What book turned you from a Kirby hater to a Kirby lover? 2 2

[kav]

2 minutes ago, shadroch said:

Never a Kirby hater, but not a big fan. In the 70s, I'd be reading the newest FF and reprints from Marvels Greatest Comics and for the most part I liked the newer art better. There was an occasional double page spread that was spectacular but for the most part, Kirby didn't impress me. 

Didn't like Kamandi or Omac and did not care for his Captain America at all. I was afraid they might put him back on the Avengers or FF and was very happy when he did his own thing. I tried to read 2001 last week and didn't get five pages in before I quit.

 

The 2001 treasury where he rewrote stuff and turned Hal into a smart aleck-WTH???

[shadroch]

Just now, kav said:

The 2001 treasury where he rewrote stuff and turned Hal into a smart aleck-WTH???

I'm pretty sure I own a copy, but I've never opened it. I bought a couple of 2001 runs in the 90s off a CBG ad and ot lucky in that there were several 35 cent variants in the lot.

[kav]

1 minute ago, shadroch said:

I'm pretty sure I own a copy, but I've never opened it. I bought a couple of 2001 runs in the 90s off a CBG ad and ot lucky in that there were several 35 cent variants in the lot.

It's a mind blower let's leave it at that.  Rewriting Arthur C Clarke.....ok.

[Ken Aldred]

As far as Kirby goes, I was lucky to start reading his work at a great time in the early 70s, when I could experience his best artwork from the Golden and Silver Ages as reprints, and his early Bronze Age comics month-by-month on the newsstand, such as The Fourth World and The Demon.  As a kid I wasn't too critical of the differences in storytelling between the two periods that I demarcated above, always being more blown away by the power, energy and creativity.  His artwork does begin to suffer in comparison from the mid-70s onwards, especially back at Marvel, but, thinking less critically and seriously now, his "flaws" are compensated for by very entertaining, unconstrained ideas and over-the-top dialogue, which I appreciate more now than I ever did as a teenager.  It's the 80s period, when his art really declines badly, which greatly saddens me.  

Edited April 3, 2021 by Ken Aldred

[davidtere]

5 hours ago, the blob said:

Which inker butchered him?

I'm not going to say that George Roussos (as George Bell) butchered Kirby's pencils, but I really disliked the way that he inked him on Fantastic Four, Sgt. Fury and others around the same period. 

[Buzzetta]

I don't hate the guy.  I don't love his work either.  He did a few great things but everything else is derivative from that great thing.

For example, I actually like John Romita Jr's Spiderman.  The problem with John Romita Jr's Superman is that Clark Kent looked like Peter Parker with darker colored hair. 

Whenever I open up a book by Kirby I can always find too many guys that look like Ben Grimm in his human form. 

 

[greggy]

13 hours ago, kav said:

The 2001 treasury where he rewrote stuff and turned Hal into a smart aleck-WTH???

That's what she said. 

[FoggyNelson]

Maybe some Kirby stories are lame, but all Kirby covers are great👍‼️❤️🎶🎶✅

[B2D327]

Never hated Kirby. His art was my introduction to comics and although my taste in art styles changed, his work still stands out to me as spectacular 

[Ken Aldred]

20 hours ago, davidtere said:

I'm not going to say that George Roussos (as George Bell) butchered Kirby's pencils, but I really disliked the way that he inked him on Fantastic Four, Sgt. Fury and others around the same period. 

Roussos had a much grittier, rougher finish to his inking when compared to Sinnott and Stone’s much smoother, slicker styles.

I don’t mind it, though it pales in comparison to the others.

 

 

[dupont2005]

The subject matter is what keeps me from reading most Kirby books but I also don’t like a lot of “poses” in comics. Everyone flexing and facing the camera, panel completely devoid of background. And Kirby’s signature inappropriate smile, which isn’t any worse than the more common fang face, just different 

[kav]

Just now, dupont2005 said:

The subject matter is what keeps me from reading most Kirby books but I also don’t like a lot of “poses” in comics. Everyone flexing and facing the camera, panel completely devoid of background. And Kirby’s signature inappropriate smile, which isn’t any worse than the more common fang face, just different 

Devoid of background?
 

[catman76]

Nothing. I respect his work and what he did and I don't hate it but I just personally don't like his stuff for some reason. Though discovering his late 40s weird funny animal/cartoony comics gave me something to like of his. I love that stuff...

 

[Ken Aldred]

17 minutes ago, kav said:

Devoid of background?
 

 

 

I was going to say, not unless Colletta erased it, but that’s quite a good example to the contrary.

[dupont2005]

23 minutes ago, kav said:

Devoid of background?
 

Yes 

[Ken Aldred]

4 minutes ago, dupont2005 said:

Yes 

Yup.  The double splash pages tended to be hyper-detailed, not so much the rest.

Some exceptions, such as when he’s drawing overly complex, futuristic-looking machinery in the panel.

Edited April 4, 2021 by Ken Aldred

[kav]

10 minutes ago, Ken Aldred said:

I was going to say, not unless Colletta erased it, but that’s quite a good example to the contrary.

the coletta stuff I agree-lotta void B/G's
Not Kirby's fault

[kav]

7 minutes ago, dupont2005 said:

Yes 

Nope

[dupont2005]

8 minutes ago, kav said:

Nope

You’re only posting double page spreads

[dupont2005]

Notice the lack of action lines, smoke, and rubble