Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 69 Next >>
Topic: Grandeur? What’s That? (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133577
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 12:53pm | IP Logged | 1  

I think the key word in Chad's comment is "nowadays". Back in "simpler times" there was nothing at all "creepy" about Batman and Robin, Green Arrow and Speedy, Captain America and Bucky, etc, etc. There were rude and inappropriate jokes -- as there were about Wonder Woman's lesbianism, or what kind of sex life Reed and Sue Richards have -- but they belonged to a minority subset of fans, for the most part. Such things were not to be thought about any more than consideration was given to how the Hulk could come down from one of those might leaps of his and not sink six feet into the ground, or how Superman could pick up skyscrapers by one corner, or how Spider-Man could clamber across a ceiling made of acoustical tiles. It was all part of the "willing suspension of disbelief".

Unfortunately, an aging audience and a major influx of fans-turned-pro, coupled with the shrinking of the marketplace, gave us a higher and higher percentage of people on both sides of the table who not only thought about these things, but felt the need to address them in the books. So there are lesbians on Paradise Island, for instance, because we have been told so, flat out. And, of course, writers cannot wait to have younger and younger characters hoping into bed with each other.

This is what makes it "creepy" to have kid characters in comics these days. The "realism" that has been shoehorned -- jackhammered!! -- into the books forces consideration of things that used not to matter. And a grown man dressed in an outrageous costume who takes a similarly dressed child into the middle of dangerous situations is extremely creepy. Because the current crop of writers and editors have made it so.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Brandon Pennison
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 June 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 472
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:12pm | IP Logged | 2  

Bravo, JB! 

 

On a similiar note to people making things the norm now is that in the latest copy of Wizard, the interview with Seth Meyers and Bill Hader from SNL, there was a quote from Hader in which he stated he was on a movie set trying to finish the Spider-man book they were writing and Ben Stiller saw him and asked him what he was doing.  He said he was finishing writing a Spider-man book to which Stiller said was pretty cool.  Hader then goes on to say that people are really ok with it and no one finds it weird that they are writing a comic book.  That is great and all, but why would you care anyway if you are writing something that is your dream?  Why worry about it not being cool to do a comic book.....to me it illustrates a similiar theme of injecting said realism into comics.  Why should anyone feel creepy about writing a dream project for Marvel as a comic fan?  Gotta diss it publicly before anyone will accept it I suppose.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Patrick Drury
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 December 2005
Posts: 695
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:31pm | IP Logged | 3  

The fans want to slaver over this Quietly freakshow, that's their problem, but
I'm pointing out how irksome it is to be reminded (via critics and fanboys) of
what a Special Artist Quietly is, simply because Morrison proclaims it and
the clowns follow on their squeaking tricycles.
----------------------

I don't know, it seems like your criticism of Quitely is a lot more slavering
than most any defense or praise of him that I've seen.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Patrick Drury
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 December 2005
Posts: 695
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:34pm | IP Logged | 4  

Hader then goes on to say that people are really ok with it and no one finds
it weird that they are writing a comic book. That is great and all, but why
would you care anyway if you are writing something that is your dream?
-------------

Why do you interpret his comments as him worrying instead of just him
reporting on what he perceives as a change in perception or an unexpected
surprise? It's no secret that a lot of the world finds involvement with comics
by adults as unusual. Seems like a bit of mindreading.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Jason Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2473
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:37pm | IP Logged | 5  

So there are lesbians on Paradise Island, for instance, because we have been told so, flat out.

Not that there's anything wrong with that. It would be wrong to make Diana a lesbian, because it contradicts what we know about the character (even with the '87 reboot), but there's no reason that same-sex couples can't be shown on Themiscyra in a non-salacious manner.


Edited by Jason Schulman on 09 July 2009 at 2:51pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric White
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 October 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1067
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:41pm | IP Logged | 6  

I agree with both JB and Andrew.

And I understand fully what Chad has been writing, I just wanted to know what Chad sees in that Quitely drawing because he assumes OTHER people are popping rods over seeing a 10 year old Robin. For him to make that assumption he must be seeing something that excites him on some level, something that the rest of us here might be missing.

I don't care about whether Chad likes Quitely's art or not, there are many artists I can't stand but others gush over. I think some of what Chad likes is absolute crap but I would never assume he was a sexual deviate because he likes to read comics about big burly men beating the crap out of each other drawn by Gerry Taloac or Sal Buscema. He just likes reading those kind of comics and some people like reading Bendis or Morrison comics. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Graham Lister
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 23
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:48pm | IP Logged | 7  

What Im getting from this thread is that most folk are only happy when superheroes are drawn in a traditional manner. As soon as someone (Quitely) approaches the material in a non-standard manner a lot of people seem to take great offense.

Im all for different artists and different approaches, I dont care for the cookie cutter approach to comic art.

I mean, these guys are non-standard.... should they not be drawing superhero comics either?

Ted McKeever:

Mike Mignola:

Sam Keith:

Back to Top profile | search
 
Graham Lister
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 23
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:49pm | IP Logged | 8  

Kelley Jones:

John McCrea

Kevon Oneill

You get the idea...

Back to Top profile | search
 
Jason Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2473
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:54pm | IP Logged | 9  

Graham,

there's a difference between non-traditional and non-dramatic. The artists you list are mostly "action" oriented. But Quitely's, whatever its strengths, usually doesn't have the sense of action, of dynamism, that makes for superhero comics that "work."

(I admit, I liked All-Star Superman anyway, but I would've preferred a different artist.)
Back to Top profile | search
 
Paulo Pereira
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 April 2006
Posts: 15539
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 2:56pm | IP Logged | 10  

Hmm, I'll take the Mignola and leave the rest.  Mignola, btw, doesn't seem all that enthralled with superheroes.


 QUOTE:
What Im getting from this thread is that most folk are only happy when superheroes are drawn in a traditional manner.

Superheroes work best when rendered in a traditional manner.  But cookie-cutting is neither the case, nor is it necessary to uphold tradition.


Edited by Paulo Pereira on 09 July 2009 at 2:59pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133577
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 3:04pm | IP Logged | 11  

What Im getting from this thread is that most folk are only happy when superheroes are drawn in a traditional manner. As soon as someone (Quitely) approaches the material in a non-standard manner a lot of people seem to take great offense.

••

Well, you're wrong.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Chris Geary
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 January 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1158
Posted: 09 July 2009 at 4:41pm | IP Logged | 12  

Let's not forget that Grandeur is not only limited to Superheroes.

Will Eisner never touched the genre and he had it in spades.  What about Joe Kubert's Sgt. Rock?

Two of the first comic artists that I remember liking, and got me seriously into the art form, were John Bolton, (from the back ups in Classic X-men - my first experince of the X-men, btw) and Barry Windsor-Smith (The Machine Man Limited series)  Neither of those are 'traditional' looking Superhero artists, in fact they draw the most 'realistic' looking people in the business, and they seemed to manage a certain level of grandeur.  It may have been more elegant than other styles but it still had that quality that lifts it from being boring.

I personally think that it comes from something intrisnic in the artwork.  If the Artist involved believes in what they're drawing, and is not condemning it, then that will show through.

Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 69 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login