-
-
I think that pretty well sums up the grumbling of most people. If you come at these changes from a fresh perspective none of these gimicks are really an issue. I never followed any DC comics but started reading batman when the new 52 kicked in and I really enjoy it.
I don't see any problem with the art style of Ramos, and Scotty Young is one of my favorite artists. If it's not your style try a different comic that is, you might just find a new favorite character.
Just started reading Hawkeye, and I never thought I would be interested in the character, but the writing is amazing. The artwork is a different style, and it had to grow on me a bit, but the layouts are so well done I love it.Comment
-
Except for a few stray dips into the "modern" comics "cess"pool now & again--I cannot pass up DD or Aquaman--I haven't read mainstream DC or Marvel since 2004.
I don't really think I've missed much of import--thank goodness for reprints.WANTED: Dick Grayson SI trousers; gray AJ Mustang horse; vintage RC Batman (Bruce Wayne) head; minty Wolfman tights; mint Black Knight sword; minty Launcelot boots; Lion Rock (pale) Dracula & Mummy heads; Lion Rock Franky squared boots; Wayne Foundation blue furniture; Flash Gordon/Ming (10") unbroken holsters; CHiPs gloved arms; POTA T2 tan body; CTVT/vintage Friar Tuck robes, BBP TZ Burgess Meredith glasses.Comment
-
Sorry, but I think Ramos' art is garbage. I'm of the mind that if you're drawing people, they should look like people, not deformed caricatures. There were PLENTY of different artistic styles in the past. Kirby, Ditko, Romita, Colan, Buscema, Kane, Adams, Simonson, Byrne are all instantly recognizable on the page without sacrificing realism.Comment
-
>a lot of the teens today would rather see this or like Chris said something like the animated series......modern teens want their own version of Spiderman a teen that is like them now....not one from the past
This is very true, and why I can't help but feel that a lot of the oldster fans are being selfish and short-sighted with their critiques. Put yourself in the place of a theorietical Batman fan from the Silver Age. How riled up do you think they were by "The Dark Knight Returns?" (Which I suspect more than a few folks here are fans of.) Would a fan from the 50's have been upset by the 60's "Go Go Checks" Batman, and seen it as a travesty; a needless complication of their favourite hero with that weird, angular art? Or a fan from the 40's reading a post-Code 50's book? Would they be outraged by the kiddification of the character?
Maybe. If those attitudes had proliferated at those different eras think how many books you like wouldn't have happened. Things HAVE to change.
I look at this pic and I don't see anything wrong with it. Good layout, it's not cluttered despite all the detail, it actually looks like Spidey's way up on an actual building.... as opposed to them weird boxes with unusually mortarless bricks he'd cling to back in the 80's. It's more cartoony than some, stylized, doesn't look like anyone else; and I think that's GREAT 'cos it shows they're trying. They're NOT trying to find someone who draws just like the guys back in the day. Yeah it's a little weird, but so what? Some of the guys considered geniuses drew weird. (Kirby's "my hand is made of legos" giant digits come to mind, as does the ol' John "I can only draw one face" Byrne era.)
Everyone wants the superheroes to be THE mainstream comic again; but ONLY if it's on their exact terms. And that's not going to happen because the world changes. Perceptions change, ideals change.... comics HAVE to change with them or they become obsolete. Sure; the Big Two-ish have been floundering for over a decade, but they're still trying to find the next thing; like they always have. When a wide-eyed new fan sees something that speaks to them, stories they enjoy, characters and art that appeal to their sensibilities.... it becomes THEIR Batman, or Spiderman, or Doctor Who, or Star Trek, or whatever. That's why Kirbys style didn't upset anyone here, it was part of our introduction, it became part of our "normal" and we were enthralled that it did. By poo-pooing the new stuff out of hand you're hoping to rob some new fan of THEIR moment of discovery, and yourself of a potential new fave. (Or at least "new tolerable.")
Sure there's gonna be a lot of misfires, but that's why I mentioned in another post that superhero fans nowadays HAVE to be laid back. They're looking for the next wave; something nobody's seen before. That's not easy. Not every experiment is a success. OF COURSE you're not gonna like everything that comes out. You're not the target audience any more. Us oldsters are a diminishing return. And it's not because the companies hate you, or laugh as they rape your childhood. It's not personal at all; it's the way things have ALWAYS been.
Don C.Comment
-
Ramos work is far fom garbage, their is nothing wrong with his layouts or his storytelling.....it's his style that maybe you don't like which is fine not everything will appeal to everyone, but Marvel would not give him steady work if his books are not selling.
Rob Liefield is a guy that Yes you can make a point that his work is not that great once you get past all the layout and coloring....Rob just didn't go and take anatomy lessons to work the bugs out of his work and he took a bashing from fans..I lay blame on him as an artist you need to continue to develop your craft he decided not too and it showed.....
Almost All the artist you mentioned at one point have all gone through the fans saying their work sucked or had a low period.
Romita is probably the only one who's work never really went south because he was such a damn good draftsman and drew beautiful women.
Kirby as much as I loved him NO ONE I knew did, all the kids i grew up in the 70's with thought he sucked.
Ditko went through the same in the 80's his work looked dated and just not appealing compared to all the new guys coming up in the 80's
Colan was horrible in his later years,
Kane's work looked very dated in the 80's and he inked with a marker....
Buscema although always great again looked very 70's in his later years which had no appeal to modern kids.
Neil Adams work now does not have the same appeal as his 60's and 70's work many guys here on the board dislike his work now.
Walt Simonson was ahead of the game back in the 80's his work was different then actually influencing many artist....He did a graphic novel called Star Slammers that was for me amazing.....his work still holds up well I'm on his FB page and he does stuff that still makes my jaw drop.
Bryne people have a love hate for him now he can still draw well but sometimes you just sit there and say haven't I seen this before?? and like Don says Bryne's faces are the same basically for everyone......Comment
-
Very, very valid points by all. This is obviously an emotional change for most of us, but, as Don has mentioned, an unavoidable and invevitible one. I can understand change to survive as an industry. I get that. I would just prefer those alterations be well thought out and planned by people who have the vision and scope to do so and not putting the fate of a company in the hands of a few creators whose autograph lines are the longest at Comic Con.
If DC had come out and explained the need for changes and actually prepared us for the amount of rebooting and ret-coning, then this would likely have gone over much smoother. With their vague and cryptic switchover to the New 52, most of us were not mentally ready to accept what has changed, which was a lot. With all of the company-altering crossover titles and Crisis books we might have all been fooled into thinking this is a temp thing, and here we are a year later and it's still rolling.
DC and Warner's really needed to take more than a few months to coordinate all of this and really plan out a calendar of events. This seemed to be more of a case of throwing everything in the fridge against a wall and see what makes the biggest stain. I know there will be a fair share of missteps along the way, but if you put people like Liefeld in charge of a few titles, how can you not expect anything but failure? There's no way the editorial and publishing arm of the company should have let some of these titles see light of day. Seriously? A Mr. Terrific title? I couldn't have sold for than a few hundred copies.
I have no idea if what Marvel is doing is any better, I don't really pick up any books anymore. It does look to be, at least initially, more organized and professional than what their counterpart put out. If these changes keep the genre above water, then fine. I hope it's a success. I will not be a part of it aside from buying TPB's to support the publisher, and most of those are used through Amazon. Change is necessary, change is often positive. Just do it the right way.I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she dumped me before we met.
If anyone here believes in psychokinesis, please raise my hand.Comment
-
>I can understand change to survive as an industry. I get that. I would just prefer those alterations be well thought out and planned by people who have the vision and scope to do so and not putting the fate of a company in the hands of a few creators whose autograph lines are the longest at Comic Con.
I think that's valid; but I think this trend started a LONG time ago.... the 80's to be exact. I also suspect us oldsters wouldn't be happy with ANY alteration, no matter how well planned it ACTUALLY was 'cos we've got too rigid a definition of what's "good" and what the best way of handling any character is.
>If DC had come out and explained the need for changes and actually prepared us for the amount of rebooting and ret-coning, then this would likely have gone over much smoother.
I feel the opposite here. I think they should just do it, and be done; rather than months of hype, rumour and innuendo. It puts WAY too many preconceptions in the heads of the fans. Back in the day they wouldn't worry about changes, they happened and that was that. I think that's best.... like pulling a tooth.... 'cos it forces the readers to deal with what's actually going on in the book, right here, right now. Not what they THINK will happen when it's announced that Joe Crosshatching is doing the art, and Scribbly McTypist is the new writer. ("McTypist?!?! I hated what he did with that one issue of Superguy!")
>This seemed to be more of a case of throwing everything in the fridge against a wall and see what makes the biggest stain.
I think it is a shotgun kinda run; let's see what the kids like.... but I suspect it's a lot more planned out than we give them credit for. Again, 'cos I suspect that NO changes would ever really make us happy.
>There's no way the editorial and publishing arm of the company should have let some of these titles see light of day. Seriously? A Mr. Terrific title? I couldn't have sold for than a few hundred copies.
Maybe; but if they don't try they won't know. Like I said before, the Japanese stuff won for over a decade by doing EVERYTHING wrong.... according to conventional publishing wisdom. Mr Terrific is just as good a guess as any. My only gripe would be that he's not different ENOUGH from their usual fare. He's a semi-obscure character from days gone by.... like a whole lot of DC's stable.
>if you're drawing people, they should look like people, not deformed caricatures
This is a tricky point too, since you're getting into appeal and style, and your showing signs of ascribing some ethereal notion of "correct" to the art. There isn't a universal ideal; if you don't like something, that's fine.... but it's definitely not wrong. By that token, Kirby was wrong. Ditko was wrong. Most of the folks people really like were wrong. Having a weird style is an advantage if you hit, 'cos it makes your work distinct.... but it's a risk, since it requires an audience willing to re-learn what they know about art so's to accomidate your style. Which is why I advocate cutting folks some slack. Sure, the Spider-sausage fingers are weird, but the rest of the pic is pretty solid and it tells the story so I can let it pass.
...and once again; let's play!:
>not everything will appeal to everyone, but Marvel would not give him steady work if his books are not selling.
True; but "sells" doesn't neccessarily mean "is good." 'Course "is good" is highly subjective, but I think for that argument the value is in the debate.
>you need to continue to develop your craft he decided not too and it showed.....
Plus, he's a wad; so it's easy to dislike his stuff. And he's slow, and a wad....
>Romita is probably the only one who's work never really went south because he was such a damn good draftsman and drew beautiful women.
....and his tenure was kinda short. He stopped doing comics before he really started to suck.
>all the kids i grew up in the 70's with thought he sucked.
I loved the weird books, so his "2001" and "Devil Dinosaur" stuff appealed to me. Same with all his old monster stuff.
>Ditko went through the same in the 80's his work looked dated and just not appealing
I think in his case it was because he stopped caring, having been soured on the whole comics thing.
>Colan was horrible in his later years
I think maybe the same as Ditko, or just general burnout. Plus, he was one of the ahrdest working men in comics, so I bet the schedules took a toll on his stuff. Cadry and Oksner seemed to suffer from this as well.
>Kane's work looked very dated in the 80's
He got kinda old though, and I think poor health played a big part in his work.
>Buscema although always great again looked very 70's in his later years which had no appeal to modern kids.
Buscems WAS the 70's; which I think is his problem because like you said, it dates his work for the fans. Success can be a double edged blade sometimes.
>Neil Adams work now does not have the same appeal as his 60's and 70's work many guys here on the board dislike his work now.
I seem to recall he's kind of a wad too, which makes folks less likely to work with him.
>Walt Simonson was ahead of the game back in the 80's his work was different then actually influencing many artist....
He always kinda did his own thing, so he didn't get pegged into one time or genre as bad as a lot of the mainstream guys.
>Bryne people have a love hate for him now he can still draw well but sometimes you just sit there and say haven't I seen this before??
Byre's a sticking point for me 'cos he's the first "designer comics" guy I can remember. He got hyped to high heaven once he started working for Marvel, and it always felt to me like it was undeserved. AND shoved down my throat. I can remember YEARS of "Byrne is SO AWESOME! AAAHHHH!!!!" while guys like Tim Truman and Dave Stevens got NO recognition whatsoever.
Don C.Comment
-
I'm thinking probably Jim Steranko as the first (although I'm waaaaaaay to young to remember when he first started.) Byrne's popularity owes alot to X-Men and his work with Chris Claremont. From there, he was all over the place because he was quick, reliable, and (bonus) could write. He was considered the standard even when Frank Miller started. (Frank was shown Byrnes art when he first started and was told there looking for people who can copy this guy.)Byre's a sticking point for me 'cos he's the first "designer comics" guy I can remember. He got hyped to high heaven once he started working for Marvel, and it always felt to me like it was undeserved. AND shoved down my throat. I can remember YEARS of "Byrne is SO AWESOME! AAAHHHH!!!!" while guys like Tim Truman and Dave Stevens got NO recognition whatsoever.
But, really.....whats happen with using a company "style guide"? There should be more consistency even between artist of vastly different styles.Comment
-
Humberto Ramos is one of the worst comic artists of all time. Can't believe he can even get work.Comment
-
True with Truman, Kinda got lost but dear God can the man draw his azz off, Grimjack,Scout and Hawkworld are truly amazing
Dave Stevens, one of my Idols was amazing but too much of a perfectionist. Harlan Ellison said Dave was brilliant but was also Lazy and it took him forever to do a comic. I think Dave struggled with that even from the beginning he had help from many comic greats to help him out.Comment
-
In this day and age a Style guide is really only used for Products or animation so that the Characters look and conform to the standards of that company.
To give an artist a style guide drawn by José Luis García-López and say draw like that is just not going to happen. not too many can actually come close to drawing like him. I'd rather deal with an individuals own take of the character rather than have a very bad clone....Last edited by kingdom warrior; Oct 26, '12, 3:12 PM.Comment
Tweet
Comment