|
CzarChasm posted:"rat queens Stjepan Sejic" Hah! I've actually seen some of this stuff before, but I thought it was just fan art! It's actually what I was hoping the comic would look like! I am reassured. Unless this Sejic turns out to be an abusive douchebag, too. 
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:20 |
|
|
CzarChasm posted:I'll have to see if I can find the posts again, but I don't think you have anything to worry about from the new artist. It's not the same, but it still looks good. If you do a search for "rat queens Stjepan Sejic" you can find some sketches he's done. Can't link from work, sorry. He maintains an active Deviant Art account. It contains a lot of full comic pages from Death Vigil. I like his art, but the Death Vigil pages haven't been doing anything for me. Still, more than willing to give him a shot. http://nebezial.deviantart.com/
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Uthor posted:He maintains an active Deviant Art account. It contains a lot of full comic pages from Death Vigil. I like his art, but the Death Vigil pages haven't been doing anything for me. Still, more than willing to give him a shot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Sejic's webcomic is getting a release from Image over Christmas, too, if you can check it out in a store maybe before his first issue of RQ comes out? I mean, you could also read it on his DeviantArt, but... y'know, you'd need to make a DA account, and who wants to do that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:I mean, you could also read it on his DeviantArt, but... y'know, you'd need to make a DA account, and who wants to do that? Me in 2003, apparently. I just never stopped following some people on there, though I mainly use tumblr for that sort of thing, now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:My LCS owner is exactly the same, it kind of threw me when he casually mentioned it in conversation, but I wager there's a lot of people who feel, or are inclined that way. One of the hardest things about working comic retail is not having a public opinion on creators. I have a half dozen dudes that love Greg Land's work and it just ruins my life every time they show up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
Opopanax posted:Love of Supreme depends on when you read it, because it's the same deconstruction Moore's written over and over again. It's cool but if you've read a lot of his 80s and 90s stuff it's not exactly groundbreaking I'm with Bobkat; I loved it and read it after reading nearly every other Moore super hero story. I also think it's tonally and thematically a bit different than his more well-known super hero deconstructions. It shares more in common with Animal Man, All Star Superman, and Batman RIP in my opinion. His early deconstruction work felt like it was demonstrating how absurd super hero tropes were by thrusting them into reality and then watching it all fall apart, whereas Supreme is much more of a celebration of the absurdity of the Silver Age. There's an Alan Moore quote somewhere where he said something to the extent of cynical superhero deconstructions were one of the more regretful trends that he was a part of. Or at least, that's how I recall it, but I can't find the quote and could be absolutely mangling it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Uthor posted:...whatever you would call Zenoscope...
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Moore's Supreme is actually pretty lovely. Once it hits the Darius Dax issue it's borderline unreadable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:It shares more in common with Animal Man, All Star Superman, and Batman RIP in my opinion. I'm sure Moore would be flattered to hear that. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:While not bad art I did drop that new Bucky series after the first issue because the art was so incomprehensible. Gaz-L posted:I've been too lazy to click the cancel subscription button in Comixology, but... yeah, I'd possibly like the book a LOT more if I could tell what was going on (though the whole 'Winter Soldier IN SPACE' thing isn't really my bag anyway. ). I'm fairly sure the letterer can't even tell. At one point in the first issue, there's a conversation between Bucky and Daisy, and I'm pretty sure the speech bubbles are assigned randomly. I added the series to my pull when it was announced because I like Bucky a lot, but then about a week before #1 came out I heard it was a "Bucky in Space" series, and was pretty disappointed. I had similar feelings about the first issue as yourselves, but I actually kinda liked the 2nd issue a lot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Is there any place online to buy back issues of physical comics? I just read Batman Eternal vol 1 and really liked it, and I'd like to be able to jump into the new "volume" starting at issue #35 because I can get 35-37 from my comic shop, but everyone says I really need to read issues 22-34 first. I don't like digital comics so that really isn't an option, but I also can't find anywhere to buy back issues. Am I out of luck?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
There's a bunch of places that do mail order. I've used Midtown Comics a few times and am happy with the service. However, I noticed that they store their passwords as clear text (they email you your password when you do a "reset"), so I make sure not to save my credit card information on their site. I haven't used anyone else (Mile High Comics, My Comic Shop, etc), so I can't comment on their selection or service. It might be easier to just grab some trades off of Amazon if you're looking for a run of issues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
Dunbar posted:Is there any place online to buy back issues of physical comics? redbackground fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Dec 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
Is there a digital version of Injustice on Comixology/Amazon that features fixed coloring?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
I bought the collected editions of Injustice on the DC app and read it on Comixology. I was actively looking forward to that panel, but it looks like the fixed version is the default now. On the collected edition, at least.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
What was the panel and what did they change?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Unmature posted:What was the panel and what did they change? There were a bunch of terrible ones during the first year but I'm assuming they mean the "Batman crying" one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Batman's teeth were drawn in the same color as his skin I think?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
BATMAN LOVE CHUNK!!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Somebody post the linework just to emphasize how bad the colorist screwed it up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Here are the fixes for print that the penciler did himself. http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/06/06/changing-the-art-on-injustice-gods-among-us/ There's a good gif somewhere that fades between pencils and bad finishing on a closeup of Catwoman. e: There are pencils for some of that stuff on the artist's Deviant Art page http://davidyardin.deviantart.com/gallery/ Teenage Fansub fucked around with this message at 08:15 on Dec 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:Am I weird in that bad art in comics doesn't bother me or stop me from enjoying comics for the most part? The only time I can recall being driven off of a book due to the art was Steven T. Seagle's Alpha Flight, with art by (IIRC) Duncan Rouleau. Rouleau's work has become something I enjoy in the right context, over time, but on that particular series, his storytelling skills were terrible; even in the panels I thought looked good, I still couldn't figure out what in the blue hell was going on. I can handle very stylized art. I can even handle bad art. But incomprehensible art defeats the entire loving purpose of being a comic book. Liefeld's art is awful, but at least you can usually figure out what's going on (admittedly, "what's going on" in a Liefeld book usually means "Abominations and mutants stand around in pin-up poses while being surrounded by words, and then later something explodes"). This is the same problem I'm running into with the current Winter Soldier book, which I actually find amazing to look at... and nigh-impossible to read. Great art, lovely storytelling.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 11:59
|
|
|
Dunbar posted:Is there any place online to buy back issues of physical comics? I just read Batman Eternal vol 1 and really liked it, and I'd like to be able to jump into the new "volume" starting at issue #35 because I can get 35-37 from my comic shop, but everyone says I really need to read issues 22-34 first. I don't like digital comics so that really isn't an option, but I also can't find anywhere to buy back issues. Am I out of luck? eBay's yet to steer me wrong. Usually can get stuff for the RRP, always bagged and boarded, and mostly free delivery!
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 14:02
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:The only time I can recall being driven off of a book due to the art was Steven T. Seagle's Alpha Flight, with art by (IIRC) Duncan Rouleau. Rouleau's work has become something I enjoy in the right context, over time, but on that particular series, his storytelling skills were terrible; even in the panels I thought looked good, I still couldn't figure out what in the blue hell was going on. One thing that I find jarring isn't necessarily bad art but a change in artwork/direction. I know artists might not be able to keep up with the workload and sometimes fill-in's are there. While this can be jarring, it is usually temporary and a bit of a necessary evil. However, the one thing that I do find jarring is when there is a long-term artist on a book who is replaced with another long term artist and the style takes a radical change. I have been reading Brubakers Catwoman run with initial art by Darwin Cooke (who I love) and the final collection has artwork by Pulacy (who I don't have a problem with outside of Catwoman) and the artwork switch is so off-putting that I find myself not really enjoying the Pulacy stuff at all. The stories are still okay (though the seemed to peak with the Relentless storyline) but every time I look at a Pulacy panel I feel sad that it isn't a Cooke panel instead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
