Ivan Reis vs Jerome Opena! Who's got more POP!?

[FIFTY-TWO (52)]

So, looking back on the artistic history of the JLA and Avengers for, say the last 10 years, it's interesting to note that when one book was kinda low the other was high.
For instance, Morrison had Porter as his artist (which always left me scratching my head) while Busiek had Perez.

Now, both Justice League and Avengers have two stupendous artists crafting their tales at the same time. Jerome's pencils, while beautiful, lose something when they're inked and colored. There's no pulse to his Avengers work so far. Ivan Reis on the other hand. . . .
Can you imagine what the Avengers would look like under his pen? The guy's work just pops like nothing else. Johns and Hickman are both buying into that decompressed bullshit style of storytelling, but Ivan's art makes it that much more endurable.

Don't get me wrong. I love what both men are doing, but Ivan has the edge for me because he can make you enjoy a slow-burn tale. Still I wonder what both books would look like if they switched artists. At least I know Jerome's art would be a bit more kinetic with the kind of stories Geoff Johns likes to tell.

[Kurt Busiek]

Ivan Reis on the other hand. . .
Can you imagine what the Avengers would look like under his pen?

He drew #52, #64, the 2001 Annual and the AVENGERS ICONS: THE VISION mini, if that helps anyone imagine.

kdb

[Desaad]

So, looking back on the artistic history of the JLA and Avengers for, say the last 10 years, it's interesting to note that when one book was kinda low the other was high.
For instance, Morrison had Porter as his artist (which always left me scratching my head) while Busiek had Perez.

Ugh, I hate this Porter hate.

Porter was a huge reason for the success of Morrison's JLA; kinetic, stylish, beautifully designed, it was exactly the right artwork for the story. Y'all are crazy, and I'll take it any day over blander styles.

Now, both Justice League and Avengers have two stupendous artists crafting their tales at the same time. Jerome's pencils, while beautiful, lose something when they're inked and colored. There's no pulse to his Avengers work so far. Ivan Reis on the other hand. . . .
Can you imagine what the Avengers would look like under his pen? The guy's work just pops like nothing else. Johns and Hickman are both buying into that decompressed bullshit style of storytelling, but Ivan's art makes it that much more endurable.

Don't get me wrong. I love what both men are doing, but Ivan has the edge for me because he can make you enjoy a slow-burn tale. Still I wonder what both books would look like if they switched artists. At least I know Jerome's art would be a bit more kinetic with the kind of stories Geoff Johns likes to tell.

If I have to choose one, I'll take Opena, because I prefer stylized guys, and I am loving the work Dean White is doing over his pencils. Reis is the more iconic, and the more kinetic, but I think Opena is more design savvy, and more innovative.

Reis feels very much like a perfect comic book artist in the traditional sense. Opena feels just a titch more individual.

[a fire in london]

He drew #52, #64, the 2001 Annual and the AVENGERS ICONS: THE VISION mini, if that helps anyone imagine.

kdb

All those issues were beautifully drawn. Reis is this generations Neal Adams in my opinion. I love both artist but as far a start up superhero comics I'd have to give Reis the edge. I prefer Opena on action books but a little more street level stuff than what the JLA has right now. My opinion might change when I see a little more action in Avengers but Hickman is usually a slow burn with his stories.

[DarkKnghtJared]

I'd go with Opena. Don't get me wrong, I love Reis' art, but Reis is standard, although exceptionally good, superhero art, whereas Opena's a little more sharp and abstract, especially on Avengers.

[Bruce Kent]

Porter style isn't what it used to be due to his injury, but he was amazing on his JLA days.

[Fused]

Reis by a village-demolishing landslide.

[FIFTY-TWO (52)]

He drew #52, #64, the 2001 Annual and the AVENGERS ICONS: THE VISION mini, if that helps anyone imagine.

kdb

Wow! I'll have to seek those out! Thanks, Kurt!

[FIFTY-TWO (52)]

Ugh, I hate this Porter hate.

Porter was a huge reason for the success of Morrison's JLA; kinetic, stylish, beautifully designed, it was exactly the right artwork for the story. Y'all are crazy, and I'll take it any day over blander styles.

I didn't think Porter was bad. I just didn't think he was the ideal choice to get Morrison's crazy ideas on the page. I've always felt it was Phil Jimenez (Morrison's partner at one time on the Invisibles) that should have gotten the JLA job. He would have given the book a multi-layered look to match Morrison's content.

[FIFTY-TWO (52)]

I'd go with Opena. Don't get me wrong, I love Reis' art, but Reis is standard, although exceptionally good, superhero art, whereas Opena's a little more sharp and abstract, especially on Avengers.

I just feel like Opena's characters often have dead eyes and harsh faces. His pencil work is near flawless, though.

[Johnny P. Sartre]

Opena all the way.

[nightw1ng]

Definitely Opena. Reis is a very good artist, but his style is very traditional and safe; everything looks too perfect (if that makes sense). Opena's style has an edge that adds something extra (to me it's somewhat reminiscent to Jae Lee's style).

[El Sombrero]

Opena is a better overall artist, but Reis is a better superhero comic book artist.

[hunter_peterson]

I didn't think Porter was bad. I just didn't think he was the ideal choice to get Morrison's crazy ideas on the page. I've always felt it was Phil Jimenez (Morrison's partner at one time on the Invisibles) that should have gotten the JLA job. He would have given the book a multi-layered look to match Morrison's content.

I agree with this. Jimenez's work on that book was phenomenal. Porter, I had a love-hate thing for. He's sometimes excellent, but his faces were also often mushy and his proportions strange. But his sense of movement was great and he captured iconic moments really well, like the debut of Zauriel or Superman Blue moving the moon. It worked, I think, but wasn't amazing. His covers were largely terrible. Hmm.

Out of Reis and Opena I would vote Opena (poll?). Basically for the same reason everyone else already said. Reis sets the standard for superheroes in this generation, but that kind of makes him the penultimate generic artist. Opena on the other hand has a much more individual style and it also really pops off the page. Honestly though, either of them are awesome for me, so I would love to see them on any book I read, always.

[Desaad]

While I do love Jimenez's work, it's very much in the Perez school of things, hyper detailed and all that but somewhat static.

What was great about Porter's work is that it was incredibly DYNAMIC, and was design oriented. It had much of that Kirby Krackle that I so love. Jimenez's stuff is good, but for different reasons; it's intricate and lush, but can sometimes feel cluttered and, as I said above, a bit static.

I'd have been happy with Jimenez, but no moreso than Porter.