What the hell happened to Howie Chaykin's and Neal Adams art???

[Blue Meanie]

Here's a preview of the Avengers 1959:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=32907

First image looks like it was drawn on actual paper....but the rest of the pages as you go down the article look like crap. It looks like he's doing his art on a computer. That's just God awful art. I was never a huge fan of Chaykin...but this new mini series looks like garbage. Same goes for the Adams art in the upcoming "First X-Men" mini series:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=38666

Then again with Adams you don't know if it is him doing the art or someone at Continuity doing the art. Can they both be that out of practice that the art is starting to tank??

[VintageMike]

At some point age has to be a factor to. Adams would have recently turned 70 and I've seen the effects of that with my own father nearing 70 himself.

[torgospizza]

The Chaykin stuff just looks like his standard stuff, to me. But, then, I've only liked his work when it had Tom Palmer or Steve Leialoha inks over it. That's like two issues out of everything he's done.

[kingdom warrior]

I don't see anything wrong with Chaykin's work it looks the same as it ever has. there is a lot of layering with the coloring of the book....but I did see uncolored pages from this book and it's still a thousand times better than most modern artist.......

Those two Adams drawings look like his typical modern style....again I find no fault in his work especially for a man in his 70's there are 20 year olds that can't draw that good if their life depended on it.....

Here is a site with Chaykins Avengers art side to side with the colored page.....looks very solid to me......also Chaykin keeps his line simple when he inks it. you won't see him feathering he hasn't done that in years......

http://graphikslava.com/avengers-1959-4/

[The Toyroom]

Adams' art was a big turn-off to me on "Batman:Odyssey"... Dropped it after issue #1

[Brazoo]

I don't hate the Chaykin drawing, but I was never a huge fan. Not knocking him though, he's a seriously talented guy - it's just personal. I never followed his work much.

There's a lot of wrong going on in that Adams cover, but my bet is Adams' pencils looked A LOT more competent before it was inked.

For example, on the chick near the top lifting the robot - sorry, I don't know who that's suppose to be - no matter what Adams drew there's no reason her breasts should look like a black smeary blob of ink like that.

[thunderbolt]

Chaikin's stuff looks ok, its got life and bounce to it. Nel Adams has never ever done anything for me, and this and Batman:Odessy did look like he's really lost what talent he had. Sabretooth sure got around in the late 50's didn't he?

[The Bat]

Adams's art looks ok to me...but THANK GOD he's not writing it!

[enyawd72]

I think the Neal Adams cover is terrible, but not because of his art...where the hell are the costumes? We have biker guy with claws, black hoodie boy, wife-beater with furry coat man, flying soccer mom, and some lilac guy I think is Magneto?
Pretty sad when I can't even tell who three of the five characters on the cover are.

[thunderbolt]

I was hoping we'd seen the last of bone claw Wolverine, too.

[thunderbolt]

I think the guy in purple might be Nitro, not Magneto.

[BlackKnight]

I can't read or look at Adams Today.
But He was Never "My Batman" ...., More so Aparo and BreyFrogle.
I do appreciate the "Look" Adams Gave Green Arrow.
Which ...., Now DC Took Away in the New 52. :sigh:

[emeraldknight47]

I agree that age has to come into play at some point in an artist's career; fingers get stiffer, eyesight starts to get wonky, the back won't take the hours it used to hunched over a drawing board. I, too, have never been a huge fan of Chaykin's stuff, but I will agree that the stuff they had posted looked pretty crappy. As for the Adams' stuff, that's just his new style---similiar to Adams' classic, but it's like he decided that he should throw a little Jim Lee in with his style as well. Not bad (and far better than a lot of stuff getting published today), but definitely not on par with his earlier stuff...