|
|
Post by the4thpip on May 5, 2014 2:34:00 GMT -5
Can you name anyone still working in the industry that sites Liefeld as an influence? How about the guy who did that Teen Titans cover that started the downfall of CBR? Rocafort or something? |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 5, 2014 2:39:44 GMT -5
Can you name anyone still working in the industry that sites Liefeld as an influence? How about the guy who did that Teen Titans cover that started the downfall of CBR? Rocafort or something? To be fair, that was the most benign "controversial" cover I've ever seen. Wonder Girl's boobs were ridiculously big, but beyond that, the artist in question is clearly far superior to Liefeld. (It's still a bad cover, but it's a masterpiece compared to some of the embarrassing bad-girl comic covers I've seen over the years.) |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 5, 2014 2:55:31 GMT -5
Neal Adams -> Michael Golden -> Art Adams -> Liefeld, Lee and McFarlane I might be missing a link between Golden and Adams, as Golden's work is certainly more cartoony, with some hints of Ploog in it as well to me. but in terms of the sketchiness of the inking, that all feels like fourth generation Neal Adams derivation. I also see the connection between Arthur and, at least, Brett Booth. Never thought about Golden as a Neal Adams derivative. If I had to find influences in his work I'd rather go with Marshall Rogers, Frank Brunner and (yes) Mike Ploog. As for connecting Golden with A. Adams, maybe I would see it if you found the missing link. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 5, 2014 3:14:02 GMT -5
McFarlane's Hulk looks like a huge walking tumor. I actually liked him better at the beginning. As he progressed, he developed a style I didn't care much about. |
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,959 
|
Post by Crimebuster on May 5, 2014 3:14:09 GMT -5
Neal Adams -> Michael Golden -> Art Adams -> Liefeld, Lee and McFarlane I might be missing a link between Golden and Adams, as Golden's work is certainly more cartoony, with some hints of Ploog in it as well to me. but in terms of the sketchiness of the inking, that all feels like fourth generation Neal Adams derivation. I also see the connection between Arthur and, at least, Brett Booth. Never thought about Golden as a Neal Adams derivative. If I had to find influences in his work I'd rather go with Marshall Rogers, Frank Brunner and (yes) Mike Ploog. As for connecting Golden with A. Adams, maybe I would see it if you found the missing link. Yeah, I should have been more clear, what with two Adams. It's probably not a direct tree. I think Neal Adams had a major influence on all the Image guys, just filtered through the other artists they were ripping off. But the link between Neal Adams and Michael Golden is maybe not there. I guess they are more like spiritual co-grandparents to the Image crew. However, to me, Art Adams' stuff looks a great deal like Michael Golden. That feels to me like a direct line from Golden to Art Adams to the Image crew. The work Michael Golden was doing on The 'Nam feels very similar to the stuff Art Adams was doing at roughly the same time on his covers to Classic X-Men. They both had a... I dunno... detailed cartooniness.   |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 5, 2014 3:16:36 GMT -5
I detect a strong Will Wisner influence on Golden's art.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on May 5, 2014 3:24:05 GMT -5
I'll admit it, I actually enjoyed Rob's Hawk & Dove mini-series back in the late 80's. Karl Kesel is largely responsible for that. Kesel sort of runs on an opposite scale. Most of his work is great, but he's never recognized for it. Marvel should just give him the FF forever Totally. I remember that, at a time when I wanted to see Austin inking all of Byrne's work, I ended liking Kesel's finishings better. |
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy D on May 5, 2014 4:01:51 GMT -5
I'll say this. It took awhile for me to work up a distaste for Rob Liefeld.But Humberto Ramos I couldn't stand from the beginning and each year I think my dislike grows. I hate to admit this but months ago in The Spider-Man thread I shared my hate for Ramos. I shouldn't have done this but i wrote that my dog's vomit looks better than what Ramos drew. Dan Slott got so angry at that comment he wrote back to say he was quitting the CBR forum. I got a warning from the mods that I went over the top but did not get banned. So yeah it was a juvenile comment. But my dog's barf is better than Ramos art I can't believe that Slott got so angry over a comment that wasn't even directed towards him. Heh, I usually get angrier and comments directed towards friends and family than towards myself, so I can understand Slott's position. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 5, 2014 5:03:37 GMT -5
Does anyone think that the Image guys were influenced by Kirby? Erik Larsen loves Kirby and you can see it in his the energy he brings to his pages.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy D on May 5, 2014 5:07:30 GMT -5
Does anyone think that the Image guys were influenced by Kirby? Erik Larsen loves Kirby and you can see it in his the energy he brings to his pages. It's hard to think of any superhero comics artist that is not influenced by Kirby in one way or another. Liefeld did have a Kirby himself as a character in one of his series and dedicated some of his work to him. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 5, 2014 5:51:10 GMT -5
I am surprised by Slott's extreme reaction. Considering that a comic book is read by tens of thousands of people, surely it's to be expected that appreciation of any of its aspects will go from extremely negative to insanely positive, no matter what a majority or readers think. It's good to defend a colleague's work if one thinks criticism is unwarranted, but at some point you also have to let it go: not all artists can please everyone all of the time. Even ones who are usually acknowledged as Greats have their detractors: Kirby, Ditko, Colan, Robbins...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy D on May 5, 2014 6:14:17 GMT -5
"Dog's vomit looking better" is pretty stronger than just criticism though. And some people let things go easier than others (not a big Slott fan myself (something in his She-Hulk just disgreed with me, did like GLA and Spider-Man/Human Torch mini's), though I'm currently reading his Silver Surfer. That has more to do with the art though).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2014 6:25:35 GMT -5
I met Rob Liefeld at a Con in 2009 (Baltimore I believe). He was really a nice guy and laughed at my question about how big a character Deadpool became. But he was nice and signed 2-3 books. For all I know, he's Jesus Christ incarnate, but I prefer to go with what an FB friend of mine who's written in the field called him -- "The human equivalent of a backward baseball cap." |
|
|
|
Post by Fan of Bronze on May 5, 2014 6:27:34 GMT -5
Amongst comic fans,for every generation there is an artist who is the whipping boy for derision.Currently it looks to be either Liefeld or Land Back in the late 60s and 70s it was unquestionably Don Heck.You can agree or disagree whether he deserved it and I know some of you are fond of his art but I'm telling you he was that generation's Liefeld Who do you recall as the 80s or 90s go-to guy for bad art as far as the majority of fan sentiment? In my recollection, Heck remained a primary object of fan scorn well into the 1980s. And of course, Harlan Ellison, in his Comics Journal interview, cited Heck as the worst artist in comics; that was published in 1980. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2014 6:28:19 GMT -5
"Dog's vomit looking better" is pretty stronger than just criticism though. And some people let things go easier than others (not a big Slott fan myself (something in his She-Hulk just disgreed with me, did like GLA and Spider-Man/Human Torch mini's), though I'm currently reading his Silver Surfer. That has more to do with the art though). All among my favorites of last decade, I hasted to add. Different strokes ... |
|
