Originally posted by Lundonj
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Best Artwork of All Volumes?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Space Cop View PostThis is OT, but Lee's Harley variant for JL was my favorite cover for that month. I put in in my display case (I rotate out favorite or topical covers). He still has it as far as I'm concerned.
Comment
-
As much of a GL fan as I am, I'm realizing how much I disliked most of the regular artists, pre "Nu52". I thought it was all so mediocre. Stanton and Bright in paricular just really didn't do it for me. (and yes, Gibbon too) The "Tales of the GLC" had more interesting art most of the time (and yes, Gibbon toowith Hollika Rahn)
I was so happy that Hal came back under the hands of EVS, Pacheco, Reis and Mahnke.. Tan sucked, but things are looking up now so...
Comment
-
Ivan Reis is extremely good. There's no denying that. He's a strong contender for best Green Lantern artist of all time...
BUT I think the single best Green Lantern artist is Neal Adams. He was so influential that he essentially changed the way comics were drawn. And beyond that his stuff just consistently looks really good.
After him... Hmm...
I don't know. It actually may be Ivan Reis.
Green Lantern, to me, has a long history of having really good solid artists who do a great job that you can't complain about, yet somehow lack that extra "something" that puts them clearly over their peers and takes them over the top. Guys like Mark Bright, Doug Mahnke, Daryl Banks, and Paul Pelletier are all really good, but somehow I guess they lack something in their vision or style that puts them on the level of Neal Adams. I think Ivan Reis does, too, but he's probably the best really, really, REALLY solid guy that you can't complain about. I mean, he does amazing stuff, too, but some people like McFarlane, Adams, and, interestingly Kirby just have something extra in their imaginations that puts them a level above their peers. I actually think Liefeld does, too, which is where his popularity came from. He has something. His art was waaaay different for the time, and it was attention grabbing. He just lacked some technical skills that would allow him to manifest his imagination better. There are artists who have more technical ability, but way less of an interesting and distinct imagination. I always see being imaginative as better, because technical skills... you can just learn that. Some people are just innately imaginative and have different ways of portraying things and that's a tougher thing to learn, I think.Last edited by Star-Lantern; 12-27-2018, 08:55 PM.
Comment
Comment