|
|
Post by Paste Pot Paul on Nov 11, 2014 17:21:26 GMT -5
As an artist myself, and because its a very visual medium, I was always one of those style over substance clowns. I bought because it was pretty/shiny and not because it told a good story, (well not entirely...I'm not quite that shallow)...
Which influences your tastes more these days ? In general, looking at the books you prefer, old and new, are you motivated by the creators ? Or is part of it the need to complete...regardless ?
When I look at the books Im most fond of, its the story, the writer that excites me most. I will follow an author more than an artist now. For example following Jonathan Hickman to his wonderful Image work recently(tho I dont like his Avengers run that much), or most of what Garth Ennis, Warren Ellis, or Kurt Busiek write, because they fail less than artists do, in giving long lasting enjoyment. I'm also more inclined to try their new books too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Nov 11, 2014 17:37:55 GMT -5
I tend to collect by character rather than by creator but only when the character is being done by creators I like. As for Art vs. Writing, I have to give the edge to Art. I can overlook a bad story if the art is good but bad art (usually) kills a good story.
Cei-U!
I summon the quick answer off the top of my head!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 17:42:23 GMT -5
Most comics I read have a single creator. Almost all of them in fact. What attracts me the most is the all around package. If the creator writes and illustrates well and the subject matter interests me.
I am more likely to check out a comic with art that appeals to me, but I am more likely to stick around for the long haul with a comic where the writing appeals to me. If it has poor art I likely won't look at it until after a recommendation or an Eisner award or something though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Nov 11, 2014 17:56:04 GMT -5
Great question. I'm going to cheat and have it both ways. I think I am most impressed by writers who are themselves artists. Not metaphorically, but literal comic book artists. Eisner, Everett, Feldstein, Miller, etc. That perfect marriage of a great story and the understanding of how to use the strengths of the visual medium to masterfully execute it will lighten my wallet every time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 11, 2014 18:01:52 GMT -5
While, like Du and Phil above, my very favorite creators do both,
I'm way more of an art guy than a writing guy in mainstream comics.
Just like when I go to the movies I care more about the combination of the directing, acting, cinematography and special effects than I care about the screenwriting.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Nov 11, 2014 18:18:00 GMT -5
Characters always come first for me and, usually, the writer is more responsible for characterization than the artist, but that's not always true. One thing I loved so much about the Wolfman/Perez Titans was how much soul Perez gave to the characters through his pencils all while Wolfman was trying to write out their innermost fears and yearnings with his words. A great comic is a comic where I know the protagonist on a profound level and care about what's going to happen to him/her next, and I'll take that feeling anyway I can get it, whether through art or writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 18:18:38 GMT -5
I cannot have bad art with a good story.
And I cannot have good art with a bad story.
But, since I'm going to look at/see something before I read it, if the art is awful, it's going to be a long road if I decide to stick with it for story's sake.
Because I'm there RIGHT NOW in Alpha Flight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Nov 11, 2014 18:22:44 GMT -5
1. characters: by far the most important if you want me to buy a comic
2. writer: if it's something new, having a writer I like might get me to take a peek
3. artist: bonus if its good, as long as it's over the Ernie Chua line I'm fine
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on Nov 11, 2014 19:14:19 GMT -5
I guess I tend to purchase comics more on the strength of the writer's name, but a poor storytelling artist will absolutely bury a title for me, no matter how good the writing may be. I'm a firm believer in that old comics maxim that a great artist will elevate the most mediocre script, but a poor artist will butcher even the best written story.
Character isn't an appeal for me so much as the concept of the book. There's some characters I do tend to always follow like Daredevil and John Constantine, but if the book isn't working for me, I'll drop it. I gave up a lifetime's collecting of Avengers after Disassembled. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 19:17:38 GMT -5
Great Story-Line by the Writer must come in 1st Place.
Then all the characters in the Story-Line must adhere by the Writer's itself, that's comes in 2nd Place.
Followed by Excellent Artwork, in 3rd Place.
That's is the formula for a successful comic book!
|
|
|
|
Post by benday-dot on Nov 11, 2014 19:46:45 GMT -5
It really should be both.. it is great art and great writing which make a comic great. The comic is a bit of a failure if the equation is imbalanced.
And yet... as others have said. A mediocre, or worse, written comic which manages to support sublime art will always be superior to me than the reverse. I can enjoy art as a thing of beauty or intrigue in itself. To a certain extant I can a well-written comic as well, but if well turned words are ensconced in hideous visual tableaux it makes it very hard for me to stomach this more obvious deficiency.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 19:57:30 GMT -5
I cannot have bad art with a good story. And I cannot have good art with a bad story. Agree on the first...am a bit more lenient with the second  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 20:13:40 GMT -5
I will buy a book solely because of the author, but not the artist. I will also avoid a book solely based on author, but not artist (one exception comes to mind). And while I'm much more forgiving of art, when I dislike art it's a much stronger feeling than what I feel towards bad writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 20:23:20 GMT -5
I cannot have bad art with a good story. And I cannot have good art with a bad story. Agree on the first...am a bit more lenient with the second Well, I mean, I'll LOOK at something that, well, looks great. But I won't buy a comic based solely on art. At least I do not think I will. And as for writers: I've ADORED certain writers on certain books because they seem to flow so well with the characters. But, I have picked up other books by the same writer, and I've just not been able to get into them. |
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Nov 11, 2014 20:47:52 GMT -5
I would distinguish between "poor art" and "art that is not to my personal liking". The former is technically flawed and/or is so unappealing that it actually interferes with the clear understanding of the story. The latter is art which, though I might not find the style to be especially appealing, is functional in the sense that it conveys the meaning of the story and the emotions and actions of the characters. I wouldn't be able to enjoy a book with poor art defined as such, but have enjoyed plenty of books where the art wasn't necessarily my cup of tea, yet it also didn't interfere with the story either. The latter group includes, for example, plenty of stories drawn by John Romita Jr after the mid-1980s.
I would add that the distinction outlined above gets harder to make when you're talking books that are done in the Marvel method. In those instances, the lines get blurry since the artist makes so many more storytelling choices.
|
|
