Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - JOE SOAP

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 943
1
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 29 April, 2017, 02:53:44 pm »

Is it not really the case that Ron Smith's aesthetic is just not to your liking –perfectly fine– and that Ron's comment on his working method –even when in his own words– is just a modest anecdote rather than a valid criticism of the quality of his craftmanship as evident on the printed page?

What you get in Thrill-Power Overload is a history of 2000 AD the comic....

I know what's in the book but my question was how is an anecdote an objective criticism of Ron's technique in his published work and what criticisms do you actually have of Ron's work that makes you not like his aesthetics? – because apart from a few arguably dodgy character angles I don't think his technical skill and creativity can really be faulted.




2
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 28 April, 2017, 08:36:14 pm »
As for Ron Smith, well... he certainly drew a LOT of Judge Dredd. Somehow I never felt like he "fit in" with the other great Dredd artists, though (diverse though they may be). I think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point.

Perhaps I should be criticizing the editor of Thrill-Power Overload for choosing to print that quote out of context of the rest of a lengthy interview, which would have presented a more balanced picture. Since he didn't choose to print any counterbalancing comments in which Mr. Smith warmly expressed his appreciation of the medium or the fans of his work, without any context it tends to paint him in a negative light....it sounded so "just business; it-was-all-about-the-money", if he couldn't find anything else the least bit provocative. I did notice just a few instances in the book of creators or editors who "declined to be interviewed for this book".

Is it not really the case that Ron Smith's aesthetic is just not to your liking –perfectly fine– and that Ron's comment on his working method –even when in his own words– is just a modest anecdote rather than a valid criticism of the quality of his craftmanship as evident on the printed page?




3
News / Re: Mills & Skinner's ACCIDENT MAN - The Film
« on: 27 April, 2017, 08:31:47 pm »
I liked the comics, so I'm looking forward to seeing this. As for the trailer, don't worry about it; a lot of good films have had terrible trailers.

That's not the trailer for this Accident Man but a previous low-budget version. The trailer hasn't been released yet.


4
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 27 April, 2017, 01:23:36 am »
Of course all commercial artists have deadlines, and there's a point at which any one of them needs to declare the page as finished. That's understood.

Why in the world Smith should choose to focus on the time demands of the work as opposed to any other aspect (that presumably his fans would be more interested in focusing on) baffled me. He's making a distinct choice to not discuss the artistic aspects of his work, but purely the timeclock-punching involved from his perspective. It just seemed like a strange response to an interviewer with curiosity regarding the work under consideration, to be preserved for the edification of the magazine's history.


Ron Smith is from a different generation - a modest old gentleman who flew Spitfires during World War II. He's  probably surprised people admire and are so interested in work that was considered throwaway and ephemeral back in the day. It's a testament to how great his work still is that people rate him so highly, out of so many other artists, decades later.



5
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 26 April, 2017, 10:49:33 pm »



While Ron was drawing for the weekly prog he was also knocking out several Daily Star strips every week for several years so I'd say his days were fairly packed.

6
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 26 April, 2017, 06:50:44 pm »
It depends on how you look at it, I guess. All I can see is an employee who cared more about making sure he got his calculated hourly wage, than an artist who cared more about what his work looked like in print -- it just seems more like a factory-worker mindset. His choice, of course. I don't know what kind of bills he had to pay every month.

If the art was crap or sub-par you might have a point – but it isn't. I see him as someone who mastered his craft a long time ago to a very high standard and was disciplined and confident enough to know what he could respectably achieve in a set time. We also don't know how long his days actually were before the buzzer went off compared to those of other artists.




7
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 26 April, 2017, 09:03:57 am »
I think ultimately the most telling indictment of his work to me, was when I read in Thrill-Power Overload that he used to set himself a specific amount of time to work on each page, based on his page-rate from 2000 AD. When that time elapsed, he was done, regardless of what the page looked like at that point. Apparently it was a system that worked for him, in justifying his page-rate, but it seemed a bit mercenary to me, and hard for me to respect from the point of view of the-artist-as-craftsman.

The fact that is true makes his level of artistry even more astonishing.

9
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 24 April, 2017, 10:27:29 pm »
In this picture, what is it that people like about the way Dredd is drawn? I mean, there is very little detail in his face, it looks very easy to replicate for anyone with out any artistic experience. By that, I mean he just looks so basic. I don't get any sense of realism from that image, no personality in Dredd's face, he just looks like a cartoon

Facial detail depends on how close up Dredd's face is in the frame. Dredd has experience written all over his chin on this page.


10
Books & Comics / Re: Whats everyone reading?
« on: 24 April, 2017, 08:46:53 pm »
Why 100B hasn't already been turned into a premium cable TV series is a mystery to me. It's so cinematic you could almost just film it verbatim and it would work on screen.

Tom Hardy Tackling Vertigo Comic '100 Bullets' for New Line


11
General / Re: DREDD 2012 Sequel
« on: 24 April, 2017, 01:44:15 pm »
Is the only hold up on us finally getting a sequal, money?

Fundamentally, yes, and I assume finding a studio/producing partner that is willing to collaborate with 2000AD to a degree where they don't demand total control of the property and want to change it beyond recognition. Not easy considering the amount of money involved.

The DNA FILMS iteration is now out of contract and the film-rights have returned to Rebellion so while I'm sure the actors could return to their respective roles - if requested - a new film it might require a slight redesign of the look as the specific designs from the 2012 version are the previous studio's copyright. I'm not sure if 2000AD can get around that since they publish the comic based on the same designs.

Either way I suspect a reboot of some order will eventually happen.

 

12
Off Topic / Re: Modern Life Is Rubbish
« on: 23 April, 2017, 11:48:12 pm »
Answering my own question here, but films used to be better in the olden days too. Star Wars, Citizen Kane, Alien....

There's an almost 40 year gap between those two and there was fair amount of shite produced in that time that has conveniently been forgotten and a fair amount after that too. The 80s and 90s were nowt much better. 

It might seem like there are more less good films now than ever but more content is produced and we do get to see more than our parents ever had the chance to.

There's also more good stuff from the past because there's simply more 'past' to choose from.


13
General / Re: I may get shot for this...
« on: 23 April, 2017, 11:07:15 pm »
I prefer the way Carlos Ezquerra lays-out a page and the gritty, dynamic feel of his work.

The visual energy from the interplay between the angle of composition and the alternating direction of deep black/high-contrast line work in these pages is extraordinary. You feel like you're being drawn into the black swirl of the last frame of the second page.



I don't get the same intense flow of story-action from more static, illustrative artists like Brian Bolland or Greg Staples. I also think Carlos Ezquerra has a unique feel for character design.


14
Off Topic / Re: Testing…
« on: 23 April, 2017, 06:54:08 pm »

Sauchie/Bikini Kill/Butch/Frank/Willie Russell is preparing his loins for the upcoming release of Tom of Finland

15
Film & TV / Re: IMDB IS SCUM (so is rotten tomatoes)
« on: 23 April, 2017, 01:22:49 am »
As always it's entirely subjective and even when a majority of critics actually agree with a proportional number of the audience, 'good' films still bomb.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/scott_pilgrims_vs_the_world
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446029/?ref_=nv_sr_1

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 943