JLA Gallery: Where is Jimenez's art?
Leah Adezio
William C Wendel wrote:
>
> I thought the JLA Gallery was supposed to have a Phil Jiminez two--page
> spread of JLA villains. Well, I looked at my store and the issue didn't
> have it anywhere.
I specifically did *not* buy the Gallery due to the lack of Phil's art.
It would have been the most impressive thing in there (which, given the
quality of the majority of the pieces isn't saying much, but it would
have been light years above the others). I'm very disappointed in its
omission.
The Gallery was mostly unimpressive, but I did like
> the page with Green Arrow giving Black Canary a back rub. But I didn't
> think it was worth $2.95 (when it was originally solicited as $2.50, and
> with the Jimenez drawing).
I was underwhelmed. Most of the pinups were, IMHO, rather ugly -- like
"Vertigo does the JLA". What *were* the editors thinking? I mean, is
there something wrong with having attractive art anymore? Does
everything have to be so dark, distorted and grotesque? The Hamilton
piece was nice, as was the piece Ron Boyd inked, but most were instantly
forgettable. I'm glad I didn't spend the money on it.
Leah
usually not so critical, but ewwwwwww.....
>
> Oh, well
>
> BC
William C Wendel
I thought the JLA Gallery was supposed to have a Phil Jiminez two--page
spread of JLA villains. Well, I looked at my store and the issue didn't
the page with Green Arrow giving Black Canary a back rub. But I didn't
think it was worth $2.95 (when it was originally solicited as $2.50, and
with the Jimenez drawing).
Oh, well
BC
David Markowitz
William C Wendel (wwe...@osf1.gmu.edu) wrote:
[comments regarding the missing Jiminez pin-up]
It's in the same place as the Neal Adams pin-up that was supposed to be in
the Green Lantern Annual two years ago :)
Has e-mail from Bob Wayne promising that the Neal Adams pin-up would
appear elsewhere in his saved mail file,
Dave
David J. Snyder
In article <5q1d10$k...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
David Markowitz <dmar...@dept.english.upenn.edu> wrote:
>William C Wendel (wwe...@osf1.gmu.edu) wrote:
>[comments regarding the missing Jiminez pin-up]
>
>It's in the same place as the Neal Adams pin-up that was supposed to be in
>the Green Lantern Annual two years ago :)
>
to put both Phil's heroes and his villians pin-up in there.
-Dave
--
"Do the flames truly sap his great Martian powers, or is it the
memories they trigger that weaken him? Does it matter? The results
are the same."
-Adventures in the DC Universe #5
William C Wendel
So, Phil's villains piece will be in Secret Files. Well, that's good to
me, since we get both his drawings in SF, which I will be buying, and I
don't have to buy the scummy looking Gallery. Sounds good to me.
BC
Jon Morgan
A better question might be:
"Where are any pictures done before 1997"?
The JLA has been around for much longer than one year....
Randy Lander
Leah Adezio <slad...@nac.net> wrote:
>William C Wendel wrote:
>>
>> I thought the JLA Gallery was supposed to have a Phil Jiminez two--page
>> spread of JLA villains. Well, I looked at my store and the issue didn't
>> have it anywhere.
>I specifically did *not* buy the Gallery due to the lack of Phil's art.
>It would have been the most impressive thing in there (which, given the
>quality of the majority of the pieces isn't saying much, but it would
>have been light years above the others). I'm very disappointed in its
>omission.
I'm *pissed.* I never buy galleries, but I got a preview and saw the
black and white preview of Phil's piece. It was breathtaking. And the
major reason I went ahead and ordered it. Then I come to find out it's
not in there. Suffice it to say, this will be the last gallery I buy
for some time.
rwla...@io.com<*>
My Home Page:http://www.io.com/~rwlander
This Post contains the opinions of one Randy Lander.
Had it been the biblical truth, your bushes would be
on fire.
Leah Adezio
Randy Lander wrote:
>
> Leah Adezio <slad...@nac.net> wrote:
>
> >William C Wendel wrote:
> >>
> >> I thought the JLA Gallery was supposed to have a Phil Jiminez two--page
> >> spread of JLA villains. Well, I looked at my store and the issue didn't
> >> have it anywhere.
>
> >I specifically did *not* buy the Gallery due to the lack of Phil's art.
> >It would have been the most impressive thing in there (which, given the
> >quality of the majority of the pieces isn't saying much, but it would
> >have been light years above the others). I'm very disappointed in its
> >omission.
