Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 55
  1. #31
    *choke* Dan B. in the Underworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montgomery al
    Posts
    11,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by foxley View Post
    Give me Frank Robbins over Jack Kirby any day.
    War with Australia is being pondered in the halls of power even as I speak, I regret to report.
    I tend to split superhero comics fans into "People who like Krypto" and "People who don't like Krypto."
    Basically, if you miss the wonder of a dog flying around in a little Superman cape, you're in the wrong hobby.

    -- Reptisaurus!

  2. #32
    Senior Member MDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Fairport, NY
    Posts
    2,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thwhtGuardian View Post
    As others have said he anatomy in the above page is certainly a crime against the human body but I applaud who ever inked that page, the mood is fantastic and I love the sense of urgency in the action so much so that I don't particularly care if the anatomy makes zero sense.
    Robbins usually inked himself at DC. And really, the vitrality of his inks make his art.

    Quote Originally Posted by prince hal View Post
    "There are horses for courses," I always say, and though I wouldn't go so far as to say I'd relish a Robbins Batman Treasury, his Caniffish style was such a relief from Bob Brown and Irv Novick (both of whose styles I liked, just not on Batman) and the Apostle of Short-armed Superheroes, Ernie Chua/Chan, that I enjoyed it. No pretense, no apologies, just straightforward in-your-face-"This my style, so there." He was fun on the Invaders series, too, thought the retro look was probably better suited to those stories.
    Yup--one of the unintended consequences of Adams on Batman and other superhero is that fans wanted more "realistic" art and the problems were that 1) not all of them could draw in a traditional illustrative style like Adams (and if you add "...and still make deadline" to that sentence, either could Adams) and 2) honestly, realistic art doesn't always work for superheroes. The best superhero artists of the silver age--like Kirby, Ditko, Infantino, Kane--were strong stylists whose art became a lot more stylized during the 60s and into the 70s. (And sometimes Adams hyper-realistic work on real superheroes like superman and X-Men--meaning people with unrealistic powers, not just a guy in an outfit--ends up looking a little silly.)

    Brown, Novick (who I like), Chua, and a lot of others on Batman (Calnan, for example) just seemed to be "not Adams" without being much else. Robbins was his own guy. Ditto Aparo.

    Quote Originally Posted by icctrombone View Post


    With drawings like this, I'm glad he never got a crack at Superman.
    Well even more than DC, Marvel wanted people to work in a house style. That slick inking doesn't belong on Robbins art.
    "It's just lines on paper, folks!"

  3. #33
    Senior Member Polar Bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    College Park, MD
    Posts
    1,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Oak Kid View Post
    Wow, that's pretty ... hideous.

    Panel 1: I have no idea what's happening with Piet's legs and right hand. If he's so short that we can see his foot at the bottom of the panel, why can we see his hand gripping the end of the chair arm, which (with his short arms) should be out of reach? Or, if he's not that short, why can we see his foot? Also, there's no light source I can figure out that would cast those shadows on their clothes.

    Panel 2: Bizarre face. Very bizarre shadow in lower right corner of the panel and at the panel's bottom--why is that there, either in terms of light source or of storytelling? I do like the speed lines, especially the angled ones that appear to radiate from the knife edge.

    Panel 3: The billowing cape actually works against the feeling of movement in the panel--part of Batman's cape is actually ahead of his skull! How does that happen? Also, the established light source far above and behind Batman, showing the shadow of his legs below, would put the underside of his torso and legs in shadow, yet we see light reflected from there. Trevor's body is stretched unnaturally.

    Panel 4: Batman requires surgery, effective immediately. The rumpling of Trevor's shirt is random.

    Panel 5: This panel has no correspondence to any human anatomy ever, and the shadow work is hideously inaccurate (for example, where's the cape?). The falling knife, an important story element, is positioned so as to be almost invisible. And hey, how exactly did his cape curl that way?

