• 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.

Jack Kirby art in the 1970s - What's your opinion?

76 posts in this topic

I utterly despised it. His overly exaggerated shading and shine just turned me off from anything he did. It all looked rushed to me. I like his work pre-1970s and that was the time where he was working the hardest. What's your take?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I utterly despised it. His overly exaggerated shading and shine just turned me off from anything he did. It all looked rushed to me. I like his work pre-1970s and that was the time where he was working the hardest. What's your take?

 

I was just a kid, but there was some that I loved and some I hated. I loved Kamandi and the Demon. I also remember liking Machine Man. I hated his Cap, mostly because of the issues where Cap was blind, and he drew him like an 88 year old tall skinny Mr. McGoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kamandi and Demon were great. Liked New Gods. Hated his take on the Losers in Our Fighting Forces and did not care for his later 70's Marvel work. Although Devil Dinosaur is intriguing in a train wreck sort of way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the early 70s stuff is still strong though like bluehawaii I didn't like it at first.

 

The later 70s stuff... he's getting to be an old man at this point and its not his best work by a long shot but still fun to look at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the DC stuff, especially New Gods. The Marvel was hit and miss, but I did like his Captain America Bicentennial Treasury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Kirbys work is always overly dependent on his inkers. In the 70s it was mostly Royer, who had a bit too much flash and brought out the stylistic pencilling of Kirby, losing much of the solidness and structure of whatJack was pencilling.

 

So overall-- reading them at the time after a decade of his Marvel period, I felt they were still clearly Kirby, but rendered almost in a cartoonish way, making Kirbys work look less tight and rushed, and over-styled. (Like what Colletta did, bringing Kirbys work too much into HIS worldview.)

 

Of course, at that point, Kirby had been drawing for 40 years and developed shorthand techniques that Royer was picking up on, rather than his earlier pencil style.

 

My favorite inker was Sinnott who captured the perfect mix of POWER, STRUCTURE and SPIRIT of Kirbys pencils. The bodies were always abstractly rendered in a very "realistic" manner. There was a FORCE about them, and Kirbys poses were enhanced by Sinnotts choice of lifework. Royer's -- by comparison, looked more like slick lines on paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I LOVE his 70's work. His 60's work was much more commercial, especially with Joe Sinnott who had the golden brush. For commercial appeal, his prime FF has never been matched but I really enjoyed his work with Royer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Early 70's I enjoy the art and I still love how he tells a story with it. The dialogue not so much.

When he came back to Marvel I wasn't really intrigued by anything, though I seem to remember reading a couple of issues of the Eternals and liking it back in the day.

 

As soon as I finish my two latest reading projects, I'm going to go back and reread everything by Kirby from 1970 forward for some perspective.

 

Yes, including Devil Dinosaur.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Kirbys work is always overly dependent on his inkers. In the 70s it was mostly Royer, who had a bit too much flash and brought out the stylistic pencilling of Kirby, losing much of the solidness and structure of whatJack was pencilling.

 

So overall-- reading them at the time after a decade of his Marvel period, I felt they were still clearly Kirby, but rendered almost in a cartoonish way, making Kirbys work look less tight and rushed, and over-styled. (Like what Colletta did, bringing Kirbys work too much into HIS worldview.)

 

Of course, at that point, Kirby had been drawing for 40 years and developed shorthand techniques that Royer was picking up on, rather than his earlier pencil style.

 

My favorite inker was Sinnott who captured the perfect mix of POWER, STRUCTURE and SPIRIT of Kirbys pencils. The bodies were always abstractly rendered in a very "realistic" manner. There was a FORCE about them, and Kirbys poses were enhanced by Sinnotts choice of lifework. Royer's -- by comparison, looked more like slick lines on paper.

 

The right inker is so important and Kirby's work was no exception. Joe Sinnott was really a master of creating depth with black and white design. I like Royer's stylistic flare 'flash' but looking at my adventures of Jimmy olsen tpb you're absolutely right about some of kirby's weaknesses being exposed through Royers choices. I wonder how much was a change in Kirbys pencils because when jack returned to working with Sinnott on the Silver surfer GN in 1977 it was a different look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will button hump all you mother !

 

No other comics creator even remotely comes close to Kirby.

 

He is unmatched as an artist, storyteller, and imagineer.

 

Ninety percent of the Marvel Comics Universe was generated by Kirby.

 

Ninety percent of the DC comics from the 1970s worth reading were done by Kirby.

 

Most creators were lucky to create a small handful of interesting characters--Kirby created hundreds.

 

Yeah, his return to Marvel didn't match his peak years--so what?

 

Devil Dinosaur is better than anything than hacks like McFarlane, Liefeld, etc. ever dreamed of doing.

 

Sorry for the rantrant but a man's gotta do what he's gotta do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites