• 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.

My review of the new DC 52 ((week 2 on page 5))

Started by Real Elijah Snow,

166 posts in this topic

400yrs

400yrs

Posted
Posted
Time out from all the art discussion. Has anyone noticed the easter egg running through all of the 52 #1's? There was a red cloaked woman who first appeared at the end of Flashpoint when the universes were merging. She has been appearing in one panel in every book this month. I don't know what her importance is yet, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.

 

I haven't noticed her in any of the 10 or so books I've read. Nor will I try to look for it. That sounds like something they are doing for previous readers. Whatever they do with it, I hope they don't nerd it out DC style and ruin this New 52 relaunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tool-migration

tool-migration

Posted
Posted

Back again. Don't get too excited FastballSpecial, iT's jUst me :)

 

See, now I love Maleev's stuff as well as Ramos and I thought Lark was great on DD.

 

Ramos is THE worst artist in the comic biz right now, no matter how many times Lebowski posts that "funny" pic. (Why is it funny?)

 

I guess I like to see art that isn't just comic book looking. Don't get me wrong I love me some Benes, Benetiz, Mahnke, Reis, Lee, etc. I enjoy all of those guys, but I love opening up a book and being challenged by the artwork...to have to look under the nice shiny polish to see what makes it great.

 

If you have to look that hard to see what makes it great, it ain't great.

 

There are very few things out there that look like Wonder Woman or Frankenstein agent of SHADE and I think the same can be said of Maleev or Ramos.

 

We can all be thankful for that.

 

That is one reason I like Kenneth Rocafort so much as well..he just skirts that line where it looks like comic book art, but his lack of, what I would consider normal inking, pushes it to something else. It has this frenetic energy to it, always in motion, which is why I think he is a great fit for Red Hood and the Outlaws...you can tell the action as well as the banter will be coming fast and furious in that book.

 

"Frenetic". That's an excellent description of the type of art I do not like. Frentic = sloppy. Like Joe Walsh drew it after an all-nighter.

 

I'm not sure what my top 5 would be but I can tell you who would probably be number one, just of the top of my head without giving it much though and that would be J.H. Williams..what he does with Batwoman is without equal in the DC universe..I'm not sure there is even a close second.

 

I agree, JH Williams in definitely in my current DC Top 5 list. If only they had put him on a good book I'd be buying his stuff. I was reading Promethea monthly when it came out.

 

As far as Perez goes I could take him or leave him. He is a great talent, just never really appealed to my eye is all.

 

You need glasses :baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reno McCoy

Reno McCoy

Posted
Posted

Tool, I think you're misunderstanding what dicjones is saying when he said:

 

...I love opening up a book and being challenged by the artwork...to have to look under the nice shiny polish to see what makes it great.

 

I don't think he's saying that he had to study the art to find something good about it, just that because it's not the typical, always-the-same, run-of-the-mill superhero art we're used to, he had to figure out what about the style he liked so much. He's an artist himself, and unlike most fan boys, he likes to figure out what it is about art that he likes or doesn't like.

 

I also don't think frenetic = sloppy. Some styles just have less clean line work than others. Kenneth Rocafort's art, as suggested by dicjones, is more frenetic in that there are sharper angles that present a more scattered feeling...almost presenting activity, or a bit of a crazed feel. Certainly offers something with feeling more than many comic artists out there that are just about big boobs and tight abs.

 

Anyway, for what it's worth, I think Chiang's art works for the new Wonder Woman because Azzarello is adding horror elements to the tale. I think the dark lines and shadows work for that. Plus, some of the sharper line work seems to align with Greek Gods as well as the horror aspects. For this story, it certainly fits better than something softer or sexier (something like a Dodson wouldn't work with this story at all).

 

The thing about art is that it must fit the story. I totally dig Ramos' art when it fits the book. But certainly not for all stories and not for all characters. He's got an over-the-top style that doesn't fit a more serious storyline, but is great for a zany, outlandish tale.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
john72tex

john72tex

Posted
Posted
Time out from all the art discussion. Has anyone noticed the easter egg running through all of the 52 #1's? There was a red cloaked woman who first appeared at the end of Flashpoint when the universes were merging. She has been appearing in one panel in every book this month. I don't know what her importance is yet, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.

 

I couldn't find her in Men of War.

:gossip:Page 17

Link to comment
Share on other sites
john72tex

john72tex

Posted
Posted
Time out from all the art discussion. Has anyone noticed the easter egg running through all of the 52 #1's? There was a red cloaked woman who first appeared at the end of Flashpoint when the universes were merging. She has been appearing in one panel in every book this month. I don't know what her importance is yet, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.

 

I haven't noticed her in any of the 10 or so books I've read. Nor will I try to look for it. That sounds like something they are doing for previous readers. Whatever they do with it, I hope they don't nerd it out DC style and ruin this New 52 relaunch.

She's not always that easy to find. You find her usually in the background or in a crowd of bystanders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dicjones

dicjones

Posted
Posted

I think there has been a bit of controversy over that issue if Catwoman. But personally I liked the adult nature of it. I get the feeling they are going to make this Catwoman/Batman dynamic a big subplot. Alfred mentioned something to Bruce in TEC #1 about "shedding a certain cat".

 

Personally I like the idea of Bruce being unable to resist her, it should provide some interesting storylines in Bruce's personal life. That same sort of thing worked really well in DD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
easyt63

easyt63

Posted
Posted

I'm sorry but i really enjoyed Catwoman. Is it so bad that they make it more adult? There was blood (a few of these new 52's have been bloody) and sex and explosions. I get tired of less than stellar fights and the lack of humanizing the characters. Guess that's why I love Invincible and TWD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shaven Kev-migration

Shaven Kev-migration

Posted
Posted
I'm sorry but i really enjoyed Catwoman. Is it so bad that they make it more adult? There was blood (a few of these new 52's have been bloody) and sex and explosions. I get tired of less than stellar fights and the lack of humanizing the characters. Guess that's why I love Invincible and TWD.

 

I guess my problem was that it wasnt very "adult"...adult content does not make something automatically mature. It just seemed to be titillation at the expense of sophistication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dicjones

dicjones

Posted
Posted

I thought it was adult. I know my wife has had bad days before and basically had me at the door when I walked in begging me to bleep the out of her. We didn't make it to the bedroom either. Seems pretty similiar to me and if that makes us childish I don't ever want to grow up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing