UGLIEST comic art and/or character renditions

Started by roughrider5 pages
Originally posted by Sado22
Frank Miller sucked balls in DKR. there i said it.

Do you mean The Dark Knight Returns, or The Dark Knight Strikes Again? The latter I would say isn't as good. He should have let Klaus Janson ink his stuff again - he was his top collaborator until Miller decided to ink all his own work from the late 80's onward.

I hear a lot of criticism of artists who draw in an unrealistic style. I don't think all comic art has to look like it was done by George Perez, Phil Jimenez, Jim Lee, Mike Deodato, Gary Frank et all. to be good. A lot of Rob Liefeld bashing is warranted, yes; but I can't help thinking that Jack Kirby should be getting the same treatment for the way he distorted for effect. Kirby is revered, though.
I think Steve Dillon's art perfectly captures the feel of the book when he works with Garth Ennis on Preacher or Punisher. And I think there's a difference between drawing in a cartoony style (so much of the 1990's art) versus an impressionistic style - Frank Miller, Walter Simonson, Tim Sale, Bill Sienkiewicz, Howard Chaykin, John Romita Jr. Their style doesn't always work on some titles, but most often they do.

I can still list some peeves, though. Jeff Purves followed Todd McFarlane's breakout work on the Hulk, and his characters just looked ugly by comparison; the art didn't pick up until Dale Keown took over. And Steve Ditko drew some of the ugliest faces, for a guy who worked in a realistic style.

But regular pencil art has always gotten better over the years, thanks to improvement in printing techniques and other factors.

Originally posted by roughrider
Do you mean The Dark Knight Returns, or The Dark Knight Strikes Again? The latter I would say isn't as good. He should have let Klaus Janson ink his stuff again - he was his top collaborator until Miller decided to ink all his own work from the late 80's onward.

I hear a lot of criticism of artists who draw in an unrealistic style. I don't think all comic art has to look like it was done by George Perez, Phil Jimenez, Jim Lee, Mike Deodato, Gary Frank et all. to be good. A lot of Rob Liefeld bashing is warranted, yes; but I can't help thinking that Jack Kirby should be getting the same treatment for the way he distorted for effect. Kirby is revered, though.
I think Steve Dillon's art perfectly captures the feel of the book when he works with Garth Ennis on Preacher or Punisher. And I think there's a difference between drawing in a cartoony style (so much of the 1990's art) versus an impressionistic style - Frank Miller, Walter Simonson, Tim Sale, Bill Sienkiewicz, Howard Chaykin, John Romita Jr. Their style doesn't always work on some titles, but most often they do.

I can still list some peeves, though. Jeff Purves followed Todd McFarlane's breakout work on the Hulk, and his characters just looked ugly by comparison; the art didn't pick up until Dale Keown took over. And Steve Ditko drew some of the ugliest faces, for a guy who worked in a realistic style.

But regular pencil art has always gotten better over the years, thanks to improvement in printing techniques and other factors.

I totally agree with you, but having said that, if I were asked to name some of my favourite artists, it'd be the ones you mentioned like Jim Lee, George Perez, Phil Jimenez, Terry Dodson, Steve Mcniven etc