and then finally to develop beyond that
>into their own styles, in such things as university art departments.
>How far they take it is up to them.
How many of the Image people (and specifically Extreme) actualy
bothered to go to art school?
Eric Jaron Stieglitz
>
>Liefeld's popularity is also a lot of his *past* image -- what he used
>to do, and now he just ain't doing it anymore, and it really shows.
>He can coast on that up to a point, but it'll get him eventually.
>
>He has talent, but it just isn't being used or even developed.
>X-Force was a time when he got his style together, and YB could be
>the really good thing he does, but instead of coming into his
>own, he's overextending himself, and then the art suffers big time.
Keep in mind that at least one of his X-Force issues was actually a ghost
job. X-Force #5 was done by Marat Mychaels and not by Liefeld. Also, I have
heard that Liefeld was fired from the book. Can anyone confirm this?