|
Ghostlight posted:To be fair, it's an imaginary snake god. They're comic writers, imagination is their primary attack.
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 08:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
^^^ I like Alan Moore as weird old non-comics person because that's kind of his whole point and it inherits a lot from Aleister Crowley style magicka.I Before E posted:Aren't they all? quote:Now, the only references there are to him, which are very disparaging, are in the works of the philosopher Lucien… Lucien explains that the whole Glycon cult was an enormous fraud, and that Glycon was a glove puppet. And I’ve got no reason to disbelieve that whatsoever. It sounds absolutely true, that yeah, the false prophet Alexander, who was the person putting on the Glycon show, had a large tame boa constrictor and he had the head of it tucked under his arm and draped over his shoulder he had a speaking tube that had been designed to look like this inhuman longhaired snake’s head with articulated jaws so that it would seem to speak. Yeah, that sounds about right. [chuckles] Of course, to me, I think that’s perfect. If I’m gonna have a god I prefer it to be a complete hoax and a glove puppet because I’m not likely to start believing that glove puppet created the universe or anything dangerous like that. Ghostlight fucked around with this message at 09:28 on Feb 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
New Gods?? Hippies?? There is no way that Moore and Kirby did not get on crazy well together.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 09:32
|
|
|
Waterhaul posted:New Gods?? Hippies?? Agreed. I have a nearly irrational dislike for Moore, and I would still love to be a fly on the wall of their conversation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 09:38
|
|
|
From the Spider-Man thread: J Scott Campbell, cheesecake and terrible work ethics!Alien Rope Burn posted:I do like Ramos, but in any case Ramos can at least finish what he start. (J Scott Campbell) is flaky as gently caress, and I remain puzzled at how he makes it as a comic artist. I guess there's a big secondary market for squishy boobs out there. Funny people should mention Humberto Ramos, though! He, Campbell and Madureira had a Wildstorm imprint called "Cliffhanger!" where they would self-publish their books Crimson, Danger Girl and Battle Chasers, respectively. It went... less than stellar. JCS managed to squeeze out seven issues of Danger Girl in three years time (issue #7 delayed a full year), Joe Madureira did nine issues (3.5 years, issue #7 delayed 16 months) and then walked away without resolving the story. Ramos, who weren't exactly hot poo poo like Madureira, was probably known most for his Impulse pencils. In Wizard Magazine, he developed something of a reputation as "The Cliffhanger! guy who is on time", putting out 24 issues and a special of Crimson in 34 months time (and issue #7 on time!).
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 10:44
|
|
|
I was a big fan of all three in my teens, but now I think only Madureira is a decent ex-Cliffhanger artist. He was a good fit on video games with the Darksiders franchise, which had amazing designs (save for some silly cheesecake). Pauldrons! Pity that he decided to go back to comics and sleep on the deadlines once again. People who read Tarot and Zenescope poo poo are weird. If you confront them about their strange entertainment choices, they are going to insist that they are only in for the "fresh take on the stories" and "awesome art". Read franco-belgian comics, jeez, at least the art is good and there is actual sex happening on the pages. And you also can pretend to be a connoisseur while jacking off to Manara's Borgia!
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 11:10
|
|
|
I have to wonder if artists that reach the "covers only" status tend to stagnate. Like with JSC, he doesn't need to stretch himself, he often just needs to draw the same woman over and over and put a new hairdo and outfit on her, and call it a day. It should be noted that Ramos had a second series through Cliffhanger, Out There, which lasted 18 issues. There were actually a good number of books put out under Cliffhanger, but most of them are utterly forgotten... or a Ramos book. Guy literally put out over a third of the imprint's published books, or at least the art therein. I like Ramos' creator-owned stuff more, it's a little disappointing to see him doing company work again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
Now that I think of it, I don't think I've ever heard anybody actually badmouth Kirby. I'm sure a few people have called him overrated (Kevin Smith apparently did recently, but what Kev doesn't know when it comes to comics could just about fill the fuckin' grand canyon, to use one of his lines of dialogue against him). But I've never heard somebody knock Jack as a man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
When Kirby's on top he's incredible. But he's also made stuff that seems very low-effort. That's not necessarily a knock against the man, as that happens to all writers/artists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 14:59
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:When Kirby's on top he's incredible. But he's also made stuff that seems very low-effort. That's not necessarily a knock against the man, as that happens to all writers/artists. I've been told that you should judge an artist on their best work. So if Picasso threw together a lovely painting while hung over one morning, you wouldn't use that as evidence that he was a lovely painter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
It's also hard to tell if it was actually Kirby phoning it in or a lovely inking or coloring.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
Kirby's output was so prolific, at times putting out five comics a month, that some misses are inevitable - nobody talks about those early X-Men issues in glowing terms, for example. But it's hard to understate just how powerful his art style it was in those early days of Marvel, where most DC books where drawn in wooden poses, Kirby was actively trying to do a more dynamic style that focused more on action than figures. And though that seems like the obvious thing to do now, it's because we grew up with it. Whether or not you think Kirby work holds up today, it has great historic importance to comic books and defined Marvel as a superhero comic book publisher. I mean, I'm trying to imagine what Marvel would have been without Kirby - I just can't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
El Gallinero Gros posted:Now that I think of it, I don't think I've ever heard anybody actually badmouth Kirby. I'm sure a few people have called him overrated (Kevin Smith apparently did recently, but what Kev doesn't know when it comes to comics could just about fill the fuckin' grand canyon, to use one of his lines of dialogue against him). But I've never heard somebody knock Jack as a man. I'm a giant Kirby fan so I'll say a few negative things about him. His high work rate meant that he got locked into the six panel layout design. There were a lot of times when he seemed to be phoning it in including a period known as "the 1950's". He really needed a collaborator to help keep the writing on track. The work for hire lawsuit was poorly conceived; no matter what you think of how comic book companies used to manage their writers and artists, Kirby's situation was cut and dry.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
El Gallinero Gros posted:Now that I think of it, I don't think I've ever heard anybody actually badmouth Kirby. I'm sure a few people have called him overrated (Kevin Smith apparently did recently, but what Kev doesn't know when it comes to comics could just about fill the fuckin' grand canyon, to use one of his lines of dialogue against him). But I've never heard somebody knock Jack as a man. When he and Stan were having it out over Stan not giving credit to Kirby for character creations, Kirby got a bunch of creators behind him for support. However, Kirby started to go overboard and started claiming credit for Spider-man as well. This led to people cautiously backing away from the fight. This is the closest I've seen anyone ever badmouthing Kirby.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Alien Rope Burn posted:Whether or not you think Kirby work holds up today, it has great historic importance to comic books and defined Marvel as a superhero comic book publisher. I mean, I'm trying to imagine what Marvel would have been without Kirby - I just can't. If I drew Galactus I would have second guessed myself and assumed I was stupid, and I couldn't have been more wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Who else could have drawn Galactus' hat, realized that it looked AWESOME, and have been RIGHT? Evidently it's still too awesome to put in a film, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:Evidently it's still too awesome to put in a film, though. Well, they'd have to make a Fantastic 4 movie, first. And they've never done that! NO THEY HAVEN'T SHUT UP
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:He really needed a collaborator to help keep the writing on track. His DC works says otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
Yeah, Kirby was at his best when his work was unrestrained and insane.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
I actually disagree and think he needed a collaborator. Not that his unrestrained Fourth World stuff wasn't great, but it's so sprawling and out of control that too often it's hard to follow where he was going with it. And forget about any effort made in keeping things focused outside the capes, whether it be regular folks, or just secret identities (of which he could not possibly come up with reasonable names for. If he had created Superman, he'd have his dayjob be as mild-mannered Steve Uperman.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
Some of Kirby's solo stuff is a bit ehhhh (I just read his '70s Captain America run and it's very hit-or-miss), but Fourth World, The Demon and OMAC are some of the most amazing comics in the history of the medium.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:I reserve judgement, but I meant like objectively even for Alan Moore. I was sure you were setting up for that Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow joke.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Some of Kirby's solo stuff is a bit ehhhh (I just read his '70s Captain America run and it's very hit-or-miss), but Fourth World, The Demon and OMAC are some of the most amazing comics in the history of the medium.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:His DC works says otherwise. While it was full of incredible ideas and terrific images, it was also lost from a story telling perspective. I don't think he needed Stan Lee sitting on his shoulder or anything extreme, just someone who could say, "That's great, Jack. Now let's turn it into a story."
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:While it was full of incredible ideas and terrific images, it was also lost from a story telling perspective. I don't think he needed Stan Lee sitting on his shoulder or anything extreme, just someone who could say, "That's great, Jack. Now let's turn it into a story." Huh, a more streamlined, coherent and on-point version of what I was trying to say. Ironic, really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
But you're suggesting this ideal situation where there is a collaborator who is completely on-board with Kirby's crazy. I mean it would be great if there was someone who totally appreciated OMAC while also heightening it and ironing out certain aspects of it, but I think that person is hard to find in 1974. For me, the appeal of Kirby is that he just tries poo poo out. His sense of exploration and lack of any real second drafts is what makes those comics great. They're flawed, weird, and often hard to penetrate, but the creativity of it all is worth it. And I don't really agree with the assertion that Kirby wasn't creating stories. His DC work still has story structure. It's not just waves of ideas on the page. Bad Kirby is mostly defined by him just not fitting a project like his Losers run.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
I picked up some animal variants and realized they still come with digital codes. Help yourselves! TMAPFGTP85KF-Punisher #1 TMAI83USAWEX-GotG #11 + Digital Collection TMAA3S4M4FBX-All-New X-Men #22 + Digital Collection
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
Senor Candle posted:I picked up some animal variants and realized they still come with digital codes. Help yourselves! The last two, at least, have already been redeemed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
Or is it Sputnik posted:From the Spider-Man thread: J Scott Campbell, cheesecake and terrible work ethics! I don't mind Campbell's style. Sure, the women are perfectly figured, but so is everyone else in comics. I mean, there's a point when you have to go "is this really worth getting mad at" and then going and reading a story about men shooting lasers from their eyes/fingers/chest/organ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
Is "perfectly figured" a euphemism for "unattainable in real life without making yourself look like an extraterrestrial real doll" now?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Chaos Hippy posted:Is "perfectly figured" a euphemism for "unattainable in real life without making yourself look like an extraterrestrial real doll" now? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Chaos Hippy posted:Is "perfectly figured" a euphemism for "unattainable in real life without making yourself look like an extraterrestrial real doll" now? That is the goal to which the fashion industry aspires.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Making overly statements of "well other mediums or art are sexist so..." just leads to terrible strawman territory. J Scott Campbell is a terrible artist who draws women that look like real dolls that even Greg Land is jealous of his ability. There are plenty of good cheesecake artists in the world and even great artists and writers who got their start doing porn. Brandon Graham is one of the best dudes around but I'm not going to pretend that he didn't do porn comics or Multiple Warheads doesn't get it's name from the fact that the main characters boyfriend has two dicks. Emma Rios and Becky Cloonan both draw "sexy" characters without being exploitative. It can be done, Campbell just ain't the dude. And all that aside, even if Campbell was the next Milo Manara, which he sure as hell ain't, neither belong on Marvel books.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 10:38
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:And you also can pretend to be a connoisseur while jacking off to Manara's Borgia! It takes a...dedicated mind to jack off to Borgia:  http://imgur.com/oNItMCY
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
You guys having the same avatar confused the hell out of me. I was wondering why this crazy person was arguing with himself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:You guys having the same avatar confused the hell out of me. I was wondering why this crazy person was arguing with himself. Crazy people often argue with themselves. It's a thing they do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
Waterhaul posted:And all that aside, even if Campbell was the next Milo Manara, which he sure as hell ain't, neither belong on Marvel books.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 02:09
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:I was wondering why this crazy person was arguing with himself. I get that a lot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:Manara would be amazing on a Marvel book if he could keep up the page rate. Has he done much US/mainstream comic work? I recall him doing that Desire story in Sandman: Endless Nights, but I can't recall running into anything else by him that wasn't straight up filled with lots of sexing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 15:59 |
|
|
He did a one-shot with Chris Claremont called X-Women, about the titular X-Women having some weird adventure (Rogue inherited a yacht or some nonsense). Not much in the way of plot or story, it was clearly just Claremont setting up Manara for cheesecake panels, and all the women having the exact same face with different hair and skin tones got distracting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 04:01
|
|