irlZaphod posted:I added the series to my pull when it was announced because I like Bucky a lot, but then about a week before #1 came out I heard it was a "Bucky in Space" series, and was pretty disappointed. I had similar feelings about the first issue as yourselves, but I actually kinda liked the 2nd issue a lot. The second issue was super fun, and the art/paneling was VASTLY improved. I could actually tell what was happening!  I was really wary and disappointed after issue 1 too but at the moment I'm glad I've stuck with it. It sounds like the creative team heard the complaints about #1 and are going to try and make things more coherent going forward.Now, that's all well and good, but if that awful #1 layout killed the book ... welp! (Seriously, there's a subplot involving some kind of cute animal that literally never gets shown on the page as far as I can tell. I love Bucky and I love dumb space stuff so I had high hopes but yeah. If it hadn't improved I would have been off it. Which is weird, because I stuck around All-New Invaders for a lot longer despite hating the art AND the writing whereas this just had bad art.) Summary: if you're even mildly interested but stopped getting it after #1 let you down, try #2. It's good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
Madkal posted:One thing that I find jarring isn't necessarily bad art but a change in artwork/direction. I know artists might not be able to keep up with the workload and sometimes fill-in's are there. While this can be jarring, it is usually temporary and a bit of a necessary evil. However, the one thing that I do find jarring is when there is a long-term artist on a book who is replaced with another long term artist and the style takes a radical change. I have been reading Brubakers Catwoman run with initial art by Darwin Cooke (who I love) and the final collection has artwork by Pulacy (who I don't have a problem with outside of Catwoman) and the artwork switch is so off-putting that I find myself not really enjoying the Pulacy stuff at all. The stories are still okay (though the seemed to peak with the Relentless storyline) but every time I look at a Pulacy panel I feel sad that it isn't a Cooke panel instead. Even after Cooke left, they replaced him with Brad Rader and Cameron Stewart, two artists with low-key, tasteful, vaguely Timm-inspired styles, similar to Cooke's. I absolutely loved that series through #24, owned the four original TPBs (reprinted in the first two more recent volumes), and never read #25-37 with Gulacy's art until relatively recently. I couldn't take it. I sold that last TPB because it was difficult to look at... and you're right, even the stories weren't as good as the earlier material with Black Mask and the cross-country road trip.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Big Bad Voodoo Lou posted:Even after Cooke left, they replaced him with Brad Rader and Cameron Stewart, two artists with low-key, tasteful, vaguely Timm-inspired styles, similar to Cooke's. I absolutely loved that series through #24, owned the four original TPBs (reprinted in the first two more recent volumes), and never read #25-37 with Gulacy's art until relatively recently. I actually did a post about this in the Good/Bad Comic Art thread a few months ago when I was reading the last TPB. Good god, the art change was so jarring and terrible. Brocktoon posted:Just finished v3 of Brubaker's Catwoman. After the series established itself with amazing art by Darwyn Cooke, Cameron Stewart and Sean Phillips, for some reason the art took a turn for the terrifying as the last few story arcs were drawn by the team of Paul Gulacy and Jimmy Palmiotti.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
Hey, do we know Lady Thor's origin yet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
HitTheTargets posted:Hey, do we know Lady Thor's origin yet? She was on the moon, picked up Thor's hammer and gained the power of Thor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
HitTheTargets posted:Hey, do we know Lady Thor's origin yet? Not yet. If it sticks to new character formula, which is has so far, we'll finish the first arc before we find out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
It's like 99.9% confirmed (through context clues from her inner monologue) that it's SHIELD Agent Roz Solomon from the previous Thor God of Thunder series. But yeah, still no explicit reveal yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 02:39
|
|
|
TwoPair posted:It's like 99.9% confirmed (through context clues from her inner monologue) that it's SHIELD Agent Roz Solomon from the previous Thor God of Thunder series. But yeah, still no explicit reveal yet. I think Aaron's a better writer than Loeb, but Red Hulk literally appeared in a panel alongside the dude he turned out to be. Don't underestimate how far comic book writers will go for a red herring.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
Wait, how did that work?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Wait, how did that work? Loeb changed the identity. The same guy who leaked Skrull Elektra was 99% certain that Red Hulk was Betty Ross.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Loeb changed the identity. The same guy who leaked Skrull Elektra was 99% certain that Red Hulk was Betty Ross. And then they did that anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:And then they did that anyway. Truth. But originally it was supposed to be some Ranma 1/2 poo poo going on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
It's one of those holdovers of when you could keep a lid on twists, really all serial media needs to get over that and just solider on when a twist gets spoiled.Rhyno posted:Truth. But originally it was supposed to be some Ranma 1/2 poo poo going on. Less actual sex swap and more that at Hulk levels of muscle mass you can pretty much kiss secondary female sex characteristics bye bye. SirDan3k fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Dec 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:20 |
|
|
Is that also supposed to explain the missing mustache?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2014 04:27
|
|