|
Post by sharkar on Mar 4, 2007 21:40:16 GMT -5
Has anyone ever seen the documentary on Roy Lichtenstein that is shown on the Ovation channel? It's shown several times a year. As you may know, he's the artist who uses comic book panels as the basis for his paintings. He was a prominent figure in the pop art explosion in the 1960s.
Throughout the documentary it's clear he looks down on comic book art and is satirizing that art by taking it out of context. To each his own. What I most enjoyed in the doc were the scenes of him sifting through boxes of old '60s comics and clipping panels from Silver Age books such as Sgt. Rock and Millie the Model. A fascinating highlight for any Silver Age junkie.
I'd love to see some documentaries on the art of Kirby, Ditko, Romita and others from the 60s. They- - as much Warhol, Lichtenstein, Peter Max, et al- -were also contributors to the look of popular art at a pivotal time. I know there have been some programs about comics in general, or superheroes, or Stan Lee, but to my knowledge there have been no programs spotlighting the work of the artists themselves.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Mar 5, 2007 14:52:16 GMT -5
To the best of my knowledge, you are correct. Of course, any such survey of these artists and their time runs the risk of an invasion of "Bam! Pow!" from the Batman tv show...
That is my one gripe about Stan Lee on television -- he himself is so campy!!!
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Mar 10, 2007 15:16:21 GMT -5
To the best of my knowledge, you are correct. Of course, any such survey of these artists and their time runs the risk of an invasion of "Bam! Pow!" from the Batman tv show... That is my one gripe about Stan Lee on television -- he himself is so campy!!! Did you see "Who Wants to be a Super-Hero?" ? Oh boy...I love Stan and appreciate all he did but that was really hard to watch. The contestants were bad enough, but Stan was at his most 'Stannish', ie. hammy and cornball. I've met him at a few conventions over the last 30 years though, most recently at San Diego last year, and he is always very friendly and charming. And even at 80+, the guy is lively and sharp!
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Mar 10, 2007 15:23:24 GMT -5
Agreed -- I've met him once in Chicago. Even in the loooonnnngggg autograph line, he was very cordial, took the time to pose for pictures (even though security strongly tried to discourage that), and signed as many autographs as was reasonable. I think I've mentioned somewhere before that one of my prized possessions is Les Daniels' Marvel: Five Decades of the World's Greatest Comics... I've taken that book to several cons and have had various creators autograph it. Among the luminaries who greeted me are Stan, Jazzy Johnny, and Our Pal Sal. Very cool!!
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Mar 14, 2007 22:07:16 GMT -5
I picked up Back Issue #21 this afternoon. While the issue looks to be its usual great read (very long survey of Daredevil in this one, along with articles on Blue Devil, Son of Satan, and Devil Dinosaur -- get the theme of this one??), what excited me even more was the advertising of two upcoming tomes from TwoMorrows.
In May, Brush Strokes With Greatness: The Life and Art of Joe Sinnott will ship. It's a 136-page tpb with tons of art, tributes, interviews, and a color section.
In June, John Romita: All That Jazz... ships in both a hardcover (208-pages w/ a color section, dust jacket, etc.) and softcover (192-pages, no color section) version. Romita discusses his life, art, and the many people he worked with. Other creators contribute their memories of John as well.
As I've said, I just love these anecdotal history books/biographies!
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Mar 15, 2007 0:06:00 GMT -5
I wish my LCS would carry the Twomorrows books. I either have to get them at cons or order them via their website.
Both the Sinnott and Romita books sound great!
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Mar 15, 2007 10:54:00 GMT -5
Let's talk inkers (I have Joe Sinnott on my mind...):
We've discussed Sinnott's powerful brush as a unifying force between Kirby, Romita, Buscema, and Buckler, and on up through Perez. What is your feeling on an inker putting a major stamp on a penciller's work?
Another example -- I've heard that during Buscema's run on Avengers in the late #200's, Big John was basically just doing thumbnails and Tom Palmer was doing more than inks; he should have been credited with "finished pencils/inks". So much of what we see in that era is Palmer. Similarly, in the current EMH II mini-series on the stands, inked by Palmer, one can certainly see his influence on the book with comparisons to his Janet of the aforementioned Buscema period.
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Mar 20, 2007 11:57:06 GMT -5
Let's talk inkers (I have Joe Sinnott on my mind...): We've discussed Sinnott's powerful brush as a unifying force between Kirby, Romita, Buscema, and Buckler, and on up through Perez. What is your feeling on an inker putting a major stamp on a penciller's work? I had to think about this for awhile. I had to go over pencillers and inkers in my head, and pull out some books. After all that thinking, for me it boils down to this: if I like that particular inkers' style, it typically doesn't bother me. Case in point, I thought Joe Sinnott looked great for FF, and it did give the series a strong sense of consistency to have him inking all those different artists. On the other hand, I never cared for Ernie Chan's inks; I thought they were too heavy, and everything he inked looked like Ernie Chan. There were times where I had no idea who the penciller was, because Chan's style so completely overwhelmed the pencils. Here's another question: what about pencillers inking their work? I was looking through some books and found myself thinking that John Byrne (for instance) generally did not look as good when he inked his own work, as compared to say having Terry Austin ink him. Are there any pencillers out there who look best when they ink themselves?
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Mar 20, 2007 12:06:01 GMT -5
John Buscema for me. Take a look at Avengers #49-50, in which he inks himself. Compare them with the issues that came earlier, by George Bell and George Tuska, and then later by George Roussos (why all the Georges? ) and Tom Palmer. And then compare these books with Silver Surfer #4, which I believed was John inked by Sal, and then later Surfer books that were inked by the VERY HEAVY Dan Adkins. The Avengers issues I mention first are where we see the true John Buscema.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Mar 26, 2007 11:13:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Mar 26, 2007 12:38:31 GMT -5
Here's another question: what about pencillers inking their work? I was looking through some books and found myself thinking that John Byrne (for instance) generally did not look as good when he inked his own work, as compared to say having Terry Austin ink him. Are there any pencillers out there who look best when they ink themselves? Well, Mike Grell´s art looks great when he inks himself. But for an inker who makes the work of others look better, my first choice would be Bob Layton. No matter who the penciller is, when Layton inks it probably will look great. Does anybody else remember the Machine Man mini series from 1984? I´m not a Herb Trimple fan, but inked by B.W. Smith the art was fantastic.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Apr 3, 2007 18:58:00 GMT -5
John Buscema for me. Take a look at Avengers #49-50, in which he inks himself. Compare them with the issues that came earlier, by George Bell and George Tuska, and then later by George Roussos (why all the Georges? ) and Tom Palmer. And then compare these books with Silver Surfer #4, which I believed was John inked by Sal, and then later Surfer books that were inked by the VERY HEAVY Dan Adkins. The Avengers issues I mention first are where we see the true John Buscema. re "all the Georges": George Bell and George Roussos are one and the same person; Bell was a pseudonym Roussos used at times. And let's not forget George Klein, IMHO, the definitive Buscema inker. GK gave JB's pencils a polished, classic, timeless look, akin to Kirby/Sinnott and- - fittingly- - Swan/Klein. GK inked most of the issues from #55-#62, and this duo--along with Roy--really established the Avengers as one of Marvel's premier mags back then. Re JB inking his own pencils: I'm know in the minority, but I'm not a fan of JB inking his own work--at least, his Avengers work. I found #49 and #50 too--splotchy? Dark? Messy? (The same reason I'm not a great fan of JB pencils and Palmer inks--though I admire their skill--I find the combo too dark, too macabre. However, Palmer suited Adams to a tee--a match made in heaven). The Surfer books--forget about the simplistic stories Stan wrote- - my God, what art. No matter who inked him: Sinnott, Sal, Adkins (personally I liked Adkins on JB)...that book was Buscema at his best. Exquisite work throughout.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 3, 2007 22:14:01 GMT -5
So, George Bell/Roussos was not unlike Mike Esposito/Mickey Demeo...
Funny you say that about Dan Adkins -- for me, he just buried John's pencils and overpowered him with blacks. Now, that may be due mainly to the fact that I've not read many Surfer issues in color (sans #'s 1 and 4) but in the Essentials... Perhaps color lightens the India ink load, so to speak.
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Apr 4, 2007 22:43:10 GMT -5
i finally got around to looking at some of these old Avengers issues. I think I agree with Sharkar; I don't like JB's inks that much. They just don't look very clean to me.
What surprised me was that George Tuska inked some of these issues (early 50's)! I don't recall seeing him credited as an inker anywhere else. I thought he wasn't bad, although there were a few instances where I could see more Tuska than Buscema, especially with certain faces.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 5, 2007 8:12:56 GMT -5
From what I've read of John, he didn't care for any inkers on his work save himself and his brother. Everyone else he felt buried his pencils under their own influence. In regard to Tuska, in researching whether or not I want to buy the Hulk DVD-ROM, I was looking at story summaries on www.leaderslair.com. Tuska inked several of the early Hulk issues (#110's-120's maybe?). But, I too, know him much better pencilling than inking.
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Apr 5, 2007 20:37:39 GMT -5
According to "The Art of George Tuska" (yes, a two Morrows publication, and recommended) , he joined Marvel full-time in 1967 and one of his first assignments was the now-famous cover of X-Men #39 (the debut of their new uniforms). He was very experienced and versatile. Apart from the Hulk books dlw mentioned, and the Avengers books Tana mentioned, I don't think he did much inking in the Silver Age (for Marvel). In the 1970s, though, he was penciling and inking on a regular basis. The GT book has a comprehensive index of his work.
I didn't think GT was the best inker for JB ; he did, shall we say, as serviceable job. And he did a decent job as penciler in Avengers #48, the debut of the Black Knight--great cover. And yes, dlw, JB was notoriously prickly when it came to inkers (though not as openly critical as Neal Adams). JB felt most inkers couldn't really draw and were just "featherers." In the Alter Ego interview (AE #15) and elsewhere, he says he didn't like Sinnott, Klein, et al. He reiterates he likes Sal inking him (and they are a very good match). Also in that AE issue, Sal says JB liked Adkins' inks on the Silver Surfer books because Adkins "is a guy who can draw."
Speaking of Adkins, I was reading the SS Masterworks, which of course is in color; and dlw, I'm not sure you would change your opinion of DA's inks just because of color (and the Masterworks' paper is very slick). I can see why you say the line is heavy, but I like the effect here. I think Adkins defined JB very well.
More on JB: I just found out that JB designed the Goliath costume Clint wore starting in Avengers #63. Since Gene Colan was the artist for Avengers #63 (in which the costume first appeared) and did that issue's memorable cover, I'd always assumed that Colan was the creator. But in the John Buscema Sketchbook, Roy Thomas says that costume was designed by John. Hmmm...one of JB's few miscues.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 6, 2007 14:36:00 GMT -5
It's a costume that's really not unlike the get-up Hercules wore in the 1980's when Buscema was again drawing the team.
I have both of the Buscema resources you cite -- they bear a second look on my part.
You also raise a bone of contention of mine concerning reprints, and that is the glossy paper. One of the reasons I do enjoy reading from the DVD-ROM versions is that, being scans of original comic books, the oft-muddy look of ink bleeding through from the other side of the page, the yellowing of the paper, etc. are preserved forever on these disks!
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Apr 11, 2007 10:05:28 GMT -5
It's a costume that's really not unlike the get-up Hercules wore in the 1980's when Buscema was again drawing the team. Ummm...actually....I always kind of liked that uniform...
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 11, 2007 12:50:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Apr 11, 2007 16:12:28 GMT -5
Argo Avengers next
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 11, 2007 16:15:43 GMT -5
In Hercules and Argo's case, the outfit makes a big H on the chest, so it makes sense, but it has little to do with Goliath
|
|
|
Post by Nutcase65 on Apr 11, 2007 16:27:34 GMT -5
I was thinking that too,... but maybe it was Goliaths way to remind himsefl of his true identity. H is for Hawkeye
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 11, 2007 17:02:37 GMT -5
I suppose it could be. And he can always give it back to Hank
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Apr 11, 2007 17:09:38 GMT -5
I guess Big John just liked drawing guys in harnesses...
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Apr 11, 2007 17:13:04 GMT -5
If I remember correctly, it was actually (my favourite ^^) Milgrom who created the harness in first place
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Apr 15, 2007 16:27:42 GMT -5
If I remember correctly, it was actually (my favourite ^^) Milgrom who created the harness in first place Shiryu, maybe I'm misunderstanding your point, but I think Buscema's "Clint Goliath harness costume", which was created back in 1969, pre-dates any similar creation by Milgrom. Not that it was original. Like many "creations", the Clint Goliath costume appears to have been based on various sources, including (and not limited to) Steve Reeves and others playing--you guessed it--Hercules in the movies; and on circus strongmen (I have a vague recollection of Anthony Quinn in "La Strada" wearing a harness). So there were precedents that undoubtedly influenced Big John. I don't have my Essentials handy at the moment but IIRC, in #74 (John's return to the book, after having last pencilled #62), Roy pokes fun at the costume: Clint is eavesdropping on two teenage girls who are staring at him and whispering. Clint thinks they're admiring his biceps (very Clint-like!) - - but they're really making fun of the absurdity of his Goliath costume. Hmmmm, I wonder if Roy thought that costume was less than inspired?
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on Apr 15, 2007 16:57:38 GMT -5
That is my one gripe about Stan Lee on television -- he himself is so campy!!! Did you see "Who Wants to be a Super-Hero?" ? Stan was at his most 'Stannish', ie. hammy and cornball. I've met him at a few conventions over the last 30 years though, most recently at San Diego last year, and he is always very friendly and charming. And even at 80+, the guy is lively and sharp! Yes, agreed; Stan may be as corny as Kansas in August . But I'm sure we can also agree that his exuberance can be overlooked, as it was his passion and vision (along with the skills of Kirby and Ditko) that resurrected the comics industry in the early-mid 60s...and it was his over-the-top personality that reached out to readers and made them feel like they were part of a community. Also, Doug and Tana (and anyone else interested in Stan the Man), there's a Stan book that's coming out- -in July I believe- -called "Stan Lee: Conversations (Conversations with Comic Artists Series)." It contains interviews by Stan conducted between 1968-2005. The editor is Jeff McLaughlin (a philosophy and comics scholar) and it's listed in Amazon.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 15, 2007 17:44:05 GMT -5
I think that those interviews take place over nearly 40 years could make for quite an interesting read -- not to mention an incredible slice of history in the comics industry! However, I wonder how candid some of the more recent comments will be, as Stan's relationship to/with Marvel has not always been sunny of late.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 15, 2007 17:46:15 GMT -5
Also in that AE issue, Sal says JB liked Adkins' inks on the Silver Surfer books because Adkins "is a guy who can draw." I was reading a lengthy article on Daredevil in the most recent Back Issue. While writing about Al Williamson, the author commented that he fit JR JR's pencils very well as an inker, because Al was no mere tracer -- he was an artist.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Apr 16, 2007 12:14:42 GMT -5
- - but they're really making fun of the absurdity of his Goliath costume. Hmmmm, I wonder if Roy thought that costume was less than inspired? I wonder who has to take "credit" for the costume Hawkeye would wear next?? Maybe Rich Buckler?
|
|