Is Michael Turner the Neal Adams of the 2000's?

[Illiterati-migration]

Say what you will, I like Turners work. He reminds me in some ways of the late Patrick Nagel, took a formula, or look if you will, and ran with it. Just my opinion of course.

 

So you admit that you just like plain-faced women? (Don't get me wrong, I've still got a Nagel... but that sort of artwork has no place in comic books.)

[nitowljr-migration]

I'm still waiting for Turner to actually provide some sequential art rather than just series of panel-sized (and larger) pin-ups like most of today's other "hot" artists.

[highlite23]

Say what you will, I like Turners work. He reminds me in some ways of the late Patrick Nagel, took a formula, or look if you will, and ran with it. Just my opinion of course.

 

So you admit that you just like plain-faced women? (Don't get me wrong, I've still got a Nagel... but that sort of artwork has no place in comic books.)

 

I don't find Turners's women any "Plainer Faced" than other artists in comics today. And saying that style has no place in comics is al little off, I suppose Dell'Otto's painted works don't belong in comics either?

 

I think comics should utilize all styles of art in them, appealing to a larger audience.

[Illiterati-migration]

Say what you will, I like Turners work. He reminds me in some ways of the late Patrick Nagel, took a formula, or look if you will, and ran with it. Just my opinion of course.

 

So you admit that you just like plain-faced women? (Don't get me wrong, I've still got a Nagel... but that sort of artwork has no place in comic books.)

 

I don't find Turners's women any "Plainer Faced" than other artists in comics today. And saying that style has no place in comics is al little off, I suppose Dell'Otto's painted works don't belong in comics either?

 

I think comics should utilize all styles of art in them, appealing to a larger audience.

 

You are actually FAMILIAR with Nagel's work, right? Static. Somewhat impressionistic. Turner draws people POSING. Adams was a master of movement... comic panels are about movement. Action. When someone just draws people STANDING (posturing, at that), even the "hottest", raccoon-eyed, gaping-mouthed, big-boobied, long-legged freaks of nature aren't going to make the pages interesting.

 

There's virtually no connection between Nagel and Dell'Otto... I don't even exactly understand where you're coming from. Dell'Otto does not obsessively sculpt impossibly "perfect" bodies ... I mean, if you want to talk about painters, I guess you could say that they are similar in that they use a similar medium? Is that what you were getting at? Hell, what I've seen of Dell'Otto's stuff has been very gritty... NOTHING like the clean lines and empty space in Nagel's stuff.

[Kermit]

Dellotto does something that i never saw from turners art: bring characters to life!!!

 

Movement, texture, expressions, frenetic perspectives/angles, a dynamic storytelling, etc... all that is the "banal" fix on each Dellotto's pages, now turner (it ain0t a bad artist) but seeing on and on and on and on the same kind of gals posing for fanboys to droll, well...it might be pretty but there's nothing beyond that, just a pretty cardboard.

 

And comparing Turner to adams??!!!!! , now that's funny...hilarious even.

[nitowljr-migration]

I just hope that in 10 years, I won't look back at his books like I do with Liefeld's and think, "How did I ever think this stuff was awesome???"

 

I'd have to give Turner the edge over Liefeld...even on one of Turner's bad days. Come to think of it, I'd give everyone this side of Al Milgrom the edge over Liefeld. Liefeld is all style and no substance. At least Turner has learned to proportion his figures since he began.

[mitol]

Liefeld is all style and no substance.

 

Couldn't agree with you more, now. But back way when, didn't you think Liefeld's stuff was hot, assuming that you were collecting 10 years ago?

[highlite23]

Say what you will, I like Turners work. He reminds me in some ways of the late Patrick Nagel, took a formula, or look if you will, and ran with it. Just my opinion of course.

 

So you admit that you just like plain-faced women? (Don't get me wrong, I've still got a Nagel... but that sort of artwork has no place in comic books.)

 

I don't find Turners's women any "Plainer Faced" than other artists in comics today. And saying that style has no place in comics is al little off, I suppose Dell'Otto's painted works don't belong in comics either?

 

I think comics should utilize all styles of art in them, appealing to a larger audience.

 

You are actually FAMILIAR with Nagel's work, right? Static. Somewhat impressionistic. Turner draws people POSING. Adams was a master of movement... comic panels are about movement. Action. When someone just draws people STANDING (posturing, at that), even the "hottest", raccoon-eyed, gaping-mouthed, big-boobied, long-legged freaks of nature aren't going to make the pages interesting.

 

There's virtually no connection between Nagel and Dell'Otto... I don't even exactly understand where you're coming from. Dell'Otto does not obsessively sculpt impossibly "perfect" bodies ... I mean, if you want to talk about painters, I guess you could say that they are similar in that they use a similar medium? Is that what you were getting at? Hell, what I've seen of Dell'Otto's stuff has been very gritty... NOTHING like the clean lines and empty space in Nagel's stuff.

 

My comparison to Nagel was not so much about similarity in their styles, but more about having a uniqueness to their work, easy to recognize. I think they both went with a "particular" look and stuck with it, thats all I was getting at. Yes comic panels are about movement, I couldn't agree more, but If you look past the covers Turner has done and look at some of the interior work from Superman/Batman, IMO he does a fine job of expressing action, grant it there are better, but I think he does some great work.

 

As far as comparing Nagel to Dell'Otto, again, I think you missunderstood, my point was that regardless of the style, painted, drawn, cell-shadded, sketchy, whatever, I think it's great to have diversity in the looks of comic books, not just your typical comic book art.

 

Hey, it is allopinion anyway, and one mans [!@#%^&^] is another mans treasure. I didn't think tis was going to turn itno such a debate...In the words of the Joker, "I don't know if it's art, but I like it"

[nitowljr-migration]

I think a lot of people were excited about Liefeld's work and expected him to evolve. It was a change from Blevins or whoever was doing New Mutants when Liefeld took over. Not to take anything away from Blevins but his stuff just didn't stand out the way Liefeld's did at the time. The introduction of "hot" new characters excused his lack of development for a while, then his ego got in the way. The rest is history...

 

I'm not sayin ya shouldn't buy the book if ya like it. I just think there are a lotta nice books out there with covers (and interior art) that haven't garnered the collector interest they should have (Golden, Gulacy and a few others) and a lot of guys like Turner and Liefeld (and a TON of others) that have gotten more attention than they deserve due to hype by Wizard or other sources.

[Illiterati-migration]

Say what you will, I like Turners work. He reminds me in some ways of the late Patrick Nagel, took a formula, or look if you will, and ran with it. Just my opinion of course.

 

So you admit that you just like plain-faced women? (Don't get me wrong, I've still got a Nagel... but that sort of artwork has no place in comic books.)

 

I don't find Turners's women any "Plainer Faced" than other artists in comics today. And saying that style has no place in comics is al little off, I suppose Dell'Otto's painted works don't belong in comics either?

 

I think comics should utilize all styles of art in them, appealing to a larger audience.

 

You are actually FAMILIAR with Nagel's work, right? Static. Somewhat impressionistic. Turner draws people POSING. Adams was a master of movement... comic panels are about movement. Action. When someone just draws people STANDING (posturing, at that), even the "hottest", raccoon-eyed, gaping-mouthed, big-boobied, long-legged freaks of nature aren't going to make the pages interesting.

 

There's virtually no connection between Nagel and Dell'Otto... I don't even exactly understand where you're coming from. Dell'Otto does not obsessively sculpt impossibly "perfect" bodies ... I mean, if you want to talk about painters, I guess you could say that they are similar in that they use a similar medium? Is that what you were getting at? Hell, what I've seen of Dell'Otto's stuff has been very gritty... NOTHING like the clean lines and empty space in Nagel's stuff.

 

My comparison to Nagel was not so much about similarity in their styles, but more about having a uniqueness to their work, easy to recognize. I think they both went with a "particular" look and stuck with it, thats all I was getting at. Yes comic panels are about movement, I couldn't agree more, but If you look past the covers Turner has done and look at some of the interior work from Superman/Batman, IMO he does a fine job of expressing action, grant it there are better, but I think he does some great work.

 

As far as comparing Nagel to Dell'Otto, again, I think you missunderstood, my point was that regardless of the style, painted, drawn, cell-shadded, sketchy, whatever, I think it's great to have diversity in the looks of comic books, not just your typical comic book art.

 

Hey, it is allopinion anyway, and one mans [!@#%^&^] is another mans treasure. I didn't think tis was going to turn itno such a debate...In the words of the Joker, "I don't know if it's art, but I like it"

 

Okay, I can get on board with you on most of that... but I'll never like Turner's stuff!

 

Except... (and you knew there had to be an exception, right? harharhar) Turner's stuff IS typical comic book art: distorted, impossibly-proportioned women AND men, no?

[highlite23]

Except... (and you knew there had to be an exception, right? harharhar) Turner's stuff IS typical comic book art: distorted, impossibly-proportioned women AND men, no?

 

OK, point taken

[Bonds25]

Just saw this on Ebay, and LOVE the cover!

 

Michael Turner Flash cover