    Panel 6: Which way is Trevor's face even pointing? It should be immediately clear that he's lying upside-down; the reader shouldn't have to squint to discover which way the body is facing.

    Also, note the near-total lack of backgrounds at any point in the page, the relatively static camera position. I do like it that the movement is generally left-to-right, except for the interrupted story elements, like the knife that never falls is portrayed right-to-left, slowing it down--that's a nice touch. But overall, I'm shocked that his work was ever published.

    Sorry to be disagreeable.
    Anyway, it is cool for you to acquire acrimony of crumbling time on blast this website.
    --best spam ever

  4. #34
    *choke* Dan B. in the Underworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montgomery al
    Posts
    11,420

    Default

    You're not being disagreeable -- i.e. you're agreeing with me: Robbins too often produced simply horrible-looking art. It's great that lots of people were able to look past that; I simply couldn't back then, & some 40 years later I obviously still can't.

    Not that anyone is on trial here or anything, but I honestly look forward to reading Robbins' champions' defense of that truly atrocious page.
    Last edited by Dan B. in the Underworld; 01-17-2013 at 09:05 AM.
    I tend to split superhero comics fans into "People who like Krypto" and "People who don't like Krypto."
    Basically, if you miss the wonder of a dog flying around in a little Superman cape, you're in the wrong hobby.

    -- Reptisaurus!

  5. #35
    I say thee nay! icctrombone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    Frank Robbins= Rob Liefeld ?
    Life is what you make it.

  6. #36
    COMIC BOOK HISTORIAN dogwelder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    BROOKLYN
    Posts
    275

    Default

    i have the whole Invaders run and can't stand Robbin's art.

    Just imagine if Vince Colletta didn't erase some of Robbin's pencils how much worse the art could have been in those first few issues.
    R.I.P. CARMINE!

  7. #37
    I say thee nay! icctrombone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dogwelder View Post
    i have the whole Invaders run and can't stand Robbin's art.

    Just imagine if Vince Colletta didn't erase some of Robbin's pencils how much worse the art could have been in those first few issues.
    That's awesome. Some people hate Colletta . Just imagine his erasing being the best part of the comic...
    Life is what you make it.

  8. #38
    Elder Member Shellhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Twin Cities
    Posts
    17,744

    Default

    I usually can't stand artwork by Frank Robbins, but that Batman is less horrible than his usual work. Only the fifth panel is offensively bad, with that typical Robbins pose that only works if the hero has two broken legs and a stroke.
    "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
    Martin Luther King Jr., Letter from Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963

  9. #39
    Idaho Spuds Slam_Bradley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    16,481

    Default

    As we all know, it's important that our imaginary friends that run around in their underwear and swing around the city on little silken ropes, look "realistic."

  10. #40
    *choke* Dan B. in the Underworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montgomery al
    Posts
    11,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by icctrombone View Post
    Frank Robbins= Rob Liefeld ?
    From 8/22/08, previous page --

    Quote Originally Posted by dan bailey View Post
    Those panels are -- dare I say it -- almost Liefeld-esque.
    Great minds think alike!
    I tend to split superhero comics fans into "People who like Krypto" and "People who don't like Krypto."
    Basically, if you miss the wonder of a dog flying around in a little Superman cape, you're in the wrong hobby.

    -- Reptisaurus!

  11. #41
    *choke* Dan B. in the Underworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montgomery al
    Posts
    11,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slam_Bradley View Post
    As we all know, it's important that our imaginary friends that run around in their underwear and swing around the city on little silken ropes, look "realistic."
    Nothing to do with importance per se, but it is sort of nice when the figures, which are supposed to be those of human beings, look sort of like those of human beings.

    Or maybe that's just me.
    I tend to split superhero comics fans into "People who like Krypto" and "People who don't like Krypto."
    Basically, if you miss the wonder of a dog flying around in a little Superman cape, you're in the wrong hobby.

    -- Reptisaurus!

  12. #42
    I say thee nay! icctrombone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shellhead View Post
    I usually can't stand artwork by Frank Robbins, but that Batman is less horrible than his usual work. Only the fifth panel is offensively bad, with that typical Robbins pose that only works if the hero has two broken legs and a stroke.

    Best . Post. Ever.
    Life is what you make it.

  13. #43
    Senior Member Polar Bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    College Park, MD
    Posts
    1,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slam_Bradley View Post
    As we all know, it's important that our imaginary friends that run around in their underwear and swing around the city on little silken ropes, look "realistic."
    Yes. When what I see in reality (legs coming down from one's hips) conflicts so primally with what I see on the page (legs emitting from one's buttocks), it detracts from my "willing suspension of disbelief." The reader-writer contract is that I agree to suspend my disbelief if the storyteller agrees to craft a story that's believable within its own set of rules. Batman is supposed to be human; the art clearly shows him to be inhuman; I feel betrayed and thus locked out of the story.
    Anyway, it is cool for you to acquire acrimony of crumbling time on blast this website.
    --best spam ever

  14. #44
    S.P.E.C.T.R.E. destro's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    doomstadt
    Posts
    1,844

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Polar Bear View Post
    Wow, that's pretty ... hideous.

    Panel 1: I have no idea what's happening with Piet's legs and right hand. If he's so short that we can see his foot at the bottom of the panel, why can we see his hand gripping the end of the chair arm, which (with his short arms) should be out of reach? Or, if he's not that short, why can we see his foot? Also, there's no light source I can figure out that would cast those shadows on their clothes.

    Panel 2: Bizarre face. Very bizarre shadow in lower right corner of the panel and at the panel's bottom--why is that there, either in terms of light source or of storytelling? I do like the speed lines, especially the angled ones that appear to radiate from the knife edge.

    Panel 3: The billowing cape actually works against the feeling of movement in the panel--part of Batman's cape is actually ahead of his skull! How does that happen? Also, the established light source far above and behind Batman, showing the shadow of his legs below, would put the underside of his torso and legs in shadow, yet we see light reflected from there. Trevor's body is stretched unnaturally.

    Panel 4: Batman requires surgery, effective immediately. The rumpling of Trevor's shirt is random.

    Panel 5: This panel has no correspondence to any human anatomy ever, and the shadow work is hideously inaccurate (for example, where's the cape?). The falling knife, an important story element, is positioned so as to be almost invisible. And hey, how exactly did his cape curl that way?

    Panel 6: Which way is Trevor's face even pointing? It should be immediately clear that he's lying upside-down; the reader shouldn't have to squint to discover which way the body is facing.

    Also, note the near-total lack of backgrounds at any point in the page, the relatively static camera position. I do like it that the movement is generally left-to-right, except for the interrupted story elements, like the knife that never falls is portrayed right-to-left, slowing it down--that's a nice touch. But overall, I'm shocked that his work was ever published.

    Sorry to be disagreeable.
    It's not disagreeable to be right :) I've seen his adventure strips and his style works well in those. But I have yet to find a super hero comic where I could enjoy his work. His Captain America and Invaders work is especially awful, it actually makes me feel rather ill looking at it.
    Life looks better in black and white.

  15. #45

    Default

    i agree with every complaint here YET I enjoy Robbins' artwork. For all the flaws, I have no trouble actually reading the scenes, to get the point of the panel. His work is idiosyncratic yet it's also consistent and immersive. I liken him to the likes of Kirby, Kane, Ditko, Infantino. He understood storytelling and action and then broke the rules. Compared to the many artists today who cannot draw a normally proportioned person to save their lives or simple storytelling from panel to panel

    Anatomy-wise, working in the photo department, I saw a lot of sports photos and it's amazing how many have the people in angles and contortions that look completely un-natural when a single split second of action is captured. Those rarely made the paper, but it did help in appreciating some of the strange contortions and poses one finds in Robbins' art.

    I don't think Robbins would have been a good fit for Superman, though a one-off story would have been fun.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •