#1 Posted by Vic Rattlehead (33 posts) - - Show Bio

Now I know its done all through-out the comic industry, but he just seems to have a particular blatant way of doing it. I mean the list starts with:

Supreme

Glory

Fighting America

Vogue

....and really just keeps going. Its like he just doesn't have much in the way of creative juices, or is such a hard @$$ fan boy that he can't help but try and duplicate the characters he enjoys. I mean this type of stunted creativity does nothing for a shrinking market who's target audience is primarily tagged as "mature" in age. Anybody else see this ?

#2 Posted by Vic Rattlehead (33 posts) - - Show Bio

I'd also like to add that in his early Marvel days I enjoyed his artwork, but now...with so many great artists out there doing comics: His just seems disproportioned and blah
Post Edited:2007-07-18 16:08:36

#3 Posted by Octagon Freak (11158 posts) - - Show Bio

Oh man, the next time Shatterstar's on, you're going to get a butt chewing. And I like his art, well, at least most of it, and haven't really heard of most of these other characters.

#4 Posted by Shatterstar (4568 posts) - - Show Bio

Vic Rattlehead says:

"Now I know its done all through-out the comic industry, but he just seems to have a particular blatant way of doing it. I mean the list starts with:SupremeGloryFighting AmericaVogue....and really just keeps going. Its like he just doesn't have much in the way of creative juices, or is such a hard @$$ fan boy that he can't help but try and duplicate the characters he enjoys. I mean this type of stunted creativity does nothing for a shrinking market who's target audience is primarily tagged as "mature" in age. Anybody else see this ?"

Well for one, all those characters with the exception of Fighting American were created in the 90s, when the market was booming not shrinking and the primary audience was still teenagers. For two, the Fighting American character was created in 1954, revived in 1994 by DC (not Liefeld), Liefeld got the rights when he started Awesome in 97, settled a lawsuit with Marvel because it looked like he was continuing his Heroes Reborn story with that book (which was his own creation, so I guess he was ripping off himself?). I'm not sure who Vogue is supposed to be a ripoff of, but Supreme and Glory are pretty much their own characters, inspired by other characters but only have superficial similarities with those characters. Supreme pretty much shares a cape and being an alien in common with Superman. Alan Moore changed the character significantly to make him more like the Silver Age Superman, not Liefeld. You could argue all of the Image creators ripped off other characters, go a step further all characters are rip offs of what guys like Kirby, Ditko, Everett, Shuster, etc did in the Golden Age.

Also just because you don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, other people like his work. If you don't like it, ignore it. Don't be a sheep and join in the conga line repeating complaints you've heard before. People complain about Liefeld's art being disproportioned, so is a dozen different modern artists' style but they don't get anywhere near the negativity, in large part just because its fashionable to bash him. Art is subjective, some people like the hyper-realism thats popular now, some people like basic retro style art, Liefeld fans like action-oriented, dynamic art.

Moderator
#5 Posted by NiteFly (1459 posts) - - Show Bio

Very well said. I do think a lot of people hate Liefeld because it is cool. He is certainly not my favorite artist, but he doesn't suck anywhere near as much as most people will try to tell you.

#6 Posted by Valkaad (2589 posts) - - Show Bio

Sorry Shatter, but I ALWAYS hated Suckfield's art. Especially his Leg's!! His depiction of the anatomy of a leg was akin to the art of my 4 year old sister's. Don't mean to step on your toes, but doesn't Shatterstar (first appearance 1991) suspiciously resemble Patrick Swayze's character in Steel Dawn (1987)?

#7 Posted by Shatterstar (4568 posts) - - Show Bio

ugh...I had to use google image search because I've no idea what you're talking about, apparently only 700 people have seen that movie before, but judging from the pictures I've seen, thats a spectacular reach you're attempting with that theory

Because he has frayed hair and is wearing Mad Max regalia?

plot- This futuristic drama offers the classic story of Shane seved up with a few Mad Max moments and some interesting twists. The tale is set in the smouldering, decimated post-World War III town of Meridian, where locals scrabble to keep their meager farms watered in the midst of a desert wasteland. Bad-guys - a powerful landowner and his cronies - try to monopolize the precious local water supplies by bullying, kidnapping and even murdering citizens. To this beleaguered place comes the enigmatic swordsman/ warrior Nomad who has come in search of his mentor's killer. The town takes him on as their "Peacemaker" and he is able to end their problems and get his revenge to boot. The story was filmed on location in the deserts of South Africa. ~ Sandra Brennan, All Movie Guide

So neither the pictures from what I can tell nor the plot has anything, 0, nada, zilch to do with the Shatterstar character. So what are you talking about?

Moderator
#8 Posted by Vic Rattlehead (33 posts) - - Show Bio

Shatterstar says:

Well for one, all those characters with the exception of Fighting American were created in the 90s, when the market was booming not shrinking and the primary audience was still teenagers.
When they were created doesn't prove of disprove anything, nor does it apply to what I stated. Perhaps they were created in the 90's, but those characters were/have been in comics since that time. Secondly, there is nothing to prove that a majority of the comic market in the 90's was comprised of teens or teenagers.
For two, the Fighting American character was created in 1954, revived in 1994 by DC (not Liefeld), Liefeld got the rights when he started Awesome in 97, settled a lawsuit with Marvel because it looked like he was continuing his Heroes Reborn story with that book
Liefeld's Fighting America is a BLATANT rip-off / clone of Captain America. It was recognized by much of the comic industry / community (Marvel included) as such, and as a result flopped. I'd also wager that given the time period of Liefeld's Fighting America release as compared to the time he renigged on his Marvel contract...it equates to a lot of Marvel would be material (which keep in mind was for a Captain America title) that became Liefeld's Fighting America material. Anyone disputing the blatant similarity of the two is either flat out blind, or in some serious @$$ denial.
I'm not sure who Vogue is supposed to be a ripoff of
Domino
..but Supreme and Glory are pretty much their own characters, inspired by other characters but only have superficial similarities with those characters.
Supreme = Superman Glory = Wonder Woman Fighting America = Captain America Vogue = Domino And superficial, I'd suggest actually understanding the meaning of the word....before using it. I'll take one example from the line-up: Wonder Woman = Daughter to an Amazon Queen who's father may well be some dark deity. An Amazon "princess" out within the world of man, she is capable of: Flight, Superhuman Strength, Superhuman Endurance, ect.. Glory = Repeat all of the same, save that Glory had a limited form of teleportaion orginally.
..Supreme pretty much shares a cape and being an alien in common with Superman.
Umm, lets see thats two. Appearance, hell yes.....save for white hair, which can be applied to Wonder Woman and Glory aswell. Add to this, many of the same powers....though not all of the powers that Superman possesses.
Alan Moore changed the character significantly to make him more like the Silver Age Superman, not Liefeld.
Yes, and at the point that Alan Moore was hired to revamp these characters....they really became more of an Alan Moore creation....and less of a Liefeld creation. This is also considered by many, to be the best of Supreme. That's why they were entitled : Alan Moore's Supreme / Glory. Much in the same way many refer to Frank Miller's Batman.
You could argue all of the Image creators ripped off other characters, go a step further all characters are rip offs of what guys like Kirby, Ditko, Everett, Shuster, etc did in the Golden Age.
Hmm... Spawn, blatant rip-off or similarity to whom ? Cyber Force / Wildcats, blatant rip-off or similarity to ? Its not nearly as easy to draw the lines from those mentioned above, to characters existing prior...or well established within the industry. Btw, Spawn was very much considered to be a landmark character in concept at the time.
..Also just because you don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, other people like his work.
Did I say that it shouldn't exist, how about creating a counterpoint to something I said, not something you created and labeled mine. Yes, other people like his work, but I'd wager more don't than do.
..If you don't like it, ignore it.
I do, aside from what I can't when browsing covers at my LCS.
Don't be a sheep and join in the conga line repeating complaints you've heard before.
Don't be a sheep? How about dont be an @$$ and paint your unconfirmed speculation as fact that belongs to me. Twisting your opinion into my motivation does nothing to strengthen your argument or position, its a weak grab at a one up in the conversation. Oh...and I dont have to be a sheep, in order to agree with a large number of people who share my opinion.
People complain about Liefeld's art being disproportioned
Yes, a lack of taste for his style seems to be a common denominator between a large number of comic book fans/reader that know of him.
..so is a dozen different modern artists' style but they don't get anywhere near the negativity
Hmm, ya think maybe its because on top of not liking his art....that he's largely painted himself as an @$$ within the industry? He was the one guy "bounced" from Image. This was done by the very same people that rallied with him to create the company, and served under his "leadership" as CEO. Pretty coincidental that the one thing all of those artists, writers and the like could agree on....was severing their relationship(s) with him. Add to that, that many of them haven't had much in the way of positive words for or about him since.
..in large part just because its fashionable to bash him.
Or maybe he's just reaping what he has sown ?
..Art is subjective, some people like the hyper-realism
Please elaborate on what exactly is "hyper" realism. Realism perhaps, but your addition of hyper seems like an attempt at flawing a style that isnt Liefelds....rather than correctly labeling an art style.
..Liefeld fans like action-oriented, dynamic art.
Thats your opinion, and your certainly entitled to it. Though, I'd say that MANY more people disagree w/you than agree. IMO, dynamic ? Maybe back in the 90's, but his style hasnt grown much when compared to those that he shared the Image foundership with : Lee, Marc Silvestri, ect..
Post Edited:2007-07-19 00:30:50

Post Edited:2007-07-19 00:33:06
Post Edited:2007-07-19 00:39:59
Post Edited:2007-07-19 01:00:38
#9 Posted by Shatterstar (4568 posts) - - Show Bio

Wow dude, you've got issues, maybe camp out in front of the guys' house with a sign or something. I'm not even going to bother.

Moderator
#10 Posted by NiteFly (1459 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm picturing him bowing to a Liefield shrine every night cursing Rob for not loving him.

#11 Posted by fesak (7061 posts) - - Show Bio

What's a Liefield thread without this pic

Moderator
#12 Posted by GoocherLee (365 posts) - - Show Bio

His industry thumping aside, Lifield is a theif, pure and simple.

How many times has he been caught drawing panels in his own comic

that came directly from another artist's source material, line for line?

Probably, too many times to count. Its one thing to use an image from Playboy

for source material, but its entirely different when you take someone else's

art, copy everything, and then slap on a different costume to call it your own.

Lifield is a hack, always was a hack, and will always be a hack. Nuff said.

It would be one thing if he gave credit where credit is due, but like the hack he is,

he never does.

#13 Posted by GoocherLee (365 posts) - - Show Bio
#14 Posted by Sling Shot (3560 posts) - - Show Bio

My theory is that ShatterStar is Liefeld or someone close to him.

#15 Posted by Vic Rattlehead (33 posts) - - Show Bio

Sling Shot says:

"My theory is that ShatterStar is Liefeld or someone close to him."

I was thinking the same myself.

#16 Posted by Prodigal Son (3473 posts) - - Show Bio

Hah! Look at the tiny little box covering him up. Nothing to do with Liefield, that's hilarious!

#17 Posted by DanPrice (143 posts) - - Show Bio

What about cable and Lt Colonel Bravo? That's pretty blatant. And don't go off calling me a pissed off fan. I am a pissed off fan. :)

#18 Posted by fodigg (6146 posts) - - Show Bio

Authors everywhere rip each other off. What matters is if they make you care about their version of an archetype.

#19 Posted by entropy_aegis (15453 posts) - - Show Bio

@Prodigal Son said:

Hah! Look at the tiny little box covering him up. Nothing to do with Liefield, that's hilarious!

AAAARRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHH

#20 Posted by Alpha (7331 posts) - - Show Bio

He does have a point. Wow. Those earlier panels really do show a pattern.