Kevin76 Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 Here's a few I was never fond of : ASM 14 Marvel Feature 1 (love Neal Adams but not one of his best) Fantastic Four 2, 3 Batman 121 Detective 141 FF 3 is actually a nice cover, The characters just leap off the page! Pure Kirby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VintageComics Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 ST #110 - don't know if it qualifies as ugly but it's lacking a key ingredient I know this is sacrilegious but I've always been underwhelmed by Ditko covers. They always lacked an 'oomph' of some sort. He was a great storyteller though. I used to feel this way as well. But I think Ditko is an acquired taste, much like the musical genius of Jimi Hendrix, it is hard to grasp on the the first go round. The covers of ASM #23 and #24 really sold me to his brilliance. I like those Spidey covers too. But for every solid Spidey cover that Ditko drew (like #3, #23, #24, #28, #29) there are plenty of clunkers like #8, #22, #30, and #31. I can't imagine how Marvel let the cover for ASM #30 ever go to the printers. What's amazing to me is that the stretch of Romita covers that followed Ditko's work was just incredible. For me, ASM #39 to #75 is one of the best sustained runs of covers I can think of. They're not all great, of course. But I think the number of classic covers in that run is far greater than the covers that are just ok. Could be simply because Romita was shown the ropes by Kirby. What were Kirby's and Ditko's relationship between each other like in the early 60's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisInBaltimore Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 It might be blasphemy, but I actually think Romita is a better cover artist than Kirby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mephisto Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 I have a love/hate with X-Men #1 I love X-Men and it is an iconic cover…it's just a stupid one…why does Angel have a bazooka? What is Beast swinging off of? How is Magneto's powers blocking Cyclops' laser vision? And WTF is Jean doing in the background? Hey ............. why does Angel have a bazooka ? Thats an excellent question Because Angel sucks and can only fly. In fact the original X-Men suck and that is why Beast got fur and Angel became Archangel. Trust me he needs the bazooka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keys_Collector Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 Interesting thread to read through and yes i'm resurrecting a 4 year old thread. Definitely seems like the different cover art and artists bring different subjective opinions to their artwork. It does seem like there is a bit of biasing towards someones opinion whether they idolize someone (Kirby, Ditko) or really dislike someones work (Liefeld). Kirby/Ditko have some not so great looking covers with plenty of errors in drawing the human body while NM 98 is loved by many even if its not the best artwork (no its not 5th grade level artwork for all the extreme Liefeld haters out there). Imagine if people picked apart Kirby and other classic artists for their anatomy choices. Xmen 1 is picked apart at points in this thread when it's an iconic cover introducing a team with minor goofs aimed at children/young adults. Hulk 181 being an ugly cover? I love the action drawn between hulk/wolverine with the red background. Floating heads not your thing even if the art is done well? TOS39 with anatomy issues but a nice simple introduction of a new character? These examples are far from ugly IMO as are others mentioned in this thread. There is a difference between artwork not being your taste or liking and deeming it as ugly. silversurfer275 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
