|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Aug 4, 2017 3:37:42 GMT -5
Maybe I should put this in the John Byrne thread but it's relevant here too: I find his artwork of the late 70s very aesthetically pleasing: it's just really nice to look at. If I had to analyse it, I'd say his style was unusual in that it managed to combine some relatively cartoonish elements with the Neal Adams-style comic book realism. That juxtaposition is part of why I love his work so much. Also, Byrne's backgrounds were always spacious and realistic, particularly in outdoor environments, which brought an extra sense of reality to the Marvel universe in my eyes. Looking back, his art started changing for the worse after his underrated Namor run. |
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Aug 4, 2017 3:48:09 GMT -5
the problem here is the 'artististic-development' quotient, that Byrne, aesthetically, was 'short-game', whereas Perez proved himself 'long-game'. Perez's work circa 1999-2001 proves this.
but the context of the thread doesn't account for this since ' 80's/90's' is specified.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 4, 2017 4:31:14 GMT -5
Feel free to examine their entire body of work, LovesGilKane. I find Perez not to be as effective as Bryne in the writing area. Nothing Perez has written can compare to his FF or Superman. Perez certainly blew past Bryne in the artwork side in the 2000's. |
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Aug 4, 2017 4:38:50 GMT -5
Feel free to examine their entire body of work, LovesGilKane . I find Perez not to be as effective as Bryne in the writing area. Nothing Perez has written can compare to his FF or Superman. Perez certainly blew past Bryne in the artwork side in the 2000's. lol, as a freelancer 70's kid, i read/absorbed ALL work by both. I had to, if i wanted to 'break in'. that's the problem with this thread; it's non-specific as per spefic talents of both creators. in some ways, Perez could never supersede what 'Byrne-ing down the house' (talking heads joke) did with FF. in the 80's. but to be FAIR, Byrne never came close to the humane pathos of Crisis. in the 80's. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 4, 2017 4:39:49 GMT -5
Also, it has been written here that Byrne was somehow blackballed by Marvel and he only got work because of certain editor friends. As I examine his history, He really worked often . As a matter of fact until 2008, www.dcindexes.com/features/creator.php?creatorid=25he was employed. Not quite the pariah that is suggested. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 4, 2017 4:41:58 GMT -5
Feel free to examine their entire body of work, LovesGilKane . I find Perez not to be as effective as Bryne in the writing area. Nothing Perez has written can compare to his FF or Superman. Perez certainly blew past Bryne in the artwork side in the 2000's. lol, as a freelancer 70's kid, i read/absorbed ALL work by both. I had to, if i wanted to 'break in'. that's the problem with this thread; it's non-specific as per spefic talents of both creators. in some ways, Perez could never supersede what 'Byrne-ing down the house' (talking heads joke) did with FF. in the 80's. but to be FAIR, Byrne never came close to the humane pathos of Crisis. in the 80's. Maybe, but Perez didn't write Crisis. |
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Aug 4, 2017 4:46:12 GMT -5
he might have bloody well have considering his contribution to pacing/mood.
and you KNOW i'm an 'art on;y' byrne supporter', so i say byrne didn't write x-men 118-129 either.
nor his iron fists.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 4, 2017 4:53:28 GMT -5
he might have bloody well have considering his contribution to pacing/mood. and you KNOW i'm an 'art on;y' byrne supporter', so i say byrne didn't write x-men 118-129 either. nor his iron fists. Fair enough, but I think most of the heavy lifting on Crisis was Marv Wolfman. Byrne proved his writing chops after the X-men run. |
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Aug 4, 2017 4:58:44 GMT -5
having met and discussed a series with Marv, you are semi-correct, sir. But as a credit to Marv, Crises would have been nothing without Mr. Perez.
as per Byrne, again, yes, until he cracked the Q@$@!!'s over lack of perceived support on Next Men. there was plenty of support.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 4, 2017 5:23:55 GMT -5
having met and discussed a series with Marv, you are semi-correct, sir. But as a credit to Marv, Crises would have been nothing without Mr. Perez. as per Byrne, again, yes, until he cracked the Q@$@!!'s over lack of perceived support on Next Men. there was plenty of support. Any great series has to have a complimentary artist to the material. It was a great series , for sure. I shudder to think what it would have looked like if Bob Hall had drawn it. As for Nextmen, there was a period when Byrne stopped drawing his figures with a feel of volume and weight. Maybe not enough shadows, I don't know. It felt like they were shortcutted into mediocrity. * To be fair, Bob Hall got a lot better since his early Avengers days. His work on Shadowman was good. I hold a silly grudge because the second Shooter run was short of great because the pencils for the Yellowjacket saga were clumsy at times. |
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Aug 4, 2017 5:28:20 GMT -5
having met and discussed a series with Marv, you are semi-correct, sir. But as a credit to Marv, Crises would have been nothing without Mr. Perez. as per Byrne, again, yes, until he cracked the Q@$@!!'s over lack of perceived support on Next Men. there was plenty of support. Any great series has to have a complimentary artist to the material. It was a great series , for sure. I shudder to think what it would have looked like if Bob Hall had drawn it. As for Nextmen, there was a period when Byrne stopped drawing his figures with a feel of volume and weight. Maybe not enough shadows, I don't know. It felt like they were shortcutted into mediocrity. byrne was someone who would do 'less effort' depending on how much he felt appreciated or shafted; i can respect that. Perez never worried about such, always gave his best, which artistically i respect, but in terms of deal-structures, 'no'. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 4, 2017 5:31:24 GMT -5
Any great series has to have a complimentary artist to the material. It was a great series , for sure. I shudder to think what it would have looked like if Bob Hall had drawn it. As for Nextmen, there was a period when Byrne stopped drawing his figures with a feel of volume and weight. Maybe not enough shadows, I don't know. It felt like they were shortcutted into mediocrity. byrne was someone who would do 'less effort' depending on how much he felt appreciated or shafted; i can respect that. Perez never worried about such, always gave his best, which artistically i respect, but in terms of deal-structures, 'no'. The problem with that is , I'm talking about his baby, Nextmen. He should have put his best into it. |
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Aug 4, 2017 5:35:59 GMT -5
byrne was someone who would do 'less effort' depending on how much he felt appreciated or shafted; i can respect that. Perez never worried about such, always gave his best, which artistically i respect, but in terms of deal-structures, 'no'. The problem with that is , I'm talking about his baby, Nextmen. He should have put his best into it. and you are absolutely correct in doing so, saying so. Nextmen could have been 'so much more'. but still was/is more than a lot of tripe published now by the big 4. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 4, 2017 5:39:24 GMT -5
I kind of enjoyed it but , it wasn't so good in the re-reading. I had the full run , I'm not sure if I sold/gave it away.
|
|
|
|
Post by LovesGilKane on Aug 4, 2017 6:18:53 GMT -5
understandable  |
|
