It’s funny how we accept all kinds of zany styles, especially in animation. But there’s this uncanny Vally in comics where it’s too close to realism to have any fun. As goofy as my stuff is, I’ve had complaints about being weird myself, so I empathize.
I enjoyed X-force when it came out, and even followed the Youngblood train for a bit, although I was a Todd McFarlane fan myself. I had a “how to draw “VHS tape with the two of them together actually!
When I saw those memes, my first thought was this was a deadline issue. My man is overworked.
Yes! I agree with all of this! I've always liked Rob Liefeld's art. It has this interesting zany quirk to it that I'm really attracted to. Great article!
I think Rob would have remained a vital creative force for many years of instead of launching extreme studios he had narrowed his scope. By his own admission, he was too young and bit off more than he could chew. His books started shipping later and later and his hype lost steam.
Rob isn't my cup of tea, but he delivered product on time. I suspect that is part of why he's disliked, much like Jim Shooter made the creators stick to deadlines.
Envy is a powerful drug. I don't doubt many of Rob's detractors have it, in spades.
Could not agree more, thank you for articulating it so well. I unironically enjoy Rob’s work because it brings me back to drawing on copybooks in school, that sense of unrestrained imagination and enthusiasm really comes across in his work. How weird that it’s “cool” to like Kirby and Ken Landgraf but not Rob? I’m not saying rob is as good as Kirby, but the things we love about Kirby are qualities rob possesses. Anyway great pieces
I sometimes like to look through a Liefeld book. But I never read them. The point of it is not to deeply immerse into a story but to look at a wild spectacle. It's more like watching a pro wrestling match. You just go with it because that's the fun of it. It's big and exaggerated and loud and brash.
Ed Piskor's death was tragic, and Liefield's enthusiasm is one I didn't know about (I must confess to knowing little of the American comic scene). So kudos to Liefield, if I may ask I had thought Stan Lee was enthusiastic for superhero comics, why do you say he wasn't genuine about it? I'm genuinely curious as this is the first I hear this sort of statement made about him.
What Ulysses said. In the early 70s, Marvel kicked him upstairs to a VP position in charge of marketing to Hollywood. Plenty of evidence that he became a company man once Marvel was sold to corporate suits in 1968. Likely led to Kirby shutting off his creative flow, leading to letting Stan do the heavy lifting on plotting for FF and Thor until Jack bailed in 1970.
Ahh je vois, didn't know about that. I know Stan Lee helped do the writing and plotting for quite a bit of Spider-Man the cartoon from the 90s, and that he gave pointers for characterization to Howard Mackie when Mackie wrote his brilliant 1993-mid-1997 Spidey Run so that both Cartoon Spider-Man and Ben Reilly Spider-Man were basically the same character and were given very similar tone and story-lines and themes. Maybe my fondness for Stan Lee stems from my fondness for the Clone Saga & Cartoon.
Gotcha, I’ll pick them up and read them, and might give them to my brother for his birthday and then have him write some essays on his thoughts on them. Thanks a bunch.
My sense is that in the early days Stan was genuine because he wrote. He was close to the actual art and craft. But as things took off he became a marketer. That’s not wrong but it was a schtick. Rob isn’t playing a character. It’s clear in his podcast when he discusses actual comics, the storylines, the artwork. He collects comics, he reads them. He is still a fan. Like, he may not know the intricacies of the latest DC events, but he knows enough about it to have an opinion that makes sense.
Ah ok thanks for clarifying it for me. Yeah Stan Lee became a heavy duty marketing guy after awhile, while Liefield I guess is different, I didn't know that about Liefield, he seems like a good man then. Thanks for telling me about him.
It’s funny how we accept all kinds of zany styles, especially in animation. But there’s this uncanny Vally in comics where it’s too close to realism to have any fun. As goofy as my stuff is, I’ve had complaints about being weird myself, so I empathize.
I enjoyed X-force when it came out, and even followed the Youngblood train for a bit, although I was a Todd McFarlane fan myself. I had a “how to draw “VHS tape with the two of them together actually!
When I saw those memes, my first thought was this was a deadline issue. My man is overworked.
Yes! I agree with all of this! I've always liked Rob Liefeld's art. It has this interesting zany quirk to it that I'm really attracted to. Great article!
Thank you, Laura!
I think Rob would have remained a vital creative force for many years of instead of launching extreme studios he had narrowed his scope. By his own admission, he was too young and bit off more than he could chew. His books started shipping later and later and his hype lost steam.
Rob isn't my cup of tea, but he delivered product on time. I suspect that is part of why he's disliked, much like Jim Shooter made the creators stick to deadlines.
Envy is a powerful drug. I don't doubt many of Rob's detractors have it, in spades.
Another take: https://www.fortressofsolitude.co.za/the-truth-behind-rob-liefelds-captain-america-image/
Could not agree more, thank you for articulating it so well. I unironically enjoy Rob’s work because it brings me back to drawing on copybooks in school, that sense of unrestrained imagination and enthusiasm really comes across in his work. How weird that it’s “cool” to like Kirby and Ken Landgraf but not Rob? I’m not saying rob is as good as Kirby, but the things we love about Kirby are qualities rob possesses. Anyway great pieces
I sometimes like to look through a Liefeld book. But I never read them. The point of it is not to deeply immerse into a story but to look at a wild spectacle. It's more like watching a pro wrestling match. You just go with it because that's the fun of it. It's big and exaggerated and loud and brash.
Ed Piskor's death was tragic, and Liefield's enthusiasm is one I didn't know about (I must confess to knowing little of the American comic scene). So kudos to Liefield, if I may ask I had thought Stan Lee was enthusiastic for superhero comics, why do you say he wasn't genuine about it? I'm genuinely curious as this is the first I hear this sort of statement made about him.
What Ulysses said. In the early 70s, Marvel kicked him upstairs to a VP position in charge of marketing to Hollywood. Plenty of evidence that he became a company man once Marvel was sold to corporate suits in 1968. Likely led to Kirby shutting off his creative flow, leading to letting Stan do the heavy lifting on plotting for FF and Thor until Jack bailed in 1970.
Ahh je vois, didn't know about that. I know Stan Lee helped do the writing and plotting for quite a bit of Spider-Man the cartoon from the 90s, and that he gave pointers for characterization to Howard Mackie when Mackie wrote his brilliant 1993-mid-1997 Spidey Run so that both Cartoon Spider-Man and Ben Reilly Spider-Man were basically the same character and were given very similar tone and story-lines and themes. Maybe my fondness for Stan Lee stems from my fondness for the Clone Saga & Cartoon.
I'm a huge Stan fan, but he was human and he had his faults like anyone else.
Recommend a couple flawed-but-informative books on the Marvel Era of (1957-1978 or so):
Marvel Comics: The Untold Story by Sean Howe, and
The Secret History of Marvel Comics: Jack Kirby and the Moonlighting Artists at Martin Goodman's Empire by Blake Bell
Don't take either as gospel, but you can get the vibe of what what going on behind the scenes.
Gotcha, I’ll pick them up and read them, and might give them to my brother for his birthday and then have him write some essays on his thoughts on them. Thanks a bunch.
You are most welcome.
I too appreciate Stan and "Stan" the character. Any more comic book history books you want to recommend? I've been meaning to read up on that more.
If you can find Jim Steranko's History of Comics, that is a wonderful primer for understanding American Comics from about 1936 to 1970.
My sense is that in the early days Stan was genuine because he wrote. He was close to the actual art and craft. But as things took off he became a marketer. That’s not wrong but it was a schtick. Rob isn’t playing a character. It’s clear in his podcast when he discusses actual comics, the storylines, the artwork. He collects comics, he reads them. He is still a fan. Like, he may not know the intricacies of the latest DC events, but he knows enough about it to have an opinion that makes sense.
Ah ok thanks for clarifying it for me. Yeah Stan Lee became a heavy duty marketing guy after awhile, while Liefield I guess is different, I didn't know that about Liefield, he seems like a good man then. Thanks for telling me about him.