All Star Superman #6 Cover

[Mon-el]

Thanks to Wizard World Philly. They have released the cover for All Star Superman #6.

That is one beautiful cover!

http://www.newsarama.com/WWPhilly06/DC/ASSMCv6.jpg

[Ontir]

Quitely is just amazing! Power, emotion, simplicity!

[Apathy Boy]

Dang, that's pretty.

I still find it weird to read or see Superman stories with Pa Kent dead. I know it's the "classic" continuity for the character, but it's been 20 years since we've seen a dead Pa Kent in comics or on TV. (Until this year, of course.)

[PanzerMega]

This is the only series I would buy just because of the covers.

The story's pretty sweet so far too.

[Kilgore Trout]

Reminded me of this classic cover:

nevermind.

[Ontir]

I was just thinking, since Morrison is bringing storylines from DC 1,000,000 into All-Star Superman, it would be really nice to see Wonder World, and its denizens again!

[Pinnacle]

Great artwork.

Quality of Morrison's story has been excellent as well. I tend to like Morrison's work but I'm not his biggest fan however I believe this series has solidified him as one of the tops in the medium today. Can't wait to read the story that goes along with this cover.

If only All-Star Batman and Robin was this good.:(

[Hellcow]

Let me qualify what I am about to say. I'm not trying to upset anyone. I don't want to lock horns. I am just expressing an opinion which I think will differ from the majority of other opinions expressed here.

I think that cover is just plain stupid. What a let down these All Star lines are for me.

[Dustin Griffin]

Great cover, and so far a really great book.

[Ontir]

I think that cover is just plain stupid. What a let down these All Star lines are for me.

Why does it look stupid to you?

[The Sentry]

FQ's the man.

Lovely cover, speaks volumes.

[Joe Rice]

Absolutely amazing.

[thehod]

I think that cover is just plain stupid. What a let down these All Star lines are for me.

Echoing Ontir here. Care to elaborate?

[algertman]

.

I think that cover is just plain stupid. What a let down these All Star lines are for me.


You say somehthing negative, and don't explain, you are trying lock to horns

[Shellhead]

The only thing wrong with that cover is that I will need to wait several months before buying that issue.

[Gingold]

Gosh, that's a nice cover. Is this issue going to be from Krypto's point of view? Because that'd be really cool.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Quitely's Superboy looks even better than his Superman. Looking forward to this one.

[Apathy Boy]

Quitely's Superboy looks even better than his Superman. Looking forward to this one.Is that really supposed to be Superboy? Because if it is, I'm going to have to retract my comment about this being a good cover. Clark's face looks way too old for him to be a boy. But now that you mention it, his body doesn't look quite as big as it should, so I dunno who that's supposed to be.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Is that really supposed to be Superboy? Because if it is, I'm going to have to retract my comment about this being a good cover. Clark's face looks way too old for him to be a boy. But now that you mention it, his body doesn't look quite as big as it should, so I dunno who that's supposed to be.

I believe this is supposed to be Morrison's version of the Superboy becomes Superman story, so Quitely's Superboy should look too old to be a boy, but shouldn't be quite the same hulking proportions of his contemporary Superman.

[Hellcow]

You say somehthing negative, and don't explain, you are trying lock to horns

Funny how people can say anything positive and they don't need to explain themselves. Double standards eh?

[Ontir]

Not really, I mean "It looks nice." isn't all that informative. Why does it look "nice," or "stupid?" What's stupid about a guy looking at his father's headstone? I've almost lost my dad a couple of times, and I found that cover very moving. Why do you find it stupid?

[Modi]

An dteh Cover of the year award goes to...:D

[the film freak]

Is Johnathan Kent dead now? Or just in this book?

[Ontir]

I don't know if he's dead in regular continuity, but if he is, it's a separate issue from the All-Star line, which has its own continuity per book.

[algertman]

Funny how people can say anything positive and they don't need to explain themselves. Double standards eh?

saying something positive without reason isn't considered trolling

[Radical_dreamer]

I believe this is supposed to be Morrison's version of the Superboy becomes Superman story, so Quitely's Superboy should look too old to be a boy, but shouldn't be quite the same hulking proportions of his contemporary Superman.

no, the cover is superMAN. The story itself will be a backstory of superman as a boy in smallville, with pa kent still alive and krypto. Contrast.

[CMBMOOL]

WOW, Powerful cover!!! :D

[EZMOHR]

Just to elaborate on the negatives, I will admit...I used to HATE Quitley's art. He had what me and my friends dubbed as, "Crud-Face," people, ie their faces always looked like they melted into crud. We also called Quitley's characters, "Crumblers," ie, his characters faces looked like a cookie after you dunked it in milk, and it got soggy and crumbly. But, I must say, as time as gone on to appreciate Quitley's art. It's not half bad. Way better than such flavors-of-the-month like John Cassaddy.

[Shellhead]

Just to elaborate on the negatives, I will admit...I used to HATE Quitley's art. He had what me and my friends dubbed as, "Crud-Face," people, ie their faces always looked like they melted into crud. We also called Quitley's characters, "Crumblers," ie, his characters faces looked like a cookie after you dunked it in milk, and it got soggy and crumbly. But, I must say, as time as gone on to appreciate Quitley's art. It's not half bad. Way better than such flavors-of-the-month like John Cassaddy.

I didn't like Quitely's work in the past either, but his artwork on All-Star Superman has been excellent. Maybe he is continuing to improve, unlike some artists who coast once they get into comics.

[TROUBLEZ]

This cover is okay. He did take the time to draw the individual blades of grass but I don't think he drew the clouds or the moon. The face of Superman also looks a little to old, even if he is outgrowing his Superboy role. He's maybe, what, 18, at the oldest 20? That's an old face for a 20 yr old.

I appreciate the simplicity of these covers because they standout from the cluttered covers of other comics but I think it could have been a little better.

[Lonewalker]

Beautiful cover.

[Shellhead]

Thanks to Wizard World Philly. They have released the cover for All Star Superman #6.

That is one beautiful cover!

http://www.newsarama.com/WWPhilly06/DC/ASSMCv6.jpg

This is simply one of the best comic book covers that I have ever seen. It’s a real work of art, better than most modern works on display in museums around the world. It is a real shame that DC will need to put the usual logo and pricing information somewhere on this cover, probably covering part of that beautiful moon and sky.

Look at the composition of this piece. Making this a nighttime picture lends the scene a somber air, suitable for Superman contemplating such a personal loss. The serene moon floating overhead provides some light and also the opportunity for shadows. The moonlit sky is quite realistic; I have looked upon skies just like that on many nights over the years. Beyond the realism, the clouds suggest the possibility of Heaven, though the overall sadness of the scene makes that possibility seem remote enough to lack comfort. This doubt is only emphasized by the dark realism of the shadowy grass underfoot.

But the detail that really pulls this whole picture together is Krypto. He is near the center of the picture, only sort of off to the right, because he is not supposed to be the focal point. But his concerned expression and the direction of his gaze shows that he understands that Superman is sad, but not why. Krypto doesn’t understand the significance of the grave or the tombstone, just the sadness. As a former dog owner, I have to say that Krypto looks perfect in this picture, with just the right amount of expressiveness.

For once, Krypto's cape doesn’t look even slightly silly… it, along with Superman’s cape and the blades of grass, is blowing in a wind in such a way that it draws the eye back to the tombstone, the real focus of this piece despite it’s location on the left edge of the page. While visually the least interesting element in this picture, the tombstone is the most important, supplying context and meaning to every other aspect.

[Ontir]

The thing that's most striking in the composition, is the almost non-existent distance between Jonathan, and Clark & Krypto. They are so very close, but the distance is, even for someone who can cross parsecs, insurmountable.

Another of the things I like best about the image, is Krypto's presence. It's very real, the way dogs respond to the people in their lives during hard time. They may not understand exactly what's gong on (though Krypto probably does), but they know that something's going on with their pet human, and respond.

I like the illustration of Clark here, as well. He's not the big Superman that is drawn previously in this series, but he's no longer a boy. You can see the boyishness giving way to the Man of Steel he's becoming.

Very well done.

[Hellcow]

It’s a real work of art, better than most modern works on display in museums around the world.


Wow, you're funny.

[Jake V]

He's also right.

[Hellcow]

I used to think that way about comic illustration.... when I was young.

Even Franky himself would probably argue against trying to compare his illustration to an artwork.

There's nothing wrong with liking it. There's nothing wrong with disliking it. There's nothing wrong with loving it.

But there are reasons comic illustration does NOT end up in an art gallery.

[Ontir]

That'll be news to the Armand Hammer Museum and the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art, since the co-presented a show on comic book/strip art that ran for like 2 months.

Not to mention the Roy Lichtenstein Estate.

[Joe Rice]

I used to think that way about comic illustration.... when I was young.

Even Franky himself would probably argue against trying to compare his illustration to an artwork.

There's nothing wrong with liking it. There's nothing wrong with disliking it. There's nothing wrong with loving it.

But there are reasons comic illustration does NOT end up in an art gallery.

You presume much and know little about this topic.

[thehod]

But there are reasons comic illustration does NOT end up in an art gallery.

As Ontir mentioned, you might want to check out Roy Lichtenstein's work (http://www.lichtensteinfoundation.org/)

[Ryan Day]

That'll be news to the Armand Hammer Museum and the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art, since the co-presented a show on comic book/strip art that ran for like 2 months.

Not to mention the Roy Lichtenstein Estate.

As well as the Art Gallery of Ontario, which ran an exhibit of Seth's work last year (http://www.ago.net/info/ago_exhibition_archive/exhibition_specific.cfm?ID=2753).

[Shellhead]

I used to think that way about comic illustration.... when I was young.

Even Franky himself would probably argue against trying to compare his illustration to an artwork.

There's nothing wrong with liking it. There's nothing wrong with disliking it. There's nothing wrong with loving it.

But there are reasons comic illustration does NOT end up in an art gallery.

Instead, the art galleries and museums show us such art as a crucifix floating in urine. Or mutilated farm animals encased in plastic. Or random splashes of paint dubbed "abstract" art. Or "found objects" (aka junk) slapped together with wires, nails, and glue. I'm not making this crap up. The art world has moved towards nearly complete irrelevance in the last century, with this ridiculous emphasis on treating anything presented to them as art. I call bullshit on them. The emperor is naked.

[Paul McEnery]

Instead, the art galleries and museums show us such art as a crucifix floating in urine. Or mutilated farm animals encased in plastic. Or random splashes of paint dubbed "abstract" art. Or "found objects" (aka junk) slapped together with wires, nails, and glue. I'm not making this crap up. The art world has moved towards nearly complete irrelevance in the last century, with this ridiculous emphasis on treating anything presented to them as art. I call bullshit on them. The emperor is naked.
*ahem*

You're embarrassing yourself.

[Andy S.]

Instead, the art galleries and museums show us such art as a crucifix floating in urine. Or mutilated farm animals encased in plastic. Or random splashes of paint dubbed "abstract" art. Or "found objects" (aka junk) slapped together with wires, nails, and glue. I'm not making this crap up. The art world has moved towards nearly complete irrelevance in the last century, with this ridiculous emphasis on treating anything presented to them as art. I call bullshit on them. The emperor is naked.


When I was in college, one of the exhibits at the School of Art was a slowly rotting pumpkin, held together with ductape. I must say, I much prefer the work Frank Quitley.:)

[Shellhead]

*ahem*

You're embarrassing yourself.

I don't see how. When I'm not on the side defending the artistic merit of urine or mutilated cattle, I feel reasonably safe from embarrassment.

[Ontir]

*ahem*

You're embarrassing yourself.

What he said!

If it weren't for urine, we wouldn't have art, in most cases. The inks and paints used by the masters whom you seem to revere instead of (as opposed to along with) the giants of the last century, like Pollack (a true genius), were partially comprised of the artist's own urine.

You may not like it, but the symbology of a Curcifix in urine does make a statement, and art is a provocateur, not something to match your sofa!

[Shellhead]

What he said!

If it weren't for urine, we wouldn't have art, in most cases. The inks and paints used by the masters whom you seem to revere instead of (as opposed to along with) the giants of the last century, like Pollack (a true genius), were partially comprised of the artist's own urine.

You may not like it, but the symbology of a Curcifix in urine does make a statement, and art is a provocateur, not something to match your sofa!

I understand your point. But if I clearly state that my taste in fine art does not include urine, where is the embarassment?

[Ontir]

You're focused on the tools/props, as opposed to the content of the image. Contrary to your previous statement, you do take a side, and pass a judgement that seems un-informed. People were equally up in arms over a picture of the Madonna several years ago, that was made using elephant dung. When I finally saw the image, I found it quite beautiful, and I find it odd that people who venerated potato chips and crap paneling that they saw some visage within, would have issue with something more beautiful.

[Rylon]

The art world has moved towards nearly complete irrelevance in the last century, with this ridiculous emphasis on treating anything presented to them as art.Yes and no. I can find examples of what you're talking about, but I can also find many counter examples. There are many painters out there who create beautiful and naturalistic art, and museums who still buy their works.

[DanH]

Wow,....That would make a great painting for a wall over the computer

[Hellcow]

As Ontir mentioned, you might want to check out Roy Lichtenstein's work (http://www.lichtensteinfoundation.org/)

I'm well aware of Lichtenstein's work. They were not comic panels blown up and hung in a gallery.

Lichtenstein was commenting on the general tastes, cliches and fantasy life of the general public.

He wasn't saying "comics are cool".

Take a class in art history and we'll talk.

[NotSuper]

I can't believe this is my first time seeing this cover. Quitely's Superman work is, as always, awesome. Superman and Krypto are such colorful, larger than life characters that to see them in such a reality based and dreary situation is really cool.

[Ontir]

I've had some art history. It was 20 years ago, but I took the classes.

Yes, it was pop-art, but it was still comic book art, whether it came directly from a comic book, and some did, or not.

[Joker2503]

Wow, that is gorgeous. Like others have said, Krypto is what makes it so moving. Sometimes, dogs know how you feel even if they don't know why you feel that way. The expression Krypto is the exact same expression my dog had when my grandfather died.

As for the Art Museum debate, I wouldn't compare it to Renaissance masters, but if I saw an exhibit of art from people like Quietly, Alex Ross, etc., I wouldn't be bothered. In fact, I think it would be great. If a painting of soup cans can become a classic, then Quietly's cover here deserves to be as well.

[Ontir]

Yeah, it's more along the lines of a Rockwell, but it's really good!

[thehod]

I'm well aware of Lichtenstein's work. They were not comic panels blown up and hung in a gallery.

Lichtenstein was commenting on the general tastes, cliches and fantasy life of the general public.

He wasn't saying "comics are cool".

Take a class in art history and we'll talk.

Some of Lichtensteins work was comic panels.

"Okay Hotshot" (can't find a link at the mo, sorry) takes images from at least two panels of DC Comics war comics.

And I know he wasn't saying "comics are cool" but he was saying that this style of art had as much aesthetic value as the more traditional forms of art.

[Hellcow]

And I know he wasn't saying "comics are cool" but he was saying that this style of art had as much aesthetic value as the more traditional forms of art.

Well if that were true, its a shame his message didn't get through, because I can't find one art historian who holds that view.

Anyway, it shouldn't stop people enjoying comic illustration, but there's no need for any of us comic fans to kid oursleves and think that a piece of comic illustration will sell for the price of a Picasso, for us to enjoy it.

[NotSuper]

As for the Art Museum debate, I wouldn't compare it to Renaissance masters, but if I saw an exhibit of art from people like Quietly, Alex Ross, etc., I wouldn't be bothered. In fact, I think it would be great. If a painting of soup cans can become a classic, then Quietly's cover here deserves to be as well.
Yeah, I could see it as well. I think Ross in particular would be accepted by that crowd.

[Michael P]

Well if that were true, its a shame his message didn't get through, because I can't find one art historian who holds that view.
Ditto. All the art history teachers I've had, and all the art history textbooks I've read, have read it derisively.

Have I mentioned I love the cover? Because I really do. I want the original art.

[Paul McEnery]

I don't see how. When I'm not on the side defending the artistic merit of urine or mutilated cattle, I feel reasonably safe from embarrassment.
Well, I think you'll find most people who know about art think rather differently than you about Damien Hirst. Enough ink's been spilt about him to save me the bother. (Not to mention "Piss Christ", which I've kinda talked to death before.)

When you talk about assemblages, you're basically writing off everything valuable in fine art, from Picasso and Duchamp onwards, which seems more than a little philistine. Not grasping the meaning (and beauty) of Rauschenberg and Johns and Warhol puts you miles behind the curve.

I mean, basically, this just ain't your subject. No shame in that. Except when you go all Archie Bunker on us and imply there's something wrong with the rest of us for whom it is our subject.

[Hellcow]

If a painting of soup cans can become a classic, then Quietly's cover here deserves to be as well.

Its not just a question of what you paint, or how you paint, its also why you paint, amongst a myriad of other considerations.

[Ontir]

That argument, of course, eliminates a great many of the Masters' works, which were often done contrary to their personal tastes for the most basic financial considerations.