Nicieza X-Force returns in September!

Paul O'Brien wrote:
 > In message <20040321172926.22573.00000103 DeleteThis @mb-m04.aol.com>, The Phoenix
 > <foenix13 DeleteThis @aol.com> writes
  >> 22 pages of art, monthly?
 > From Liefeld?!
 > Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
 > Ha ha ha.
 > Ha ha.
 > No. Never gonna happen. This is the man who produces, what, 22 pages
 > of Youngblood a year? Got kicked off Cable after something like five
 > issues last time round... didn't last much longer on Wolverine?
 > Nah. It'll implode. It's Rob Liefeld project, they always do. If a
 > comic actually appears, it'll be wholly secondary to the backstage
 > chaos, which will be infinitely more interesting.

He's got a bunch of issues in the can, so maybe he is supposed to have it finished for
publication by September, it seems possible.
--
There is a significant difference between 'dignified and understanding' and 'suffering the
inane fools patiently' concerning the dregs of society.
-till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
consul DeleteThis @INVALIDdolphins-cove.com ((remove the INVALID to email))<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

Dan McEwen wrote:
 > Which is funny, because by all accounts you really enjoyed the work of
 > Karl Kesel.

The NPR newscaster?
--
There is a significant difference between 'dignified and understanding' and 'suffering the
inane fools patiently' concerning the dregs of society.
-till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
consul.DeleteThis@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com ((remove the INVALID to email))<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

Dan McEwen wrote:
 > I'm not sure we'll ever see that again. Closest I can remember to that
 > was the "On the Road" arc shortly after John Francis Moore took over
 > X-Force.

One of my most fav storylines.
--
There is a significant difference between 'dignified and understanding' and 'suffering the
inane fools patiently' concerning the dregs of society.
-till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
consul.TakeThisOut@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com ((remove the INVALID to email))<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

On 23 Mar 2004 06:47:14 GMT, Dan McEwen <dannyboymcny DeleteThis @hotmail.com>
wrote:

 >Jeremy Henderson <hellpop DeleteThis @tampabay.rr.com> wrote in
 >news:j7ku50lp4dp6t7h71mnqed6dn1j1fqh5ik@4ax.com:
 >
  >> On 22 Mar 2004 04:51:30 GMT, Dan McEwen <dannyboymcny DeleteThis @hotmail.com>
  >> wrote:
  >>
   >>>You definitely echo my thoughts on this one, Samy. Whatever bad stuff
   >>>there is to say about Liefeld's work, he still created what was one of
   >>>my favorite action books of the 90's, and he definitely improved the
   >>>New Mutants over what it had been under Simonson/Blevins. Besides,
   >>>it's easier to keep him focused on a limited series than an ongoing.
  >>
  >> Ummm...does the phrase "Youngblood: Bloodsport" mean anything to you?
 >
 >No. I read Youngblood #1 way back when and haven't even browsed
 >anything Liefeld was involved with since that time. (Unless he was
 >still on X-Force, I suppose.)

Well, Youngblood: Bloodsport was a miniseries announced with much
fanfare last July. Written by Mark Millar, it was supposed to launch
Liefeld back into the good graces of comics fans everywhere. Like all
projects Liefeld has ever tackled, he spoke of it with enormous
enthusiasm.

Since then there has been one issue actually released, and that came
out about 4 months later than originally announced. A second is
reportedly completed, but no actual release date has been announced
yet. Diamond has been so often burned by Liefeld's failure to produce
comics he's solicited they've refused to distribute it, so it's only
sold through his website or at conventions.

It now appears that Liefeld ditched Youngblood: Bloodsport to work on
X-Force. Who's to say whether he'll actually finish this project, or
something else will come along to catch his infamously short attention
span?
______________________________________________
Life's a lot like a freakshow...
nobody laughs when they leave

Come visit the least interesting blog ever!
The Fortress of Lassitude!
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.livejournal.com/users/mr_hellpop/" target="_blank">http://www.livejournal.com/users/mr_hellpop/</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

On 23 Mar 2004 06:44:32 GMT, Dan McEwen <dannyboymcny.DeleteThis@hotmail.com>
wrote:
 >yu239006@yorku.ca (Peter Dimitriadis) wrote in
 >news:c3mop3$bvv$2@sunburst.ccs.yorku.ca:
 >
  >> I was annoyed at Cable.
 >
 >Oddly enough, he became less annoying as time went on.

Amazingly, I found him leasy annoying when he was nothing like he
originally was, during the Kordey run.

-Ralf Haring
"The mind must be the harder, the heart the keener,
the spirit the greater, as our strength grows less."
-Byrhtwold, The Battle of Maldon<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

Samy Merchi <samy RemoveThis @iki.fi> wrote in message
news:Xns94B65B1DCAF3Asamyikifi@130.232.1.14...
> Jeremy Henderson <hellpop RemoveThis @tampabay.rr.com> wrote in
>
> > Charles Schulz never drew his characters wildly oddly proportioned
> > from panel to panel.
>
> I think he drew his characters wildly oddly proportioned in *every*
> panel... I mean really, a head being the size of the rest of the body?
>
> Didn't stop me from understanding what was going on.
>

I think what he meant was that the characters keep the same proportions from
panel to panel. Liefeld's do not.

- Nathan P. Mahney -
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

~consul <consul.DeleteThis@INVALIDdolphins-cove.com> wrote in
news:c3q1pp$dj7$1@gist.usc.edu:

 > Dan McEwen wrote:
  >> Which is funny, because by all accounts you really enjoyed the work
  >> of Karl Kesel.
 >
 > The NPR newscaster?

He's a writer...co-writer of the aforementioned Hawk & Dove mini series.
I think his most recent work was on Fantastic Four prior to Waid's
run.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

rah2.TakeThisOut@duke.edu (Ralf Haring) wrote in
news:4060dda4.3059599@news.optonline.net:

 > On 23 Mar 2004 06:44:32 GMT, Dan McEwen <dannyboymcny.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com>
 > wrote:
  >>yu239006@yorku.ca (Peter Dimitriadis) wrote in
  >>news:c3mop3$bvv$2@sunburst.ccs.yorku.ca:
  >>
   >>> I was annoyed at Cable.
  >>
  >>Oddly enough, he became less annoying as time went on.
 >
 > Amazingly, I found him leasy annoying when he was nothing like he
 > originally was, during the Kordey run.

Was that near the end of his series? Yes, I enjoyed the run immensely.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

Samy Merchi <samy DeleteThis @iki.fi> wrote in message
news:Xns94B669B2AFB92samyikifi@130.232.1.14...
> "Nathan P. Mahney" <nmahney DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in
>
> > I think what he meant was that the characters keep the same
> > proportions from panel to panel. Liefeld's do not.
>
> While I certainly won't dispute that, I would dispute that detail's
> importance. The casual reader won't care one whit if the head fluctuates
> between 1/8 and 1/10 of body length. The casual reader won't even
*notice*.
> Besides, lots of more surreal artists (Bodganove, Sienkiewicz et al.)
> fluctuate proportions for effect all the time and don't get called on it.
> Heck, a classic cartoon effect that you've no doubt seen many times over
is
> the whole 'eyes bulging out' (quite literally), which is an exaggeration
of
> anatomy in one panel (or a few seconds of moving pictures) in order to
> create an effect. You'll notice any number of cartoons, comics and comic
> strips using proportion deviation all the time.
>
> At the other spectrum, you have artists who draw *everything* *the same*,
> *always*, and do everything so precisely that you almost wonder if they
use
> a measuring stick to check the proportions of every figure in every panel
> down to fractions of inches.
>
> Neither approach is wrong. They're simply different. I've found artists
who
> please my eye in both fluctuating proportions and precise proportions, and
> I've found artists who *don't* please my eye in both fluctuating
> proportions and precise proportions.
>
> Having the proportions down to precision doesn't make art *pleasing* any
> more than fluctuating proportions makes it *displeasing*. The pleasure is
> all up to individual tastes.
>

While I do have some issues with Liefeld's use of proportion, that's not my
main problem with his art. I actually like his art, in the same way that I
like a lot of bad movies. But I hate the inconsistencies that occur from
panel to panel. One example of this is New Mutants #91. On one page,
Rictor is wearing a leather jacket with his chest bare underneath. On the
next he is wearing a white singlet, with no jacket. On the page after that,
the jacket's back and the singlet is gone. It's not a crippling flaw, but
it annoys the hell out of me.

That said, Liefeld's art is not completely without merit. It's distinctive,
dynamic and full of energy. I just hope that this time he can finish the
whole series. And by that I don't mean having Marat Michaels ghosting every
three or four!

- Nathan P. Mahney -
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

In article <Xns94B669B2AFB92samyikifi.DeleteThis@130.232.1.14>,
Samy Merchi <samy.DeleteThis@iki.fi> wrote:

>While I certainly won't dispute that, I would dispute that detail's
>importance. The casual reader won't care one whit if the head fluctuates
>between 1/8 and 1/10 of body length. The casual reader won't even *notice*.
>Besides, lots of more surreal artists (Bodganove, Sienkiewicz et al.)
>fluctuate proportions for effect all the time and don't get called on it.

The difference you seem to be missing is that of intentional, stylistic
distortion (Sienkiewicz) and a simple inability to draw (Liefield).

I've always said that after the dark ages of Blevins on _New Mutants_,
Liefield's art was (at the time) a breath of fresh air. But whatever
dynamic, exciting qualities his art may have possessed were quickly
overwhelmed by the innumerable problems it also possessed (no feet,
no backgrounds, impossible anatomy, inconsistent perspective, no ability
to keep minor details like whether a character is wearing a shirt or not
consistent from panl to panel...).

This IS NOT a taste or style argument. Liefield's art is objectively bad.

JRjr
--
%%%%% Jerry B. Ray, Jr. %%%%%%%% www.prism.gatech.edu/~jr70 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
"Some will shake off the sloth of faithlessness
While others simply languish in their sleep
Me, I just fight to stay awake..." -- VOL, "Black Cloud O'er Me"
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

In article <c3s8i0$2bt24k$1@ID-195503.news.uni-berlin.de>,
Marc-Oliver Frisch <Derschwarm.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> This IS NOT a taste or style argument. Liefield's art is objectively bad.

>Paul can show it with graphs, I'm sure.

Exactly.

JRjr
--
%%%%% Jerry B. Ray, Jr. %%%%%%%% www.prism.gatech.edu/~jr70 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
"Some will shake off the sloth of faithlessness
While others simply languish in their sleep
Me, I just fight to stay awake..." -- VOL, "Black Cloud O'er Me"
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

In article <Xns94B6DF1803464samyikifi.DeleteThis@130.232.1.14>,
Samy Merchi <samy.DeleteThis@iki.fi> wrote:

>> The difference you seem to be missing is that of intentional,
>> stylistic distortion (Sienkiewicz) and a simple inability to draw
>> (Liefield).

>I'm not missing it. I either think it's an insignificant difference, or a
>nonexistent one. Without being telepathic, it's difficult to know, after
>all, whether Liefeld intends his distortions or not.

You may think it's insignificant, but it's certainly not nonexistent.

I think I'm reasonably safe in concluding that Liefeld is just a bad artist,
rather than an incredibly talented, yet unconventional artist who has made
it his life's work to explore the boundaries of the medium by producing
intentionally bad work in some sort of avant garde experiment in
storytelling, if only because Liefeld has never shown any ability to
produce work that CAN be objectively described as technically proficient
or "good."

>Intentionality does not affect the pleasure derived from art. If somebody
>does a piece I find ugly, it sure as hell won't be saved by the merit of
>being intentionally exaggerated. The contrary is also true: if somebody
>does a piece I *don't* find ugly, it won't be ruined by the merit of it
>being accidental, rather than intentional.

I'm not arguing that you don't, can't, or shouldn't enjoy Liefeld's work.
I'm glad you like it; whatever floats your boat, y'know? But just because
you like his stuff, that doesn't mean that he's not an objectively bad
artist. Nearly everything he produces is testament to the fact that he's
a bad comic book artist.

>I find it amusing how people always keep bringing up the shirt incident.
>Were there other similar errors made? It almost makes it seem like there
>never were any other such errors, if the amount people keep harping on
>the 'shirt gaffe' is anything to judge by.

I only brought it up because it was mentioned earlier today. Yeah,
there are plenty of things like that in his work. The first issue
of his Heroes Reborn _Captain America_ series was full of these sorts of
errors. Gloves appearing and disappearing from panel to panel, the shape
and location of a window changing from panel to panel, the arrangement of
furniture in a room changing from panel to panel. It's typical, textbook
Liefeld. (Just use Google Groups and you can find a few posts from back
then detailing all of the errors in the artwork in the various books Liefeld
drew.)

>Similarly, backgrounds. In this issue at least, I found the backgrounds
>quite sufficient for me.

I haven't read the new book yet, but if you peruse his older work,
you'll find an awful lot of figures posed in front of blank backgrounds.
(Of course, I'm of the opinion that the less Liefeld draws, the better -
he has fewer opportunities to screw stuff up that way. So maybe his
general tendency to avoid drawing backgrounds is a blessing, rather than
a curse.)

>I've addressed the anatomy in another part of this thread. I don't feel I
>can comment on the perspective because I'm just a reader, not an artist,
>and that's a technical thing I don't know anything about.

I'm not an artist, either, but I do know which way my neck can bend, what
my arm looks like when I hold it in front of me and look in the mirror, and
stuff like that. I recall the "refrigerator chest" Captain America promo
art piece from Heroes Reborn with great amusement.

>> This IS NOT a taste or style argument. Liefield's art is objectively
>> bad.

>I disagree.

Well, you're wrong. You like his stuff, that's fine. I, too, like the
work of some artists, writers, and musicians that most people find cheesy.
There's nothing wrong with enjoying his work, but you're fighting a losing
battle when you try to say that he doesn't produce bad work. The facts
are there on every page.

>I think Liefeld is merely being used as a scapegoat and focal
>point for many peoples' loathing for what comics became in the early 90s.

That may be true, but that's not what I'm doing. On its own merits, his
work is poor.

JRjr
--
%%%%% Jerry B. Ray, Jr. %%%%%%%% www.prism.gatech.edu/~jr70 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
"Some will shake off the sloth of faithlessness
While others simply languish in their sleep
Me, I just fight to stay awake..." -- VOL, "Black Cloud O'er Me"
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September! 

On 24/3/04 8:30 pm, in article c3sr4r$2s$1@news-int.gatech.edu, "Jerry B.
Ray, Jr." <jr70 DeleteThis @prism.gatech.edu> wrote:

> In article <Xns94B6DF1803464samyikifi DeleteThis @130.232.1.14>,
> Samy Merchi <samy DeleteThis @iki.fi> wrote:
>
>> I find it amusing how people always keep bringing up the shirt incident.
>> Were there other similar errors made? It almost makes it seem like there
>> never were any other such errors, if the amount people keep harping on
>> the 'shirt gaffe' is anything to judge by.
>
> I only brought it up because it was mentioned earlier today. Yeah,
> there are plenty of things like that in his work.

My comic-book collection contains approx. 3 pages of Liefeld art -- in
Supreme: The Return 6 -- and I found an error in them. (The V on Supreme's
costume is across his pecs in one panel, and under them in another.)


--
James Moar
 >> Stay informed about: Nicieza X-Force returns in September!