Jon Bogdanove: What Happened?
William C Wendel
I read Fantastic Four vs. X-Men the other day and it had great art by
Jon Bogdanove and Terry Austin.
But Jon Bog's art now is, IMO, horrible. It is ugly and distorted and
sketchy. What happened? I can't believe this is the same guy.
There are a lot of artists whose work has gone downhill, but I can't
believe that the Jon B that is drawing now is the same one who did such
great work on FF vs. X-Men. The inker can't have that much influence,
can he? (I know that Terry Austin is a great inker).
BC
Scott L. Silver
I must disagree. I think Bog's Superman is the best of the 5 books. I
feel he does a more classic Supes (throwing in cartoony panels every now
and then) and I feel his is the definitive Superman. Many people do not
like him, but I don't know why. His Supes is neither ugly nor distorted
and I feel he is as good as he ever was, if not better. Bog is a great
artist and his Superman is excellent.
Aaron Mojo
I kinda like Bogdanove's Superman (as much as I can like a Post-Crisis
Man of Steel... Well, aside from Ordway's, I mean). Is like a modern
version of Joe Shuster's artwork. Of course, I also like Kelley Jones's
Batman stuff... And I AM a visual arts student... Maybe I just like
"weirder" stuff ('cept Ted McKeever... UGH).
-Aaron!
Justin Haley Martin
I would have to say Bogdanove's art is horrible. I've hated his art since
X Factor. It's too cartoony and lacks everything. I do like him better
than Stuart Immonen though. Let's hope Immonen isn't as bad a writer as
he is an artist. My favorite art on Superman is in Man of Tomorrow, then
Superman, especially when Jurgens does any of the art.
Justin
lir...@iinet.net.au
In article
<Pine.SUN.3.96.970602...@stimpy.us.itd.umich.edu>,
>
> I would have to say Bogdanove's art is horrible. I've hated his art since
> X Factor. It's too cartoony and lacks everything. I do like him better
> than Stuart Immonen though. Let's hope Immonen isn't as bad a writer as
> he is an artist. My favorite art on Superman is in Man of Tomorrow, then
> Superman, especially when Jurgens does any of the art.
>
> Justin
Justin,
I couldn't disagree with you more! As a dedicated fan of Stuart
Immonen's artwork, I feel obligated to leap to his defence. While
different art styles appeal to different people, I wonder at your
failure to recognise his grace and his ability to show expression. A
recent example of his work in the form of a Thor illustration Stuart
did for Wizard showed how he was able to depict the majesty of the
Thunder-God. The Thor illustration was simple yet stunning in in its
majesty.
In addition, I'd like to mention that, while I have my own opinion
of the other artists whom you mentioned, I'm not going to tear them down
or insult them in a public forum. Regards from a DC fan Downunder!
Royd
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Justin Haley Martin
I totally respect your opinion, but I myself find most of Immonen's work
somewhat blah. He does really good close ups, but I think his art lacks
detail and is overly blurry when it is more distant. Maybe it has
something to do with the inkers, but in his work on Supes, and in the
Final Night, I thought they were too blah. As for Thor, I haven't seen
his work there, but Simonson I thought did the best work on Thor, in both
art and writing. I feel art overall on not only Superman books but most
books in general are pretty poor compared to only a few years ago and
before. I miss Ordway, Perez and Swan on Superman, Aparo on Batman, Adams
in general. I think the Kuberts are good, and Deodato is pretty decent,
but lots of great artists aren't doing art anymore. John Byrne is a great
artist, but lately, it is showing that he really needs an inker like Karl
Kesel. Jurgens I think, and many would agree that he has great ability at
pencilling. Look at Teen Titans. I won't ask you to buy it since most
people seem to hate it, but the art is great. Jurgens and Perez is a
great combo! The problem is too many artists are trying to be writers.
Perez, Byrne, Jurgens, Kesel, Grell, Ordway, McFarlane, Liefeld, Jim Lee,
etc. Many of these people have been able to make the transition to become
decent writers that put out good stories once in a while, but they aren't
doing what they are most strong at. The art I do like is pretty much
Starman, Power of Shazam, Ka Zar, Hulk, and Supergirl, though I pay more
attention to writing. ONe of the reasons I won't buy Green Lantern which
I think generally has pretty good art for the most part. For the most
part people have their personal tastes. I think Immonen is talented at
close ups and expressions like you said, and I think others like Weeks are
very good with storytelling through art. Even in Batman where everyone is
freakish and Robin looks like a Transylvanian transvestite, I think some
of the expressions, layouts, and storytelling is quite good. When you get
to the details and finishes, though, it becomes too freakish for my taste.
I will readily admit to artists (or writers, for that matter) that I
dislike overall, that most usually have aspects of their abilities that I
find unbelievably great. I think Immonen and others have great qualities,
but I'm not satisfied with the total package. Matter of taste, that's
all. Thanks for bringing this up, that was great!
Justin
ShutUpRob
IMO, Bog's "work" on Man of Steel is generally rushed, internally
inconsistent, anatomically unbelievable and generally an eyesore
to look at. This doesn't mean that I dislike the style that he's
attempting, just that I think that he's incompetent at the style
he's chosen.
BTW, to address William Wendel: If you compare FF/X-Men with
other work of Bog's, especially other work that he did during roughly
the same period -- namely, Power Pack and X-Factor, you'll discover
that Terry Austin's inks saved FF/XM. Before and since FF/XM, Bog's
art has been, IMO, horrid.
DC should turn that vacation he's taking from MOS into a permanent
one.
-- Rob Jensen
==================================================
"Sleep? What's that?
Free time?! Never heard of it."
Scott L. Silver
I must disagree. I think Bog's Superman is the best of the 5 books. I
feel he does a more classic Supes (throwing in cartoony panels every now
and then) and I feel his is the definitive Superman. Many people do not
like him, but I don't know why. His Supes is neither ugly nor distorted
and I feel he is as good as he ever was, if not better. Bog is a great
artist and his Superman is excellent.
Scott
On Tue, 3 Jun 1997 lir...@iinet.net.au wrote:
RI2d2
As a long time Superman fan let me say this: Bogs is one of the best
artists to have drawn superman. Look at the cover of Superman: The Man
of Steel #1.
Richard
Jeffery D. Sykes
ri...@aol.com (RI2d2) wrote:
We're talking about *current* styles. Bog's art was *much* better back then.
There's a clear moment at which Bog and Janke's art on MAN OF STEEL changes.
It began when "The Reign of the Supermen" did. It seems that in the
few-month-long hiatus between "Funeral" and "Reign", one or both of them
decided they needed a style-change. I personally think that the problem
must be Dennis Janke, and not Bog -- there are too many things inside each
individual issue which are *really* good for the problem to be Bog. Quite
often, his poses and forms look very much like Joe Shuster's work, but the
overly-heavy inking tends to ruin and distort otherwise good ideas.
Scot Eaton recently took over on MOS as a fill-in for a few months, and I'm
noticing the exact same problems with the art now as I did when Bog was on
the title. Is it not the inker's fault when a new penciller comes aboard and
the same problems remain?
The exact same thing has been going on with ACTION for some time now. First
Jackson Guice, then Kieron Dwyer, then Tom Morgan -- all of these pencillers
had basically the same look because of heavy inking by Denis Rodier. He's
lightened up a bit working with Tom Grummett, but it's still not as good as
Grummett *can* look (as he does with say Doug Hazlewood or Scott Hanna).
In my opinion, the worst art problems on the Superman titles are inking ones.
Stuart Immonen and Ron Frenz have wonderful inkers in Jose Marzan and Josef
Rubinstein. Jon Bogdanove and Tom Grummett have not-so-great inkers.
Jeff
Don Brinker's Evil Twin's Evil Twin
sy...@ms.uky.edu (Jeffery D. Sykes) wrote:
>ri...@aol.com (RI2d2) wrote:
>> As a long time Superman fan let me say this: Bogs is one of the best
>> artists to have drawn superman. Look at the cover of Superman: The Man
>> of Steel #1.
>We're talking about *current* styles. Bog's art was *much* better back then.
>There's a clear moment at which Bog and Janke's art on MAN OF STEEL changes.
>It began when "The Reign of the Supermen" did.
I dunno, while Bog's art was *always* too stylized for me (give me
Ordway or Grummet any day) I'd say it started getting much worse
sometime before the Death arc. I mean, in the memorial service
episode, if they hadn't said so in the text, I never would have
guessed that Clinton was supposed to be talking there...
>Scot Eaton recently took over on MOS as a fill-in for a few months, and I'm
>noticing the exact same problems with the art now as I did when Bog was on
>the title. Is it not the inker's fault when a new penciller comes aboard and
>the same problems remain?
Well, to argue otherwise, when Norm Felche (sp?) did a fill-in issue,
it had *none* of the problems that Bog did. Looked really good, IMHO.
- Don
ShutUpRob
In article <sykes-ya02408000...@news.campus.mci.net>,
sy...@ms.uky.edu (Jeffery D. Sykes) writes:
>Scot Eaton recently took over on MOS as a fill-in for a few months, and
I'm
>noticing the exact same problems with the art now as I did when Bog was
on
>the title. Is it not the inker's fault when a new penciller comes aboard
and
>the same problems remain?
Normally, I'd say yes, except that Bog has had the same problems
under Al Milgrom, Hilary Barta and every other inker he's had. The
problem isn't Dennis Janke, it's Jon Bogdanove.
I'm tired of his junk.
ShutUpRob
In article <19970608134...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, ri...@aol.com
(RI2d2) writes:
>
>As a long time Superman fan let me say this: Bogs is one of the best
>artists to have drawn superman. Look at the cover of Superman: The Man
>of Steel #1.
The problem is that he does pretty good covers, but everything that's
in-between the covers is rushed and distorted and particularly wretched.
MOS's consistently lower ranking on sales charts than the other
super-titles is an indication that his IMO sloppy work is actually
turning off readers.
Don Brinker's Evil Twin's Evil Twin
sy...@ms.uky.edu (Jeffery D. Sykes) wrote:
>dbri...@dont.spam.me.pobox.com wrote:
>> I wrote:
>> >Scot Eaton recently took over on MOS as a fill-in for a few months, and I'm
>> >noticing the exact same problems with the art now as I did when Bog was on
>> >the title. Is it not the inker's fault when a new penciller comes aboard and
>> >the same problems remain?
>>
>> Well, to argue otherwise, when Norm Felche (sp?) did a fill-in issue,
>> it had *none* of the problems that Bog did. Looked really good, IMHO.
>Can you remember when this was? The only work by Felchle that I can find
>on a Superman title in the past three years was on ACTION COMICS #699.
Y'know, that may have been the Felchle issue I was thinking of. Well,
that and confusing it with M.D. Bright's MOS issue (#31, for the
curious). This issue looks like vintage Bright, without any Bogisms.
- Don