#1 Posted by scouts1998 (528 posts) - - Show Bio

Now that Jim lee has started drawing superman unchained and that he finished up on Justice League and i recently read Batman Hush.

I was thought to myself that i like Jim Lee on team books (Justice League and X-men) more than single character books (Hush and For tomorrow). This because i LIKE Jim Lee's Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Hal Jordan, Flash and Aquaman. (mainly Aquaman)

What do you think?

#2 Posted by Z3RO180 (5947 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't care if he's on a solo title or a team book I love that guys art

#3 Posted by Battle_Forum_Junkie (7262 posts) - - Show Bio

@z3ro180:

Seconded. That guy's art is truly awesome.

#4 Edited by Billy Batson (56986 posts) - - Show Bio

Turrible.

BB

#5 Posted by Manwhohaseverything (1443 posts) - - Show Bio

Upper echelon of artist in comic history. And that's how he'll be remembered when he's done with comics.

#6 Posted by RulerOfThisUniverse (5616 posts) - - Show Bio

I would put him on every book I read if I had the chance. The guy's art is amazing.

#7 Edited by sinestro_GL (3008 posts) - - Show Bio

It was maybe super-awesome in the early 2000s, but I think most people are over it now...or at least I am

#8 Edited by Wolverine08 (27309 posts) - - Show Bio

His art is awe inspiring. Marvel needs to get him back, and put him on a Wolverine book :)

#9 Posted by QueenCorp15 (988 posts) - - Show Bio

Anything he does is AMAZING!!!! Maybe even god like

#10 Posted by Chronus (1115 posts) - - Show Bio

Upper echelon of artist in comic history. And that's how he'll be remembered when he's done with comics.

Very fitting compliment.

#11 Posted by Chronus (1115 posts) - - Show Bio

Upper echelon of artist in comic history. And that's how he'll be remembered when he's done with comics.

Very fitting compliment.

#12 Posted by Squalleon (3061 posts) - - Show Bio

He clearly isn't as good as he was.He is still good just not great.

Comparison between his 2005 and 2013 pre 52 superman.
I loved him on For Tomorrow but his work since then is not in the same league.

Also both pictures are covers from books so he probably put the same work on both of them

2005
2013

#13 Edited by gunmetalgrey (1251 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't see his style working for books outside of the capes and cowls genre though, and honestly it can look very dated sometimes, but that could be due to other factors (inks, colors, etc.).

#14 Edited by sasquatch888 (271 posts) - - Show Bio

It was maybe super-awesome in the early 2000s, but I think most people are over it now...or at least I am

i agree ,,,he was really unique at one time he revolutionized comic art but now that revolution has passed...hes still an incredible artist

#15 Posted by judasnixon (5473 posts) - - Show Bio

He was my favorite artist when I was 13, now at the old age of 34........ My taste in comic art changed. I'll take Phil Noto, David Aja or Fiona Staples any day over Jim Lee....... Not saying Jim Lee art is bad........

#16 Posted by TheManInTheShoe (3775 posts) - - Show Bio

I love Jim Lee's art no matter on which book.

#17 Posted by TDK_1997 (13740 posts) - - Show Bio

I just love the guy.If I can see his artwork in every book I am reading it would be great.

#18 Edited by NightCrawler358 (199 posts) - - Show Bio

I like how he has a very sharp look, which I think works perfectly for these young New 52 heroes, but a lot of the time when people try to ink his work it comes off as scratchy and messy. When he shades in characters--which he does heavily on faces/necks--it's like he's thinking about how the sketch looks, and not how it will look post-production.

His art is astounding, but characters can look messy when finished.

#19 Edited by dondave (27305 posts) - - Show Bio

@z3ro180 said:

I don't care if he's on a solo title or a team book I love that guys art

#20 Posted by WaveMotionCannon (4680 posts) - - Show Bio

He's still good not great. He's actually gotten better at not reusing poses all the time but the faces still all look the same mostly. I still buy his stuff though.