Worst modern covers ever 3 3

[SquareChaos]

I've seen worse examples of Kirby perspective than that Larsen cover.

 

Yeah. Like I said, for Larsen... not really that bad, it doesn't really belong here.

[Aweandlorder]

....there's already a thread for "Worst modern covers ever"...... it's called "Celebrate Dell 'Otto" GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

[Aweandlorder]

That may be the worst thing I've ever seen.

 

It deserves to exist in the thread as an image.

 

 

 

Jesus. When I saw this cover, I actually thought it was a joke. I just.....don't get it....on any level. I've heard Miller's health has been an issue, so did he draw this on some sort of substance??? All I can think is that he really needed his painkillers for a time--even throughout some deadlines.

 

This is for me, by far, the absolute worst specimen of cover art I think I've ever seen.

 

--Funny thing is, no one wants it---in 10 years...and perhaps after Miller passes away, this will be a huge piece to own.......but a piece of what???

 

You think?

Take a look here:

Miller

 

And for some highlights here:

Darkseid

 

Thanos

[bcphillips119]

....there's already a thread for "Worst modern covers ever"...... it's called "Celebrate Dell 'Otto" GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

Hahahah woah those are fighting words to some.

[SquareChaos]

In my opinion, those Miller references are not in the same league of awful as that WW Lone Wolf & Cub inspired terribleness.

 

This recent auction sketch surprised me a tiny bit, but if I recall, the seller got less than they'd paid for it previously... that is a bit hazy, but I think that's right.

 

 

 

[drotto]

In my opinion, those Miller references are not in the same league of awful as that WW Lone Wolf & Cub inspired terribleness.

 

This recent auction sketch surprised me a tiny bit, but if I recall, the seller got less than they'd paid for it previously... that is a bit hazy, but I think that's right.

 

 

 

What the hell is that thing?

[SquareChaos]

In my opinion, those Miller references are not in the same league of awful as that WW Lone Wolf & Cub inspired terribleness.

 

This recent auction sketch surprised me a tiny bit, but if I recall, the seller got less than they'd paid for it previously... that is a bit hazy, but I think that's right.

 

 

 

What the hell is that thing?

 

That would be Elektra. It sold for $3,400 on ComicLink.

[drotto]

In my opinion, those Miller references are not in the same league of awful as that WW Lone Wolf & Cub inspired terribleness.

 

This recent auction sketch surprised me a tiny bit, but if I recall, the seller got less than they'd paid for it previously... that is a bit hazy, but I think that's right.

 

 

 

What the hell is that thing?

 

That would be Elektra. It sold for $3,400 on ComicLink.

 

I have friends that lover Miller, and have seen The Dark Knight 1 in person, but to each their own I guess.

[rjrjr]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

[newshane]

Good god, what TF happened to Larsen???

 

 

What the hell is that!?

 

1. He even inked that, so there's no one else to blame

 

2. I never liked Larsen personally, this doesn't look 'that bad' for him in my opinion

 

If you want to see Larsen at his worst, check out the interiors of Spawn from last year.

[SquareChaos]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Everything you are saying is why Frank remains one of my heroes. His work (with Janson) on Daredevil, contrasted with his style in Sin City... it's awesome that the same artist had such range. But this?

 

He's often drawn square, exaggerated certain proportions, and had masterful use of negative space, but what we recently see, in my opinion, is a failure to have those various techniques flow together in a single image. They're still there, but one of them (typically the exaggerated proportions) jars from the rest in a way that not only prevents it from being aesthetically pleasing, but makes it downright distasteful. And yes, I know sometimes artists want you to feel that way, but what indication in the context of the image hints that we should feel distasteful? There typically isn't any... and that is the problem.

[Aweandlorder]

2 things.. First is that Miller is a major player in comic book history. Period.

Some would go as far as saying that he was the main inspiration behind Tim Burton's 1st batman movie. No one can undermine the man's talent and achievements as an artist and storyteller

and because of that...

Second, He can mess on a canvas and call it art.

Not to say that he does. but his credibility and influence allows him to express himself as he see fits

 

 

[SquareChaos]

2 things.. First is that Miller is a major player in comic book history. Period.

Some would go as far as saying that he was the main inspiration behind Tim Burton's 1st batman movie. No one can undermine the man's talent and achievements as an artist and storyteller

and because of that...

Second, He can mess on a canvas and call it art.

Not to say that he does. but his credibility and influence allows him to express himself as he see fits

 

 

Artistic works get judged, that's how it works. No resting on your laurels.

 

This doesn't take away from his previous accomplishments, as I've said, the man is a personal artistic hero to me, but most of what he does now (again, in my opinion) is terrible.

[Ken Aldred]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Sad to say, Neal Adams. There's often a similar comparison and criticism of his peak 70s work with his modern era art style. That said, he can still do some really brilliant commissions.

 

[rjrjr]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Sad to say, Neal Adams. There's often a similar comparison and criticism of his peak 70s work with his modern era art style. That said, he can still do some really brilliant commissions.

 

Has Neal Adams' art changed much over the years? I know his recent TFA cover is reminiscent of his work from the 70s:

 

http://swcomiccollector.blogspot.com/2016/11/modern-marvel-star-wars-force-awakens-1.html

 

 

Any examples of current work showing his range?

Edited January 15, 2017 by rjrjr

[Aweandlorder]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Sad to say, Neal Adams. There's often a similar comparison and criticism of his peak 70s work with his modern era art style. That said, he can still do some really brilliant commissions.

 

Has Neal Adams' art changed much over the years? I know his recent TFA cover is reminiscent of his work from the 70s:

 

http://swcomiccollector.blogspot.com/2016/11/modern-marvel-star-wars-force-awakens-1.html

 

 

Any examples of current work showing his range?

 

I cant think of any artist's work that has improved after their success. You can throw Art Adams, Mike Golden in there as well..

Actually Adam Hughes is probably the only one I can think of... But he mainly just does covers now so cant really compare

[SquareChaos]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Sad to say, Neal Adams. There's often a similar comparison and criticism of his peak 70s work with his modern era art style. That said, he can still do some really brilliant commissions.

 

Has Neal Adams' art changed much over the years? I know his recent TFA cover is reminiscent of his work from the 70s:

 

http://swcomiccollector.blogspot.com/2016/11/modern-marvel-star-wars-force-awakens-1.html

 

 

Any examples of current work showing his range?

 

I cant think of any artist's work that has improved after their success. You can throw Art Adams, Mike Golden in there as well..

Actually Adam Hughes is probably the only one I can think of... But he mainly just does covers now so cant really compare

 

Jae Lee?

[Aweandlorder]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Sad to say, Neal Adams. There's often a similar comparison and criticism of his peak 70s work with his modern era art style. That said, he can still do some really brilliant commissions.

 

Has Neal Adams' art changed much over the years? I know his recent TFA cover is reminiscent of his work from the 70s:

 

http://swcomiccollector.blogspot.com/2016/11/modern-marvel-star-wars-force-awakens-1.html

 

 

Any examples of current work showing his range?

 

I cant think of any artist's work that has improved after their success. You can throw Art Adams, Mike Golden in there as well..

Actually Adam Hughes is probably the only one I can think of... But he mainly just does covers now so cant really compare

 

Jae Lee?

 

Well, I dont think that he is as influential as some of the artists mentioned (Art, Adams, Golden, Miller). Def hasnt been around as long as them

[SquareChaos]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Sad to say, Neal Adams. There's often a similar comparison and criticism of his peak 70s work with his modern era art style. That said, he can still do some really brilliant commissions.

 

Has Neal Adams' art changed much over the years? I know his recent TFA cover is reminiscent of his work from the 70s:

 

http://swcomiccollector.blogspot.com/2016/11/modern-marvel-star-wars-force-awakens-1.html

 

 

Any examples of current work showing his range?

 

I cant think of any artist's work that has improved after their success. You can throw Art Adams, Mike Golden in there as well..

Actually Adam Hughes is probably the only one I can think of... But he mainly just does covers now so cant really compare

 

Jae Lee?

 

Well, I dont think that he is as influential as some of the artists mentioned (Art, Adams, Golden, Miller). Def hasnt been around as long as them

 

Guess it depends on what you mean by success.

 

He isn't a legend.

[Aweandlorder]

What I think is fascinating about Frank Miller's art is he is one of a handful of comic artists who has transcended what we've come to expect of comic book artwork. Clearly, Frank Miller can draw in a more commercial style (look at his work on Daredevil for example) and his art has transformed tremendously over the years. Most artists find a style that is commercial and sells comics and coast on that the remainder of their career. Miller is a true artist IMHO, pushing the boundaries and challenging his audience. It might not be pleasing to some, but if you've followed the man's career, his choices are bold and challenging.

 

He is up there with:

 

Bill Sienkiewicz

Mike Mignola

 

I'm sure there are others. These artists have admirers and detractors. Can anyone think of any others?

 

Sad to say, Neal Adams. There's often a similar comparison and criticism of his peak 70s work with his modern era art style. That said, he can still do some really brilliant commissions.

 

Has Neal Adams' art changed much over the years? I know his recent TFA cover is reminiscent of his work from the 70s:

 

http://swcomiccollector.blogspot.com/2016/11/modern-marvel-star-wars-force-awakens-1.html

 

 

Any examples of current work showing his range?

 

I cant think of any artist's work that has improved after their success. You can throw Art Adams, Mike Golden in there as well..

Actually Adam Hughes is probably the only one I can think of... But he mainly just does covers now so cant really compare

 

Jae Lee?

 

Well, I dont think that he is as influential as some of the artists mentioned (Art, Adams, Golden, Miller). Def hasnt been around as long as them

 

Guess it depends on what you mean by success.

 

He isn't a legend.

 

Im surprised that no one has shared some Liefeld & Mcfarlane covers yet.. How can they not be in this thread??