>
> I'm *pissed.* I never buy galleries, but I got a preview and saw the
> black and white preview of Phil's piece. It was breathtaking. And the
> major reason I went ahead and ordered it. Then I come to find out it's
> not in there. Suffice it to say, this will be the last gallery I buy
> for some time.
books like this since my shop gets enough and I do my shopping the day
new books come out, so I didn't lose in that respect.
I do understand that Phil's villains piece will now appear along with his
heroes one in JLA Secret Files #1. If so, that's where my money will go.
Leah
Bryant Durrell
In article <33C309...@nac.net>, Leah Adezio <slad...@nac.net> wrote:
>I was underwhelmed. Most of the pinups were, IMHO, rather ugly -- like
>"Vertigo does the JLA". What *were* the editors thinking? I mean, is
>there something wrong with having attractive art anymore? Does
>everything have to be so dark, distorted and grotesque? The Hamilton
>piece was nice, as was the piece Ron Boyd inked, but most were instantly
>forgettable. I'm glad I didn't spend the money on it.
It wasn't worth the money, but I felt I ought to buy it since it was on
my pull list. (When you tell your store to feed your JLA fanboy
addiction, it creates an obligation, see...)
So I might as well break it down.
I love Quitely's art; he shouldn't be doing superheros unless of course
they're Flex Mentallo. A pity -- he was one of the reasons I wanted to
buy this in the first place. Too coarse, somehow.
The Chriscross was enh, all style nothing notable otherwise. I really
liked the Zezelj piece, mostly because I like it when people do
something *different*. It was very woodcut. Nice. I liked the
Batista/Wallace piece for the nod to history, although otherwise it was
nothing special.
Hm, Barry Kitson's piece was nice -- I'm fond of the stylized approach
and I liked the concept. I did not like Pearson's piece. Horribly
distorted in a way that didn't add a damned thing. The Baretto was
technically nice enough but nothing special otherwise.
I liked, again, the concept in the Williams/Grey piece. I like seeing
the JLA in the context of the universe. Yum. Followed by a very dull
Aquaman/GL from Wojtkiewicz which *almost* redeems itself by the use of
Nazi zombies... but not quite.
I did not at all like the faces in the Abell/Geraci piece.
The Weston got some points for the setting, but who's that guy
pretending to be Aquaman, huh? But then the next page is somewhat of
an up note, again mostly for the JLA in the context of their world.
Thumbs up to Mr. Mahnke.
We then return to a few nothing special pieces from, in order, Cully
Hamner (Batman being macho); Hamilton/Snyder (a historically inaccurate
JLA versus Starro); Andrew Robinson (grim heros against the night); and
Jay Stephens (cartoony historically inaccurate JLA). Sigh.
I wanted to like Stuart Immonen's centerfold a lot, cause I like him,
but it just didn't quite click. Should probably have gone in a JSA
Gallery book, too. I liked most of the figures but his Superman seemed
a touch chubby around the face? Maybe it's just me.
Nice Gene Ha backrub. Comics will miss him.
The McKone/Kenna was yet another piece that was OK technically but just
another fight scene, yawn. Oh, but the Harris/Grawbadger? My favorite
page. *That* was lovely. Lush, rich, yummy. Followed by a piece from
Don Hillsman that I should be panning as yet another fight scene --
except that he got Guy Gardner's attitude down very nicely, and it's
the only Guy picture in the book, so I like it. Nyah.
Ted McKeever was more effective than I'd have expected. I think I'm
glad he didn't do the current seven. He picked three of the more
mystic JLAers, and that was good.
Gary Frank and Cam Smith -- Just Another Group Pose. And Diana was
drawn with a compass. Porter is about as effective as he usually is,
albeit with a different League, on the next page. I liked Simon
Coleby's a lot, except I can't figure out the iconography of the last
Martian planting an American flag. Weird. But nice bold distinct
style, so points for that.
I liked Paul Pope's cause it was nice to see Diana just having fun.
Whimsy is good. I like whimsy. Steve Pugh fell flat for me. Cute
elemental theme: Hawkman and Aquaman, wind and wave, but the art
didn't hold it up well.
Randy Duburke needs to draw much smaller noses. Much smaller. And his
Superman looks a little too much like Sergio Aragones' except I don't
think this was supposed to be a parody. And Batman seems to have
borrowed Spawn's cape.
I bet I would have liked the Alexander/Robinson piece a lot more if I
knew more JLA history. It looks like it should have emotional
significance. The same goes for Tommy Lee Edwards. In both cases I
liked the style but I had no idea what was going on.
The Delaney/Boyd piece was supercute in a good way. The Shanower, in
my eyes, was not.
All in all, not a lot chimed for me. Ah well.
--
dur...@innocence.com http://www.innocence.com/~durrell dur...@bofh.net
"[David] Cronenberg is to Toronto as John Hughes is to Chicago."
-- David Plant, Toronto Film Commissioner
Abhay Khosla
On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Leah Adezio wrote:
> William C Wendel wrote:
> > I thought the JLA Gallery was supposed to have a Phil Jiminez two--page
> > spread of JLA villains. Well, I looked at my store and the issue didn't
> > have it anywhere.
> I specifically did *not* buy the Gallery due to the lack of Phil's art.
Aw, RAC, I love ya. I thought I was being weird! I sat there staring
at that table of contents for I don't know how long, on my lunch break...
and then I just put it back.
Was it a double-page spread or a single page shot? There were a couple
single-pagers I'd be curious why they chose over it...
> The Gallery was mostly unimpressive, but I did like
> > the page with Green Arrow giving Black Canary a back rub. But I didn't
> > think it was worth $2.95 (when it was originally solicited as $2.50, and
> > with the Jimenez drawing).
I rather liked Eric Shanower, the Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman shot...
my memories are vague so I'm not sure why... oh and Jay Stephens from
Atomic City Tales(is that the name?)- that was just swell..
> "Vertigo does the JLA". What *were* the editors thinking? I mean, is
> there something wrong with having attractive art anymore? Does
> everything have to be so dark, distorted and grotesque? The Hamilton
> piece was nice, as was the piece Ron Boyd inked, but most were instantly
> forgettable. I'm glad I didn't spend the money on it.
Oh, I don't know- I'd rather see the weird version in the gallery than
the banal, subjectmatterwise. Its like all the mid-range pretty ones kind
of run together. It was disturbing too- all those good looking JLA's and
then you hit Howard Porter and remember who does the book...
The preview copies all raved about it too... maybe they're saving it for
the regular book? The Secret Files? A cover? Hello, DC?
-Abhay
akh...@umich.edu
DCOJohanna
Both of the Phil Jimenez two-page spreads (heroes and villains) are in the
JLA Secret Files, with keys.
Johanna
BrYan Westbrook
Only coming through in waves, Leah Adezio <slad...@nac.net> wrote:
> The Gallery was mostly unimpressive, but I did like
>> the page with Green Arrow giving Black Canary a back rub. But I didn't
That was my favorite. I also liked the cartoony one of the mad scientist having
the League in tubes about to transfer their powers to some robot. It was nice
to see other incarnations of the League represented too.
The worst ones were Aquaman on his throne (I can draw better than that) and the
Batman solo picture (excuse me, fellows, this ain't the Batman Gallery).
All in all not worth the cover price, but since I've got every Justice League
comic since March 1973, I bought it anyway.
-------------
My Comics Want List:
Adventure Comics: 460-462,466 All-Star Comics: 63,72
Amazing World of DC Comics: 1-18 America Versus the Justice Society: 3,4
Blue Beetle: 4,12 Hawkman: 22
Infinity Inc.: 20,21,23,27-29,33-36 Isis: 2,5-7
Justice League of America (First series only! All of these issures are pre-1973.): 1-19,21,25,28,29,31-33,35-38,40-43,45-47,50-55,58,61,68,73-74,79,85,94,111,112,115
Kingdom Come: 1-4 Limited Collectors' Edition C-46 (JLA issue)
Secret Society of Super-Villians: 11 Shaman's Tears: 10-12 Super Powers: (i): 1-3 (ii): 1,6
Superfriends: 1,3,6,10,12-15,17,19,21,24-27,29,31,32,41 Special: 1 Superman: 257
Please list individual prices for each issue and email all offers to west...@hsnp.com.
-------------
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/6663/
Jack Grimes
In article <33cac4fd...@news.dx.net>, west...@hsnp.com (BrYan Westbrook) says:
>
>Only coming through in waves, Leah Adezio <slad...@nac.net> wrote:
>
>> The Gallery was mostly unimpressive, but I did like
>>> the page with Green Arrow giving Black Canary a back rub. But I didn't
>
>That was my favorite. I also liked the cartoony one of the mad scientist having
>the League in tubes about to transfer their powers to some robot. It was nice
>to see other incarnations of the League represented too.
That was Professor Ivo and his robot Amazo, for the historically
challenged.
---
Jack R. Grimes | http://www.epix.net/~lbmgmd/glc/glcorps.html |
|Email: lbm...@epix.net Nuclear Warhead: 31.63N, 54.34W|
------------------------------------------------------------------------|
"Super-heroes were created to represent the best in all of us. We should|
aspire to match their nobility, not their ability to shoot big chrome |
guns." -- Mark Waid. |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BrYan Westbrook
Only coming through in waves, lbm...@epix.net (Jack Grimes) wrote:
>That was Professor Ivo and his robot Amazo, for the historically
>challenged.
I'm not historically challenged. The picture looks nothing like any version of
those two characters I've ever seen.
Bradly E. Peterson
dcojo...@aol.com (DCOJohanna) done said this here deal:
>Both of the Phil Jimenez two-page spreads (heroes and villains) are in the
>JLA Secret Files, with keys.
great. I'll order it... TOO!
sheesh... They could have knocked four of the crappy looking
pinups OUT of the book and put Phil's IN, like they said in the
solicitation.
The copy of JLA Gallery I ordered (based on the fact that Phil's
art was going to be in it, and on that fact alone) is still
sitting in my box at the store. I'm going to get it out
eventually, because I don't want my retailer to eat the cost of
an issue I ordered. It's going to take a while to get to it,
though. I can't stand when these kinds of screwups happen, but I
know sometimes it can't be avoided. I'm sure I'll pull the same
kind of crap when I'm publishing full-time. heh...
Whatever the case, a slight spanking for DC for making me order a
book that didn't have in it the thing I ordered it for in the
first place.
spank, spank, spank! bad, DC, bad!
And DON'T crap on the furniture again!
heh...
(remove SPAMBLOCK from address to reply)
Bradly E. Peterson, Psychodrama Press
"I stared long and hard into the abyss...
... and saw myself staring back"
Live Fast. Love Hard. Die with your mask on!
(Rick Veitch)
"Great spirits have always encountered
violent opposition from mediocre minds"
(Albert Einstein)
KrytenToo
In article <5q4g0m$2gj$1...@toybox.flick.com>, dur...@innocence.com (Bryant
Durrell) writes:
>Andrew Robinson (grim heros against the night);
GARAK?
Jeremy B
"Beware the advice of successful people. They do not seek company."
--Dogbert
Logan
On Fri, 11 Jul 1997 18:20:59 GMT, west...@hsnp.com (BrYan Westbrook)
wrote:
>Only coming through in waves, Leah Adezio <slad...@nac.net> wrote:
>
>> The Gallery was mostly unimpressive, but I did like
>>> the page with Green Arrow giving Black Canary a back rub. But I didn't
>
>That was my favorite. I also liked the cartoony one of the mad scientist having
>the League in tubes about to transfer their powers to some robot. It was nice
>to see other incarnations of the League represented too.
>
>The worst ones were Aquaman on his throne (I can draw better than that) and the
>Batman solo picture (excuse me, fellows, this ain't the Batman Gallery).
>
>All in all not worth the cover price, but since I've got every Justice League
>comic since March 1973, I bought it anyway.
I am curious why would someone pay more money just to see these
pictures.
PERRYDER
My favorite was the picture signed "SIN". The silver age JLA with the big
three talking to the cop while J'onn and Hal are sitting on the robot.
What other work has this artist put out?
Perry Der
S&Elmo
west...@hsnp.com (BrYan Westbrook) writes:
> Only coming through in waves, Leah Adezio <slad...@nac.net> wrote:
>> The Gallery was mostly unimpressive, but I did like
>>> the page with Green Arrow giving Black Canary a back rub. But I didn't
>
> That was my favorite. I also liked the cartoony one of the mad scientist having
> the League in tubes about to transfer their powers to some robot.
Professor Ivo, to Amazo, in a reinterpretation of the cover of the third
JLA appearance, Brave and Bold #30. The first two covers (Starro and the
Weaponmaster) also had reinterpretations in the Gallery, which I thought
was really pretty neat.
Still, I like the concept of the first Superman and Batman Galleries the
best--reprinting rare or classic images from the entire history of the
characters.
--
"Practice Random Kindness and Senseless Acts of Beauty"
--Unknown
elmo mor...@physics.rice.edu
http://www.bonner.rice.edu/morrow
Ask me about my All-Star Archive for sale