Page 7 of 10

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:42 pm
by Garrett Gilchrist
https://41.media.tumblr.com/3461e806077 ... 1_1280.jpg

Cover art for Marvel’s unpublished Ozma of Oz (1976). Art by Alfredo Alcala. Colored by Eric Shanower for the Baum Bugle in Winter 1987.

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:27 pm
by Garrett Gilchrist
Scenes you won't see in any Fantastic Four movie.

http://mostingeniusparadox.tumblr.com/p ... ic-four-60

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 2:37 pm
by Garrett Gilchrist

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Tue Sep 22, 2015 3:44 pm
by Garrett Gilchrist

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:45 am
by Garrett Gilchrist

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Tue Sep 29, 2015 1:37 pm
by Garrett Gilchrist
In one episode of "Batman: The Brave and The Bold," they adapted Wally Wood's spoof "Batboy and Rubin," from MAD #8 (1953). It's toned down compared to the more macabre original, lacking the creepiness and beautiful detail of early MAD. But otherwise it's a panel-for-panel recreation. [The episode, told by Paul Reubens' Bat-Mite, also included "Bat-Manga," and a story where Batman teams with the Scooby-Doo gang and "Weird Al" Yankovic.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIDcxaxNOoo

http://jeffoverturf.blogspot.com/2011/0 ... d-mad.html

There's definitely a noticeable difference in tone. Early MAD, like the Howdy Doody spoof, is often about as dark as their horror work. It's a faithful adaptation, but rather kiddie and toothless as well. The cartoony qualities distract from what would more accurately have been a pretty off-putting presentation ... Something of a case study in what censors will and won't allow!

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 11:55 am
by Garrett Gilchrist

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 1:00 pm
by Garrett Gilchrist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqcOhkEPsxg

The art style makes me ill; I'm amazed it's an actual series now. I love the basic concept of marketing superheroes to young girls, but of course in their minds that means the show has to be garbage.

My Little Pony's "Equestria Girls" spinoff has some of that same soullessness. It's crazy how little these companies think of girl audiences. They somehow haven't noticed that Disney's "Princesses" were designed by the best of the best.

What makes this sadder is, Lauren Faust [of My Little Pony] had done shorts with a similar theme, focusing on Supergirl, Batgirl and Wonder Girl. They're really neat. Nothing was done with them. Admittedly I wouldn't want a "Disney Princess" style line to be that stylized, but it should look like it was drawn by an animator rather than a machine. [The designs look good as action figures and that's about it.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob3vYWwLcfY

[Faust had also done something called Milky Way and the Galaxy Girls before My Little Pony, so the Equestria Girls team would have had a pretty good idea of how the ponies would have looked as humans, but the Equestria Girls films really lack her touch].

The line is clearly based on the Disney Princesses, but with any artistic quality sucked out of it by committee. If they'd let a decent team of artists have any say, you'd have pleased both worlds. Pretty much any professional animator could have done a better job. [You even see this in the Equestria Girls films to an extent - the merchandise designs are hideous, but out of necessity what appears in the films are a little more like the actual My Little Pony series, just a lot blander.]

This is how marketing and corporate THINK it should work, that they can just conjure these series up out of thin air based on marketing. And when that happens you get this crap, based entirely on the low expectations of quality they think should be given to young girls.

To make a decent product, you need decent artists and writers, who are fully capable of working within the constraints marketing and corporate come up with, as long as they don't suck ALL of the soul out of the project. There can be a balance, and male-driven shows generally manage a higher quality than this.

This is a product which comes out of a can, and it's DC screwing up. It will probably do well anyway, as it's done with a demographic in mind. They know who it's for, and why they want it. But they removed art from the equation, standing on the shoulders of better artists and animators who created these characters to begin with [Harley Quinn?] ....

When these exact same characters are marketed to boys, they're handled by some of the best in the business and nobody says they have to be dumbed down into a very poor approximation of the style of some Disney merchandise.

It's very clear that at no point in the development of this series was an artist allowed to have an opinion, which could have made the series appealing to look at. Better art would not have hurt the series' merchandising prospects in any way, as the series is already banking on the known appeal of these characters and a vague Disney style without any of the actual Disney quality.

http://io9.com/paul-dini-superhero-cart ... 1483758317

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 3:54 am
by Garrett Gilchrist

Re: Comics Thread

PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2015 10:05 pm
by Garrett Gilchrist