Follow the Leader: Episode 91: Mighty Morphin’ Pencil Opinions! Praise and Pans!
Martinex1: George S. Patton once said, "Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way." He would have enjoyed our Tuesdays here at Back in the Bronze Age! Who will lead today?
Perhaps we can call this Mighty Morphin Pencil Praisers (and Panners).
How about artists whose work you love in one Age, but don't at all take a shine to in another? I'll start, and you can agree or disagree with me, and add to the conversation as you see fit.
Golden Age Jack Kirby - not so much. Silver and even Bronze Age Kirby? Sign me up!
Bronze Age John Romita, Jr. (think Iron Man) - yes! Since - a resounding No!
Bronze Age Frank Miller - of course, yes! The era of his second Dark Knight? Blech!! Although I will say a style similar to his DKII worked just fine in Sin City. But on the DC characters, for that I did not care.
Hopefully we get a little mileage out of this. Who doesn't like to discuss comic book art?
Hey Doug! This one is sure to get a lot of responses.
I agree about Golden Age Jack Kirby, although I do find it interesting to compare his style to others that were about at the time and to look closely to try to discover any seeds which would evolve into his later style.
I'll add the problematic Steve Ditko. A revolutionary style, but one whose shine really seems to me to fade in the later Bronze Age. I'm not sure if some of that was due to inking or to the general artistic trends at the time, but there it is.
Then comes Herb Trimpe. I like his work on Hulk, War of the Worlds, and heck even Shogun Warriors, but I recently read Starblast and it was almost completely unrecognizable.
There are others, but I'm curious to see what others say.
Thanks, guys. I was worried I'd left a dud for Redartz and Martinex!
Don Heck was an obvious choice for me as well, JA. His efforts on Earth's Mightiest Heroes from #s 19-40 and in Annual 1 are among my favorite comics. But once we pass to the 1970s, or really at any time he did not have a strong inker, I'm not generally a fan.
Carmine Infantino pretty much also falls into that category.
I'm having a tougher time coming up with artists who I liked and then didn't like while they were still in their prime, as the aforementioned JRJr and Miller.
Wally Wood was genius at EC. But, I didn’t take a cotton to him at Marvel or the independent companies. Science fiction was his genius?
Frank Robbins did great newspapers in the golden age but his work on the Shadow, Invaders, and Captain America was not enjoyable,
Kirby’s GoldenAge was inconsistent. Some Cap and Newsboy Legion is great, some not so, unlike his late silver-early bronze which was great and consistent.
Great topic, Doug. On Kirby, I have to disagree with you and several others: I like his Golden Age stuff (including the 1950s). Usually back then he was working with Joe Simon, who was or inking/finishing his art, and I think all of that stuff has this cool underground look to it. Silver Age he's still good, but I don't like most of his work in the Bronze Age - basically, I think the initial issues of New Gods, Mr. Miracle and also Captain America: Bicentennial Battles are quite good, everything else, not so much. I actually think his work on Captain Victory (the first six issues basically) in the early 1980s is better than most of his 1970s output.
Ditko is an artist whose less stellar work can't, I think, be tied to a specific era. I think it's more of a matter of whether he was interested in the work or if his art was just a good fit with a given character/title. For example, I don't really like his work on Legion of Super-heroes (early 1980s) or Captain Universe, but I love his art in the Starman (Prince Gavyn) feature in Adventure Comics, which was just a little before that. He also did some good work for Pacific Comics (Missing Man) at around the same time.
I'm with you on Frank Miller, though. I think his peak as an artist, and possibly even as a writer, was his first run on Daredevil.
Charlie - I concur RE Robbins. Many tweeters really praise his Bronze Age work on Captain America and the Invaders. I... just... can't... I just can't. But for reasons I do not know, I was a faithful Invaders buyer. And yes - when I read those stories now, they somehow look "right". Must be the nostalgia talking.
Wally Wood did some nice work on early Daredevil, and on the JSA revival in the mid-70s.
Edo, "underground" feel seems an apt characterization. I like that adjective. I didn't care for Kirby's work on Super Powers in the early 80s.
Of course most artists evolve and redefine their styles over time. Some just plain get better as they figure things out.
Kirby- not a fan of his '30's and '40's style but do enjoy his monsters from the '50's. Silver age is my favorite. Not so much in the Bronze.
Ditko- I actually like his Golden and Silver. Again not so much Bronze.
I wonder if we are a little more tolarable to the Silver age style in it's own time and not beyond.
As for JR Jr on Iron Man, Layton's inks are a heavy influence (like he does to most artists) not sure I would thought the same of it with a different finisher.
I'll agree on Ditko ... his Spidey/Doc Strange stuff is classic, but a lot of his later work just didn't do it for me. Giffen's early work (like Defenders or Deadly Hands of Kung Fu) is nowhere near as good as his later Legion stuff.
The big one for me has always been Sal Buscema ... I like his older stuff (Hulk, Thor, MTU, Defenders) but by the late 80s he had this weird minimalist linear style that I just can't stand; his long 80s/90s run on Spectacular Spider-Man was really not my cup of tea.
There's an FF Annual (has Dragon Man on the cover IIRC). The art is poor in my estimation. Lots of folks like Ditko's Speedball; again, not for me.
Funny, Mike - when you think of the SBuscema/Grainger work in the Avengers (right before and at the beginning of the Kree/Skrull War) it looks virtually nothing like the Spectacular Spider-Man work you referenced.
Killraven, in regard to Layton's inks on JRJr, another example of an inker's heavy hand would be Tom Palmer inking Don Heck in X-Men #64 (I think that's right - could be 63). It's the issue with Sunfire. I really have to strain my eyes to see Heck in that art.
How about Steve Epting? His 90s Avengers was OK, but steeped in... well, 90s speed lines, et al. But his work with Brubaker on the Winter Soldier arc is lovely. Both eras are good, but I think I actually like the more modern stuff better.
Mike, Killdumpster, I am track with you on Sal Buscema! I saw an earlier cover of his like Sub Mariner 26(?) and thought “Wow. Sal could draw well once upon a time.”
Same with Gil Kane! I just dug Amazing Spidey 100 out of the long box. Much better than his later stuff in my estimation.
Don't agree at all about Sal Buscema or Gil Kane. I have no problems with any of Sal's work in the later '80s and then 1990s, even if it does look different from what came before. Kane is someone whose art kept getting better in my estimation. I especially love all of his work from the 1970s and 1980s, more than I like his earlier stuff for DC in the 1960s - which is still top-notch work, it's just that I think his later stuff is so much better.
I prefer Gil Kane earlier (Silver Age) than later (Bronze Age +). I think Gil's figure work tended to be "beefier" earlier; his later stuff seems super wiry to me. I think, though, as a storyteller (moving the eye around a page and through a narrative) he probably got better as he went along. Kane's career output is work I've grown to appreciate the more I've seen of it and really taken the time to ask "what's he doing here?" As an 11 or 12-year old, I'd have never said Kane was one of the masters. He was just the guy with the contorted figures and nose upshots - in the same barrel with Frank Robbins. I don't feel that way about him any longer.
Several months ago I got out my copy of the Gil Kane's Amazing Spider-Man Artist Edition and stood at the kitchen counter (those books are huge, if you've never seen one) for several hours reading from the original art to ASMs 96-102 and 121. It was a wonderfully enriching experience.
RE: Sal. I don't think he lost anything along the way as a storyteller. Some feel he relied too heavily on "stock poses"; me, I've always felt that was just part of an artist's style. While his art certainly looked different, it was still Sal. But overall I'd side with his very late Silver Age and Bronze Age output.
Can I toss out a few names who spanned the Ages, and whose work I like regardless? Nominating Neal Adams and John Buscema.
This is going to sound like a strange one and I understand 100% if people don’t agree. I’m going out on a limb here. But I loved George Perez in his early Avengers (in issues between ~160 and 200 for example) and on his classic work on the New Teen Titans.
But I find his “newer” work just different and less appealing to my eye. He adds a lot of facial lines and details that I think are distracting. When he returned to the Avengers with Kurt Busiek I noticed a slight style change. I particularly see it on his Captain America and Scarlet Witch - more lines on their face, heavier details around the lips, eyelids more noticeable, and even some markings on the teeth.
I say this knowing his work is still great - but I think the detail makes some characters look aged.
I give him credit for all of the characters he draws with an outlandish amount of line work in the background details. I just like the smoother, cleaner, facial features that he used in the past.
I hope that makes sense. I don’t want to be overly critical - just a preference.
Oh - and I love the Sal Buscema / Sam Grainger team.
We were typing at the same time, or I'd have referenced your comment previously.
What I notice about Perez in the 90s-00s Avengers run is his facial distinction for all characters. I'm not sure if this is part of what you're referring to, but if you were to lay samples of Vizh, Wanda, and Thor (these three particularly) side-by-side with his versions from the mid-70s, I think you'd see that all three characters are drawn much differently in the later iterations. Not better or worse, but definitely different.
Martinex, I've noticed the difference in art by Perez, too; however, it doesn't bother me and I still like it.
Doug, re: "Can I toss out a few names who spanned the Ages, and whose work I like regardless? Nominating Neal Adams and John Buscema." So, going for a two-fer and introducing a second question? ;) Actually, that's a good follow-up. I agree about Adams and Big John, and in line with my above comments, I'd add the latter's kid brother Sal. A few others are Walt Simonson, John Byrne (I know most people don't agree on that one), Alan Davis, Will Eisner and, of course, Jose Luis Garcia Lopez (PBHN).
JR Jr- I'm indifferent to his early work and I don't like what his art turned into in the '90s. When it was inked by Al Williamson on Daredevil, however, his art was perfect for the stories. He captured grit and horror particularly well, to which his later hyper-exaggerations weren't as well-suited.
John Byrne- In the late '80s, his work lost a lot of the smoothness and charm that came through in his heyday. His figures looked a little less-defined, his layouts could get repetitive, and his facial expressions got rubbery. He is still capable of good work, but he needs the right inker.
Art Adams- He still draws well, but he's simplified his faces and draws bodies in a way I don't find appealing.
Neal Adams- I think his work has gotten uglier.
Jim Lee - I was a fan as a kid, but his art has gotten stiff. I really dislike the way he draws faces, especially when he draws Superman.
One thing I do dislike about Neal Adams is his recent penchant for not only recoloring his old work, but also tinkering with artwork that's often 45-50 years old. Apparently he's been bitten by the same bug George Lucas was dealing with.
I'm tempted to say that Joe Kubert's and Gene Colan's art remained fairly consistent through their careers, but I have to confess I would not be familiar with much after 1980-ish lol.
Great topic, Doug! Kind of late to this conversation; verrrrry busy work day.
Agreeing with Edo about Sal; I find his work on Spectacular Spider-man different, but still pleasant. Like Kane's later work better than his earlier Silver age efforts. I feel he did some of the best art of his career on Amazing Spider-man. Charlie, from what I've seen, you're right about Kubert and Colan; their later work is similar in style to their earlier work, and still excellent. Keith Giffen- his work changed greatly through the years; and I liked all of it. Kirby- his Golden age work is interesting, but not what I'd call appealing. His Silver age art is unparalleled. Bronze age, still solid but getting a bit clunky.
Incidentally, this discussion has briefly touched, tangentially, upon a topic we will be examining in just a couple of days. So, a heads-up: be thinking about penciller/inker combinations. Don't say I didn't warn you!
I think an artist always runs the risk of being submerged within their own style, things that they do to solve a problem or speed up the renderings process.
That's why I think Joe Kubert was such a fantastic cartoonist through out his career. Since he was also teaching at his school from the mid Seventies on he was around young artists constantly, helping them grow and learn. And that helped keep his own work so dynamic.
Of course, all teachers might just be truly extraordinary and insanely talented people. What do you think of that idea, Doug?
Great to interact with everyone today. I generally make my presence known on Twitter these days. However, I remarked to Martinex offline that I have always felt that conversations through blog comments are richer than what forms on Twitter. The lack of confinement to 240 characters really allows a person to fully express themself. It’s been a fun day!
Gene Colan's art took a slight dip in the late '80s - Tomb of Dracula: Day of Blood, Nigt of Redemption and his work on Wolverine are among his least inspired work. The good news is that he found his groove again in the '90s, and did some great work on Daredevil, Curse of Dracula, Tales of the Slayers, Captain America, and more. I think having his art produced from pencils invigorated him.
And yes, Joe Kubert produced excellent art up to the end of his career.
Like Red, VERY busy work day today-- couldn't get my nose to the keyboard!
Put me on the team that liked Sal's work throughout his many periods. Although he got criticism for it, I admired the fact that Sal's work on Spectacular Spidey was the result of him specifically re-thinking his style, looking for new methods of drawing, etc. He was looking to grow as an artist-- not just keep capably treading water. It may not be easy to recall, but that period of that title was not helped at all by some particularly uninspired coloring work--- LOTS of monochromatic, overly-bright backgrounds. . .
Herb Trimpe's biggest fan, me. And first one to recognize that his work tended to be plagued by inconsistency more and more as time went on. He also tended to rise and fall with the ability of his inker.
Keith Giffen went through a DREADFUL period where he did nothing but these blocky, minimalist, nearly-abstract drawings of characters (Remember both a HEX issue like that, and a DAREDEVIL). I honestly liked him best during OMEGA MEN-- a solid, conventional style.
Hey, although he didn't do much work at all in his later years, you know who NEVER lost a micron of ability over the decades? John Severin! The latest thing I think I have of his is the MAX mini-series RAWHIDE KID-- and it's as flippin' good as any of his other work.
And now, I am going to take a risk and make a rare criticism of John Buscema. When he returned to the Avengers in the late 80's it absolutely saved that book (and how), but there's no question that he was largely phoning most of those penciling assignments in. I think some of us have even seen some of examples of that back on the old Avengers Assemble page. Very rough, loose sketches that Tom Palmer brilliantly filled in and finished off. Thing is-- even an uninspired JB being finished by a generous and gifted Tom Palmer is still a step up from 90% of the other artists available at the time. 'Cause it was. It's kinda funny-- in the Avengers era shortly before that, Joe Sinnott's were largely responsible for keeping the book afloat, and Tom Palmer may have played a very similar role here. Bless them inkers. . .
Have to disagree slightly about Kubert having a consistent - if by that one means recognizable - style throughout his career. Back in the 1940s, when he was still early in his career, his work didn't really jump out from the pack. Here's a Hawkman story he did in the late 1940s to demonstrate the point. There's nothing wrong with it, in fact I think the art is quite solid, but if he wasn't credited on the first page I'd have a hard time guessing that story was drawn by Kubert.
The same holds true for Gil Kane. Here's a similar example of his art in the late 1940s. Again, technically it's fine, but this is long before Kane had solidified his distinctive style. I'd never, ever guess that was his work if I hadn't been told.
P.S. A shout-out and a big thanks to our pal the Groovy Agent for posting this stuff and keeping it online.
It was surreal to see my very thoughts being typed by Martinex1. Literally, it was like an echo in here... here... here.
Remember when we were young and Pop came in cans with those pull tabs that came off and you'd keep and make long chains out of and sometimes the ring part would detach and you were stuck with a can you couldn't drink out of and some days your teacher would give you paper and crayons and you'd wander around the school and make rubbings of different surfaces...
Well, if Martinex1 was a brick, I would be the purple impression of said brick; that's how close our opinions are.
Mike Wilson, did you ever see Sal's later work with Walter Simonson on Thor? Simonson wrote and Sal drew and then Walter would ink. Had a Kirby feel that I enjoyed.
Remember when school snack was crackers and little cartoons of milk? And if the teacher picked you to help pass things out, you literally ran the school for that time!?! You were a King, nay, a GOD...
(Can you hear the drums Fernando? I remember long ago another starry night like this In the firelight Fernando You were humming to yourself and softly strumming your guitar I could hear the distant drums And sounds of bugle calls were coming from afar
They were closer now Fernando Every hour every minute seemed to last eternally I was so afraid Fernando We were young and full of life and none of us prepared to die And I'm not ashamed to say The roar of guns and cannons almost made me cry
There was something in the air that night The stars were bright, Fernando They were shining there for you and me For liberty, Fernando Though we never thought that we could lose There's no regret If I had to do the same again I would, my friend, Fernando If I had to do the same again I would, my friend, Fernando
Now we're old and grey Fernando Since many years I haven't seen a rifle in your hand Can you hear the drums Fernando? Do you still recall the fateful night we crossed the Rio Grande? I can see it in your eyes How proud you were to fight for freedom in this land
There was something in the air that night The stars were bright, Fernando They were shining there for you and me For liberty, Fernando Though we never thought that we could lose There's no regret If I had to do the same again I would, my friend, Fernando
There was something in the air that night The stars were bright, Fernando They were shining there for you and me For liberty, Fernando Though we never thought that we could lose There's no regret If I had to do the same again I would, my friend, Fernando Yes, if I had to do the same again I would, my friend, Fernando If I had to do the same again I would, my friend, Fernando).
Prowler: My Thor reading stopped around #275 or so (right before Roy Thomas's big Ragnarok story), so I haven't actually read Simonson's run. I keep meaning to, but I've got so much on my "to read" list and Thor isn't really top priority for me.
Prowl - ha ha - I guess I have to be in synch with somebody once in a while. You’d need a lot of paper to make a tracing of me though.
Remember pulling images off of comic strips or comic books with Silly Putty? I think I did every panel of Avengers 71 that way - and then stretch out the characters?
29 comments:
Good morning -
Perhaps we can call this Mighty Morphin Pencil Praisers (and Panners).
How about artists whose work you love in one Age, but don't at all take a shine to in another? I'll start, and you can agree or disagree with me, and add to the conversation as you see fit.
Golden Age Jack Kirby - not so much. Silver and even Bronze Age Kirby? Sign me up!
Bronze Age John Romita, Jr. (think Iron Man) - yes! Since - a resounding No!
Bronze Age Frank Miller - of course, yes! The era of his second Dark Knight? Blech!! Although I will say a style similar to his DKII worked just fine in Sin City. But on the DC characters, for that I did not care.
Hopefully we get a little mileage out of this. Who doesn't like to discuss comic book art?
Doug
Hey Doug! This one is sure to get a lot of responses.
I agree about Golden Age Jack Kirby, although I do find it interesting to compare his style to others that were about at the time and to look closely to try to discover any seeds which would evolve into his later style.
I'll add the problematic Steve Ditko. A revolutionary style, but one whose shine really seems to me to fade in the later Bronze Age. I'm not sure if some of that was due to inking or to the general artistic trends at the time, but there it is.
Then comes Herb Trimpe. I like his work on Hulk, War of the Worlds, and heck even Shogun Warriors, but I recently read Starblast and it was almost completely unrecognizable.
There are others, but I'm curious to see what others say.
Thanks for the topic!
Good topic.
Liked Don Heck's art okay in Silver Age comics, after that, not so much (although I thought he did fine in 'Crisis On Earth Prime').
Ditko was great in the Silver Age, not a fan after that.
Thanks, guys. I was worried I'd left a dud for Redartz and Martinex!
Don Heck was an obvious choice for me as well, JA. His efforts on Earth's Mightiest Heroes from #s 19-40 and in Annual 1 are among my favorite comics. But once we pass to the 1970s, or really at any time he did not have a strong inker, I'm not generally a fan.
Carmine Infantino pretty much also falls into that category.
I'm having a tougher time coming up with artists who I liked and then didn't like while they were still in their prime, as the aforementioned JRJr and Miller.
Doug
Wally Wood was genius at EC. But, I didn’t take a cotton to him at Marvel or the independent companies. Science fiction was his genius?
Frank Robbins did great newspapers in the golden age but his work on the Shadow, Invaders, and Captain America was not enjoyable,
Kirby’s GoldenAge was inconsistent. Some Cap and Newsboy Legion is great, some not so, unlike his late silver-early bronze which was great and consistent.
Great topic, Doug.
On Kirby, I have to disagree with you and several others: I like his Golden Age stuff (including the 1950s). Usually back then he was working with Joe Simon, who was or inking/finishing his art, and I think all of that stuff has this cool underground look to it. Silver Age he's still good, but I don't like most of his work in the Bronze Age - basically, I think the initial issues of New Gods, Mr. Miracle and also Captain America: Bicentennial Battles are quite good, everything else, not so much. I actually think his work on Captain Victory (the first six issues basically) in the early 1980s is better than most of his 1970s output.
Ditko is an artist whose less stellar work can't, I think, be tied to a specific era. I think it's more of a matter of whether he was interested in the work or if his art was just a good fit with a given character/title. For example, I don't really like his work on Legion of Super-heroes (early 1980s) or Captain Universe, but I love his art in the Starman (Prince Gavyn) feature in Adventure Comics, which was just a little before that. He also did some good work for Pacific Comics (Missing Man) at around the same time.
I'm with you on Frank Miller, though. I think his peak as an artist, and possibly even as a writer, was his first run on Daredevil.
Charlie - I concur RE Robbins. Many tweeters really praise his Bronze Age work on Captain America and the Invaders. I... just... can't... I just can't. But for reasons I do not know, I was a faithful Invaders buyer. And yes - when I read those stories now, they somehow look "right". Must be the nostalgia talking.
Wally Wood did some nice work on early Daredevil, and on the JSA revival in the mid-70s.
Edo, "underground" feel seems an apt characterization. I like that adjective. I didn't care for Kirby's work on Super Powers in the early 80s.
Doug
Good one Doug!
Of course most artists evolve and redefine their styles over time. Some just plain get better as they figure things out.
Kirby- not a fan of his '30's and '40's style but do enjoy his monsters from the '50's. Silver age is my favorite. Not so much in the Bronze.
Ditko- I actually like his Golden and Silver. Again not so much Bronze.
I wonder if we are a little more tolarable to the Silver age style in it's own time and not beyond.
As for JR Jr on Iron Man, Layton's inks are a heavy influence (like he does to most artists) not sure I would thought the same of it with a different finisher.
I'll agree on Ditko ... his Spidey/Doc Strange stuff is classic, but a lot of his later work just didn't do it for me. Giffen's early work (like Defenders or Deadly Hands of Kung Fu) is nowhere near as good as his later Legion stuff.
The big one for me has always been Sal Buscema ... I like his older stuff (Hulk, Thor, MTU, Defenders) but by the late 80s he had this weird minimalist linear style that I just can't stand; his long 80s/90s run on Spectacular Spider-Man was really not my cup of tea.
Mike and Killraven -
There's an FF Annual (has Dragon Man on the cover IIRC). The art is poor in my estimation. Lots of folks like Ditko's Speedball; again, not for me.
Funny, Mike - when you think of the SBuscema/Grainger work in the Avengers (right before and at the beginning of the Kree/Skrull War) it looks virtually nothing like the Spectacular Spider-Man work you referenced.
Killraven, in regard to Layton's inks on JRJr, another example of an inker's heavy hand would be Tom Palmer inking Don Heck in X-Men #64 (I think that's right - could be 63). It's the issue with Sunfire. I really have to strain my eyes to see Heck in that art.
How about Steve Epting? His 90s Avengers was OK, but steeped in... well, 90s speed lines, et al. But his work with Brubaker on the Winter Soldier arc is lovely. Both eras are good, but I think I actually like the more modern stuff better.
Doug
Mike, Killdumpster, I am track with you on Sal Buscema! I saw an earlier cover of his like Sub Mariner 26(?) and thought “Wow. Sal could draw well once upon a time.”
Same with Gil Kane! I just dug Amazing Spidey 100 out of the long box. Much better than his later stuff in my estimation.
Same with the Beatles!
Don't agree at all about Sal Buscema or Gil Kane.
I have no problems with any of Sal's work in the later '80s and then 1990s, even if it does look different from what came before.
Kane is someone whose art kept getting better in my estimation. I especially love all of his work from the 1970s and 1980s, more than I like his earlier stuff for DC in the 1960s - which is still top-notch work, it's just that I think his later stuff is so much better.
I prefer Gil Kane earlier (Silver Age) than later (Bronze Age +). I think Gil's figure work tended to be "beefier" earlier; his later stuff seems super wiry to me. I think, though, as a storyteller (moving the eye around a page and through a narrative) he probably got better as he went along. Kane's career output is work I've grown to appreciate the more I've seen of it and really taken the time to ask "what's he doing here?" As an 11 or 12-year old, I'd have never said Kane was one of the masters. He was just the guy with the contorted figures and nose upshots - in the same barrel with Frank Robbins. I don't feel that way about him any longer.
Several months ago I got out my copy of the Gil Kane's Amazing Spider-Man Artist Edition and stood at the kitchen counter (those books are huge, if you've never seen one) for several hours reading from the original art to ASMs 96-102 and 121. It was a wonderfully enriching experience.
RE: Sal. I don't think he lost anything along the way as a storyteller. Some feel he relied too heavily on "stock poses"; me, I've always felt that was just part of an artist's style. While his art certainly looked different, it was still Sal. But overall I'd side with his very late Silver Age and Bronze Age output.
Can I toss out a few names who spanned the Ages, and whose work I like regardless? Nominating Neal Adams and John Buscema.
Doug
This is going to sound like a strange one and I understand 100% if people don’t agree. I’m going out on a limb here. But I loved George Perez in his early Avengers (in issues between ~160 and 200 for example) and on his classic work on the New Teen Titans.
But I find his “newer” work just different and less appealing to my eye. He adds a lot of facial lines and details that I think are distracting. When he returned to the Avengers with Kurt Busiek I noticed a slight style change. I particularly see it on his Captain America and Scarlet Witch - more lines on their face, heavier details around the lips, eyelids more noticeable, and even some markings on the teeth.
I say this knowing his work is still great - but I think the detail makes some characters look aged.
I give him credit for all of the characters he draws with an outlandish amount of line work in the background details. I just like the smoother, cleaner, facial features that he used in the past.
I hope that makes sense. I don’t want to be overly critical - just a preference.
Oh - and I love the Sal Buscema / Sam Grainger team.
Martinex -
We were typing at the same time, or I'd have referenced your comment previously.
What I notice about Perez in the 90s-00s Avengers run is his facial distinction for all characters. I'm not sure if this is part of what you're referring to, but if you were to lay samples of Vizh, Wanda, and Thor (these three particularly) side-by-side with his versions from the mid-70s, I think you'd see that all three characters are drawn much differently in the later iterations. Not better or worse, but definitely different.
Doug
Martinex, I've noticed the difference in art by Perez, too; however, it doesn't bother me and I still like it.
Doug, re: "Can I toss out a few names who spanned the Ages, and whose work I like regardless? Nominating Neal Adams and John Buscema."
So, going for a two-fer and introducing a second question? ;)
Actually, that's a good follow-up. I agree about Adams and Big John, and in line with my above comments, I'd add the latter's kid brother Sal. A few others are Walt Simonson, John Byrne (I know most people don't agree on that one), Alan Davis, Will Eisner and, of course, Jose Luis Garcia Lopez (PBHN).
JR Jr- I'm indifferent to his early work and I don't like what his art turned into in the '90s. When it was inked by Al Williamson on Daredevil, however, his art was perfect for the stories. He captured grit and horror particularly well, to which his later hyper-exaggerations weren't as well-suited.
John Byrne- In the late '80s, his work lost a lot of the smoothness and charm that came through in his heyday. His figures looked a little less-defined, his layouts could get repetitive, and his facial expressions got rubbery. He is still capable of good work, but he needs the right inker.
Art Adams- He still draws well, but he's simplified his faces and draws bodies in a way I don't find appealing.
Neal Adams- I think his work has gotten uglier.
Jim Lee - I was a fan as a kid, but his art has gotten stiff. I really dislike the way he draws faces, especially when he draws Superman.
- Mike Loughlin
Mike --
One thing I do dislike about Neal Adams is his recent penchant for not only recoloring his old work, but also tinkering with artwork that's often 45-50 years old. Apparently he's been bitten by the same bug George Lucas was dealing with.
Doug
I'm tempted to say that Joe Kubert's and Gene Colan's art remained fairly consistent through their careers, but I have to confess I would not be familiar with much after 1980-ish lol.
Great topic, Doug! Kind of late to this conversation; verrrrry busy work day.
Agreeing with Edo about Sal; I find his work on Spectacular Spider-man different, but still pleasant.
Like Kane's later work better than his earlier Silver age efforts. I feel he did some of the best art of his career on Amazing Spider-man.
Charlie, from what I've seen, you're right about Kubert and Colan; their later work is similar in style to their earlier work, and still excellent.
Keith Giffen- his work changed greatly through the years; and I liked all of it.
Kirby- his Golden age work is interesting, but not what I'd call appealing. His Silver age art is unparalleled. Bronze age, still solid but getting a bit clunky.
Incidentally, this discussion has briefly touched, tangentially, upon a topic we will be examining in just a couple of days. So, a heads-up: be thinking about penciller/inker combinations. Don't say I didn't warn you!
Hiya,
New computer so back on line again.
I think an artist always runs the risk of being submerged within their own style, things that they do to solve a problem or speed up the renderings process.
That's why I think Joe Kubert was such a fantastic cartoonist through out his career. Since he was also teaching at his school from the mid Seventies on he was around young artists constantly, helping them grow and learn. And that helped keep his own work so dynamic.
Of course, all teachers might just be truly extraordinary and insanely talented people. What do you think of that idea, Doug?
pfgavigan
PFG -
I probably trend toward insane...
Great to interact with everyone today. I generally make my presence known on Twitter these days. However, I remarked to Martinex offline that I have always felt that conversations through blog comments are richer than what forms on Twitter. The lack of confinement to 240 characters really allows a person to fully express themself. It’s been a fun day!
Doug
Gene Colan's art took a slight dip in the late '80s - Tomb of Dracula: Day of Blood, Nigt of Redemption and his work on Wolverine are among his least inspired work. The good news is that he found his groove again in the '90s, and did some great work on Daredevil, Curse of Dracula, Tales of the Slayers, Captain America, and more. I think having his art produced from pencils invigorated him.
And yes, Joe Kubert produced excellent art up to the end of his career.
- Mike Loughlin
Like Red, VERY busy work day today-- couldn't get my nose to the keyboard!
Put me on the team that liked Sal's work throughout his many periods. Although he got criticism for it, I admired the fact that Sal's work on Spectacular Spidey was the result of him specifically re-thinking his style, looking for new methods of drawing, etc. He was looking to grow as an artist-- not just keep capably treading water. It may not be easy to recall, but that period of that title was not helped at all by some particularly uninspired coloring work--- LOTS of monochromatic, overly-bright backgrounds. . .
Herb Trimpe's biggest fan, me. And first one to recognize that his work tended to be plagued by inconsistency more and more as time went on. He also tended to rise and fall with the ability of his inker.
Keith Giffen went through a DREADFUL period where he did nothing but these blocky, minimalist, nearly-abstract drawings of characters (Remember both a HEX issue like that, and a DAREDEVIL). I honestly liked him best during OMEGA MEN-- a solid, conventional style.
Hey, although he didn't do much work at all in his later years, you know who NEVER lost a micron of ability over the decades? John Severin! The latest thing I think I have of his is the MAX mini-series RAWHIDE KID-- and it's as flippin' good as any of his other work.
And now, I am going to take a risk and make a rare criticism of John Buscema. When he returned to the Avengers in the late 80's it absolutely saved that book (and how), but there's no question that he was largely phoning most of those penciling assignments in. I think some of us have even seen some of examples of that back on the old Avengers Assemble page. Very rough, loose sketches that Tom Palmer brilliantly filled in and finished off. Thing is-- even an uninspired JB being finished by a generous and gifted Tom Palmer is still a step up from 90% of the other artists available at the time. 'Cause it was. It's kinda funny-- in the Avengers era shortly before that, Joe Sinnott's were largely responsible for keeping the book afloat, and Tom Palmer may have played a very similar role here. Bless them inkers. . .
HB
Have to disagree slightly about Kubert having a consistent - if by that one means recognizable - style throughout his career. Back in the 1940s, when he was still early in his career, his work didn't really jump out from the pack. Here's a Hawkman story he did in the late 1940s to demonstrate the point. There's nothing wrong with it, in fact I think the art is quite solid, but if he wasn't credited on the first page I'd have a hard time guessing that story was drawn by Kubert.
The same holds true for Gil Kane. Here's a similar example of his art in the late 1940s. Again, technically it's fine, but this is long before Kane had solidified his distinctive style. I'd never, ever guess that was his work if I hadn't been told.
P.S. A shout-out and a big thanks to our pal the Groovy Agent for posting this stuff and keeping it online.
It was surreal to see my very thoughts being typed by Martinex1. Literally, it was like an echo in here... here... here.
Remember when we were young and Pop came in cans with those pull tabs that came off and you'd keep and make long chains out of and sometimes the ring part would detach and you were stuck with a can you couldn't drink out of and some days your teacher would give you paper and crayons and you'd wander around the school and make rubbings of different surfaces...
Well, if Martinex1 was a brick, I would be the purple impression of said brick; that's how close our opinions are.
Mike Wilson, did you ever see Sal's later work with Walter Simonson on Thor? Simonson wrote and Sal drew and then Walter would ink. Had a Kirby feel that I enjoyed.
Remember when school snack was crackers and little cartoons of milk? And if the teacher picked you to help pass things out, you literally ran the school for that time!?! You were a King, nay, a GOD...
(Can you hear the drums Fernando?
I remember long ago another starry night like this
In the firelight Fernando
You were humming to yourself and softly strumming your guitar
I could hear the distant drums
And sounds of bugle calls were coming from afar
They were closer now Fernando
Every hour every minute seemed to last eternally
I was so afraid Fernando
We were young and full of life and none of us prepared to die
And I'm not ashamed to say
The roar of guns and cannons almost made me cry
There was something in the air that night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For liberty, Fernando
Though we never thought that we could lose
There's no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
Now we're old and grey Fernando
Since many years I haven't seen a rifle in your hand
Can you hear the drums Fernando?
Do you still recall the fateful night we crossed the Rio Grande?
I can see it in your eyes
How proud you were to fight for freedom in this land
There was something in the air that night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For liberty, Fernando
Though we never thought that we could lose
There's no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
There was something in the air that night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For liberty, Fernando
Though we never thought that we could lose
There's no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
Yes, if I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando).
Prowler: My Thor reading stopped around #275 or so (right before Roy Thomas's big Ragnarok story), so I haven't actually read Simonson's run. I keep meaning to, but I've got so much on my "to read" list and Thor isn't really top priority for me.
Prowl - ha ha - I guess I have to be in synch with somebody once in a while. You’d need a lot of paper to make a tracing of me though.
Remember pulling images off of comic strips or comic books with Silly Putty? I think I did every panel of Avengers 71 that way - and then stretch out the characters?
Post a Comment