I really enjoyed Leob on the Batman "Hush" storyline.  However, Ultimates 3 may be the worst thing ever written.  I think he is trying to out do All Star Batman and Robin, in terms of going over the top. 

When I got back into comics (2002 or so), I bought everything by Bendis including Powers, Alias, Ultimate Spiderman, Daredevil.  I still like Ultimate Spiderman, but the Avengers Dissassembled started to break me and the New Avengers made me drop most things Marvel after a few issues. 

JMS comes to mind, he is fine when doing things like Rising Stars and Squadron Supreme, but keep him away from long established characters.  His work on Spiderman is best described as unforgivable. 

If Joe Q is considered popular add him to the list.   

I liked Loeb's work on "Batman: The Long Halloween" a great deal.

heh heh  . . hah . . um . . how much bandwidth do we have to spare on THIS one . .

actually, forgoing the obvious self-loathing super-hero hating sound-of-their-own-dialoge loving dour british and british wanna be's  . . i'll go with Keith Giffen -- i can't see why anyone can tollerate, much less LOVE a writer who's every work says over and over "Comics are Stupid, and you're stupid for reading them"

I liked Loeb's work on "Batman: The Long Halloween" a great deal.

Me too!  And I don't normally read DC!  I picked up "Halloween" because the "mini-comic" in my Batman Begins DVD only had part of the story.  I had to find out what happened. Tim Sale's artwork was very different for my realistic tastes.  Nevertheless I enjoyed it immensely.  I think it really fit the "mood" of the story !

Back to Jeph Loeb, I also enjoyed his recent work on Fallen Son.  From what I read, this was an opportunity for JL to express some of his emotions re: his son's passing.  I think Fallen Son was tastefully done.  Interesting "application" of Elizabeth Kubler's Ross' paradigm on grief !

I stopped reading Ultimates after Millar/Hitch left, not because Loeb came on board.  I like Millar a lot.  Ultimates and Civil War were enjoyable. I confess however, that I do not enjoy Ultimate Fantastic Four.  I read it for an entire two years (long after Millar left).  It wasn't the writing.  It was that I just can't get my head around a "teen-age" FF !

Mr. Shock Treatment himself.

Peter David.

Often I think he writes a character to please himself and tell his story rather than serve the character. Always liked Hulk but as Peter David progressed on the title I felt it got further and further from the concept and Hulk, while getting more explained, got less interesting.

Aquaman was okay but I was picking up comics sporadically at the time and I didn't get every issue. Then the 25th issue came out and it was supposed to be the culmination of the 'Big Plot' that had been going on for the first two years and I blinked in confusion because I had no idea there even was a 'Big Plot'.

Though my dislike might come from interviews I've read with him, not the normal; 'I'm a big nob', stuff he might say but that bizarre way of looking at things. Like on the Hulk, the sales are going down, the character has potential to go up, he's shocked that anyone would dare take him off the character. Or on Captain Marvel where he said that when the sales weren't great he looked at himself and asked what he could do to raise the sales. I read that and started swearing a bit, isn't that part of your job as a writer or an artist? Raise the sales? Serve the character? Make money for the company? Or at the very least TRY to do that?

Not saying you have to sell your soul but using someone else's character to tell your stories and then saying your stories should take precedence over the character's basic concept just annoys me.

Yes, his dialogue work is good, and his thought processes are usually interesting enough, but I find his plots are average and even when I didn't dislike his work I found myself caring less and less about his work the longer I read it.