• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Neal Adams versus Bernie Wrightson

Started by dekeuk,

211 posts in this topic

KingOfRulers

KingOfRulers

Posted
Posted
I'm in the same boat as Jim. My borther and I have been long time comic readers and we used to mock Kirby and Ditko work. MOCK IT! It was hilarious. I used to wonder how they could pay someone to draw like that.

 

I see it now. You do see things differently with age. Thor was always my least favorite Marvel character and now he is a fave.

 

I don't really get Ditko. I'm still trying to. I can see the creativity and the breadth of work but I don't really see the appeal. Maybe I will one day.

 

Neal Adams blew me away from the first second I saw him. I think I had a reprint of his X-men work or something. I'd never seen anyone stretch the boundaries of comic art so immediately. The first thing that came to my mind IIRC was that this guy had no limits. He was a giant among children.

 

I never felt that for Wrightson. Wrightson was an acquired taste much like Kirby. The mood, the detail, the storytelling. It took time to appreciate. Neal Adams was instant gratification. It was like a sugar intravenous. It was instant energy. Wrightson needed to be digested.

 

I think over all Neal made the bigger impact. He is still considered a giant among men. He's the Michael Jordan version of comics. Even though Dr. J was great, there will not be another MJ any time soon. MJ was so much more than just basketball the way NA was about more than just drawing. There will never be another NA anytime soon either.

 

R.

 

 

I know I am going to get flamed for this, but here goes.

 

I still do not get Kirby art in the '70s. What am I missing? I didn't like it then and I still don't like it now. In the Bronze Age: Adams - IMHO the best....Wrightson - great stuff.....Kubert - great stuff.....Aparo - great stuff....Grell - very good, but not consistent....Kirby - yuck

 

Kirby in the 40's - 60's - good stuff, but for me, it got worse each year in the '70s...

 

Thick skin is on - so, let me have it! ????

 

Kirby is my second favorite artist of all time, but his 70s stuff...I don't like it either. Later 1960s material, I'm not even too fond of. Take FF #72 for example. Why are Silver Surfer's arm's so tubular? Kirby got hooked on creating random scribbles, and the addiction to these scribbles got worse in the 70s. Look at Silver Surfer's leg--random scribbles everywhere. Kirby also had the signature line in the center of the chin and center of the forehead. If you like the chin and forehead lines, check out his Machine Man stuff. Also, fingertips that are super squared off were one of his 1970s favorites.

 

18FF72.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cimm

Cimm

Posted
Posted
I'm in the same boat as Jim. My borther and I have been long time comic readers and we used to mock Kirby and Ditko work. MOCK IT! It was hilarious. I used to wonder how they could pay someone to draw like that.

 

I see it now. You do see things differently with age. Thor was always my least favorite Marvel character and now he is a fave.

 

I don't really get Ditko. I'm still trying to. I can see the creativity and the breadth of work but I don't really see the appeal. Maybe I will one day.

 

Neal Adams blew me away from the first second I saw him. I think I had a reprint of his X-men work or something. I'd never seen anyone stretch the boundaries of comic art so immediately. The first thing that came to my mind IIRC was that this guy had no limits. He was a giant among children.

 

I never felt that for Wrightson. Wrightson was an acquired taste much like Kirby. The mood, the detail, the storytelling. It took time to appreciate. Neal Adams was instant gratification. It was like a sugar intravenous. It was instant energy. Wrightson needed to be digested.

 

I think over all Neal made the bigger impact. He is still considered a giant among men. He's the Michael Jordan version of comics. Even though Dr. J was great, there will not be another MJ any time soon. MJ was so much more than just basketball the way NA was about more than just drawing. There will never be another NA anytime soon either.

 

R.

 

 

I know I am going to get flamed for this, but here goes.

 

I still do not get Kirby art in the '70s. What am I missing? I didn't like it then and I still don't like it now. In the Bronze Age: Adams - IMHO the best....Wrightson - great stuff.....Kubert - great stuff.....Aparo - great stuff....Grell - very good, but not consistent....Kirby - yuck

 

Kirby in the 40's - 60's - good stuff, but for me, it got worse each year in the '70s...

 

Thick skin is on - so, let me have it! ????

 

I understand, man. I don't like Kirby from ANY era.

I realize the man was a workhorse and what he did for the industry, but I hate his art.

He is iconic to me on the scale of what he did, not how it looks.

 

I'm not a fan of Ditko, either. I like him even less than Kirby.

 

 

For once, the Diceman and I are in agreement... should I be worried? :o:devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bhhooks22

bhhooks22

Posted
Posted
I'm in the same boat as Jim. My borther and I have been long time comic readers and we used to mock Kirby and Ditko work. MOCK IT! It was hilarious. I used to wonder how they could pay someone to draw like that.

 

I see it now. You do see things differently with age. Thor was always my least favorite Marvel character and now he is a fave.

 

I don't really get Ditko. I'm still trying to. I can see the creativity and the breadth of work but I don't really see the appeal. Maybe I will one day.

 

Neal Adams blew me away from the first second I saw him. I think I had a reprint of his X-men work or something. I'd never seen anyone stretch the boundaries of comic art so immediately. The first thing that came to my mind IIRC was that this guy had no limits. He was a giant among children.

 

I never felt that for Wrightson. Wrightson was an acquired taste much like Kirby. The mood, the detail, the storytelling. It took time to appreciate. Neal Adams was instant gratification. It was like a sugar intravenous. It was instant energy. Wrightson needed to be digested.

 

I think over all Neal made the bigger impact. He is still considered a giant among men. He's the Michael Jordan version of comics. Even though Dr. J was great, there will not be another MJ any time soon. MJ was so much more than just basketball the way NA was about more than just drawing. There will never be another NA anytime soon either.

 

R.

 

 

I know I am going to get flamed for this, but here goes.

 

I still do not get Kirby art in the '70s. What am I missing? I didn't like it then and I still don't like it now. In the Bronze Age: Adams - IMHO the best....Wrightson - great stuff.....Kubert - great stuff.....Aparo - great stuff....Grell - very good, but not consistent....Kirby - yuck

 

Kirby in the 40's - 60's - good stuff, but for me, it got worse each year in the '70s...

 

Thick skin is on - so, let me have it! ????

 

Kirby art in the 70's ranks among some of the worst comic art I have seen. Some of his Kamandi covers are absolutely terrible. I HATE this cover.

supespal.jpg

 

Yeah , that's a flaming Dracula drag-queen if I've ever seen one. meh

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnT

JohnT

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

Just reminiscing, Adams, Wrightson, Steranko,Barry Smith and Kaluta all drawing comics at the same time, I wish we had artists like that drawing modern comics right now for the big two.

 

Aparo deserves to be on that list. He never gets his due.

 

 

and where is Nick Cardy... Some of my favourite covers from the early seventies were by him...

 

Unexpected 134, anyone?

 

Unexpected134.jpg

 

:applause:Just picked up one of those myself.

 

Or this one...

 

Unexpected130.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnT

JohnT

Posted
Posted

First tier of the 70's:

 

Adams, Wrightson, Kubert, Barry Smith, Kane.

 

Second tier:

 

Kaluta, J. Buscema, Aparo, Cardy, Grell, Rogers, Redondo, Nino, Steranko, and probably another half dozen I can't think of right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
I'm in the same boat as Jim. My borther and I have been long time comic readers and we used to mock Kirby and Ditko work. MOCK IT! It was hilarious. I used to wonder how they could pay someone to draw like that.

 

I see it now. You do see things differently with age. Thor was always my least favorite Marvel character and now he is a fave.

 

I don't really get Ditko. I'm still trying to. I can see the creativity and the breadth of work but I don't really see the appeal. Maybe I will one day.

 

Neal Adams blew me away from the first second I saw him. I think I had a reprint of his X-men work or something. I'd never seen anyone stretch the boundaries of comic art so immediately. The first thing that came to my mind IIRC was that this guy had no limits. He was a giant among children.

 

I never felt that for Wrightson. Wrightson was an acquired taste much like Kirby. The mood, the detail, the storytelling. It took time to appreciate. Neal Adams was instant gratification. It was like a sugar intravenous. It was instant energy. Wrightson needed to be digested.

 

I think over all Neal made the bigger impact. He is still considered a giant among men. He's the Michael Jordan version of comics. Even though Dr. J was great, there will not be another MJ any time soon. MJ was so much more than just basketball the way NA was about more than just drawing. There will never be another NA anytime soon either.

 

R.

 

 

I know I am going to get flamed for this, but here goes.

 

I still do not get Kirby art in the '70s. What am I missing? I didn't like it then and I still don't like it now. In the Bronze Age: Adams - IMHO the best....Wrightson - great stuff.....Kubert - great stuff.....Aparo - great stuff....Grell - very good, but not consistent....Kirby - yuck

 

Kirby in the 40's - 60's - good stuff, but for me, it got worse each year in the '70s...

 

Thick skin is on - so, let me have it! ????

 

I understand, man. I don't like Kirby from ANY era.

I realize the man was a workhorse and what he did for the industry, but I hate his art.

He is iconic to me on the scale of what he did, not how it looks.

 

I'm not a fan of Ditko, either. I like him even less than Kirby.

 

 

For once, the Diceman and I are in agreement... should I be worried? :o:devil:

 

There was a time when Kirby was a giant. He was unparalleled in the way he displayed the universe. His layouts were larger than life and his action was fast and intense. Unfortunely the guy had been drawing for almost 40 years by the time he began to "suck". Still, there is no way you can deny his gift.

 

MarvelMysteryComics126_5R.jpg

 

CaptainAmericaComics7.jpg

 

fa1.jpg

 

AmazingAdventures1CGC8_0.jpg

 

JourneyIntoMystery83CGC5_0.jpg

 

JIM89roy.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted

Kirby was intense. His job at Marvel in the early 60's was teaching all the Romitas and the Buscemas how to layout Kirby style. The man was off the charts when it came to big scenes!

 

R.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HouseofComics.Com

HouseofComics.Com

Posted
Posted
I also drew the Batman "running in the sand" by Adams around the same time but can't find it. (It was also the modified cover to a Limited Collectors Edition I still have.)

 

And modified for a great puzzle that DC put out in the 70s. I still have it and put it together a few times last year. I think I know every piece by heart.

 

If you're going to go with panel pages, you have to go Adams over Wrightson I think. So many great pages. Look at Batman 243, so many great pages in there. Actually, that's a great cover too. I love how it's almost entirely black but he puts the stained wood floor in the picture and the reflection of their feet on it.

 

It's interesting how so many people say they'd rather have an original Wrightson page on the wall but I'd rather have a page that I have some nostalgia for and that would be one of the Adams Batman pages. Perhaps something from Detective 404.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShadowKnows

TheShadowKnows

Posted
Posted
I also drew the Batman "running in the sand" by Adams around the same time but can't find it. (It was also the modified cover to a Limited Collectors Edition I still have.)

 

And modified for a great puzzle that DC put out in the 70s. I still have it and put it together a few times last year. I think I know every piece by heart.

 

If you're going to go with panel pages, you have to go Adams over Wrightson I think. So many great pages. Look at Batman 243, so many great pages in there. Actually, that's a great cover too. I love how it's almost entirely black but he puts the stained wood floor in the picture and the reflection of their feet on it.

 

It's interesting how so many people say they'd rather have an original Wrightson page on the wall but I'd rather have a page that I have some nostalgia for and that would be one of the Adams Batman pages. Perhaps something from Detective 404.

Unless its Frankenstein I agree.Tec 404 is such a great book.Neal Adams tribute to Kubert.I have a reader copy that gets broke out a couple of times a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mackenzie999

mackenzie999

Posted
Posted
....Grell - very good, but not consistent.

 

Do people really like Grell? He always seemed like a watered-down Adams wannabe to me.

 

And nice to see all the people coming out against Ditko. I always felt his art was awkward and boring, and I could never understand why people who's opinions I respected thought so highly of him. I'm not saying ALL his work was terrible, but...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
40sJohn

40sJohn

Posted
Posted
....Grell - very good, but not consistent.

 

Do people really like Grell? He always seemed like a watered-down Adams wannabe to me.

 

And nice to see all the people coming out against Ditko. I always felt his art was awkward and boring, and I could never understand why people who's opinions I respected thought so highly of him. I'm not saying ALL his work was terrible, but...

 

I agree with your take on Grell... to me, he had a similiar style to Adams - which is not a bad thing. My take on Grell, is that he has cleaner lines, and an almost engineer or architecht's style of preciseness to his drawings. Good stuff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing