Comics Todd McFarlane's artwork was AWFUL

  • Thread starter Thread starter leftblank
  • Start date Start date
Arach Knight said:
His take on the Lizard during Torment, was pretty good. And lets not forget his most credible creation, Spawn. The original Spawn suit should be regarded as some what revolutionary, for deviating from both the typical hero or villain look. It was sort of all unto itself, as this very modern idea of a super beings costume. It lacked the idiosyncraces of the typical hero look (beyond his cape) yet it wasn't fully endowed with villainy qualities...only some.

Again, I'm saying original design. The Lizard isn't his orignal design. And all he did with him is what he seems to do with every monster- add fangs and a large tongue. And to be honest, even Spawn isn't very impressive to me. Considering all the character designs that have been made over the years, Spawn, purely as a costume doesn't really stand out. McFarlane basically has a mood that he generates with his drawing style. And it's pretty much all the same mood.

Since this thread was generated I was looking over some of Todd's Spidey work. There is some that is genuinely good artwork. But he's often very lazy and so the work suffers. Some here were commenting on Alex Ross' work and his tendency to make people look fat. Well, he clearly doesn't make his characters look fat- he just doesn't give them comic book style physiques, which are unrealistic to begin with. He's going for photorealism. how someon actually looks in a skin tight costume. And, no matter how cut a person is, their abs won't show through the material as comics make it look. It's obvious based on his strong knowledge of anatomy that Ross does what he does on purpose. But look at McFarlane's Spidey drawings- he gives Spidey the legs of a horse.

As for his poses, they're ridiculous. They aren't "spidery" or cool IMO. Spidey often looks like he suffers from cerebral palsy. His arms and hands will be twisted in ways that don't suggest flexibility, but that he's spasming.
 
Dragon said:
Again, I'm saying original design. The Lizard isn't his orignal design. And all he did with him is what he seems to do with every monster- add fangs and a large tongue. And to be honest, even Spawn isn't very impressive to me. Considering all the character designs that have been made over the years, Spawn, purely as a costume doesn't really stand out. McFarlane basically has a mood that he generates with his drawing style. And it's pretty much all the same mood.

I agree with that much. Todd mcfarlene does not captivate much more than "gritty", "dark", "evil", and a vibe of things lurking in the shadows. Basically, if you wanted to summarize him in very short words, you could say that everything is Spawn. But like I said in my previous post, that is the style that he is TRYING to do. You can't condemn a romance novelist for writing about love...and you can't condemn a gothic-style comic book artist for drawing things to look seedy and evil. So he serves his purpose.


Dragon said:
Since this thread was generated I was looking over some of Todd's Spidey work. There is some that is genuinely good artwork. But he's often very lazy and so the work suffers. Some here were commenting on Alex Ross' work and his tendency to make people look fat. Well, he clearly doesn't make his characters look fat- he just doesn't give them comic book style physiques, which are unrealistic to begin with. He's going for photorealism. how someon actually looks in a skin tight costume. And, no matter how cut a person is, their abs won't show through the material as comics make it look. It's obvious based on his strong knowledge of anatomy that Ross does what he does on purpose. But look at McFarlane's Spidey drawings- he gives Spidey the legs of a horse.


I agree that his work can be lazy. He tends to black a lot of things out instead of drawing out the details. Backgrounds are very plain sometimes. Sometimes. But again it's a question of lazy vs. style. What you said about ross, I agree with. That's what I was saying in my previous post. But it's not to say that Todd doesn't know anatomy, he does it like that because it looks cool to some people. I have a Macfarlene styled spidey figure, it looks pretty damn cool.

Think about it. Do you know why heroes wear tights? Why they wear revealing clothes that show off their bodies? It was because originally they wanted to show that the heroes had super strength. The characters were something more than just average or human. So the style just became more and more stylized.

Okay so Todd is doing that on purpose. Just to make that clear.


Dragon said:
As for his poses, they're ridiculous. They aren't "spidery" or cool IMO. Spidey often looks like he suffers from cerebral palsy. His arms and hands will be twisted in ways that don't suggest flexibility, but that he's spasming.

The idea is to be creepy. Think about Spider-man's costume. If you were a nervous criminal and you went to do something in the night. You're affraid of cops, and you're wondering if you'll be sent away for years if you get caught. All these things on your mind. And then some creep flashes a red flashlight in front of you...And just as you realize that it's Spider-man, you see this weirdo slowly lower himself down, upside down on a web. You have no idea what the guy looks like under the mask, and you're not even so sure that he's all the way human. All you see are huge white, reflective eyes glowing and looking at you. That's really really creepy.

And that's why Todd has him in those weirdo stances. So he can be creepy. Todd is not going for realism. So for you to point out contortions and such that are "unrealistic" or inhuman, is a n/a point. Everything is stylized. It's all intentional for that vibe and that feeling that you felt.

You don't have to like his style. You can say "I prefer a more realistic representation" But to attack his style as if he didn't do it on purpose is kind of silly. Like you speak as if his art is drawn in a manner that makes many mistakes....
 
Regardless if you like Todd's art or not, no one can deny that without him Spider-man would look completley different today. We wouldn't have had Bagley drawing Spider-man the way he did, or anyone else for that matter.

The big eyes, extremely complex webbing, crazy poses, Todd started all that, so even if you don't like his artwork, we should at least be greatfull for what he started.
 
Exactly, there's plenty of art out there(whether it be film, book, music, painting, comic or otherwise) that I don't personally like, but still recognize as good or important in terms of revolutionizing something.

That being said, McFarlane is my favourite Spidey artist, ever.
 
ChineseFooD said:
I agree with that much. Todd mcfarlene does not captivate much more than "gritty", "dark", "evil", and a vibe of things lurking in the shadows. Basically, if you wanted to summarize him in very short words, you could say that everything is Spawn. But like I said in my previous post, that is the style that he is TRYING to do. You can't condemn a romance novelist for writing about love...and you can't condemn a gothic-style comic book artist for drawing things to look seedy and evil. So he serves his purpose.





I agree that his work can be lazy. He tends to black a lot of things out instead of drawing out the details. Backgrounds are very plain sometimes. Sometimes. But again it's a question of lazy vs. style. What you said about ross, I agree with. That's what I was saying in my previous post. But it's not to say that Todd doesn't know anatomy, he does it like that because it looks cool to some people. I have a Macfarlene styled spidey figure, it looks pretty damn cool.

Think about it. Do you know why heroes wear tights? Why they wear revealing clothes that show off their bodies? It was because originally they wanted to show that the heroes had super strength. The characters were something more than just average or human. So the style just became more and more stylized.

Okay so Todd is doing that on purpose. Just to make that clear.




The idea is to be creepy. Think about Spider-man's costume. If you were a nervous criminal and you went to do something in the night. You're affraid of cops, and you're wondering if you'll be sent away for years if you get caught. All these things on your mind. And then some creep flashes a red flashlight in front of you...And just as you realize that it's Spider-man, you see this weirdo slowly lower himself down, upside down on a web. You have no idea what the guy looks like under the mask, and you're not even so sure that he's all the way human. All you see are huge white, reflective eyes glowing and looking at you. That's really really creepy.

And that's why Todd has him in those weirdo stances. So he can be creepy. Todd is not going for realism. So for you to point out contortions and such that are "unrealistic" or inhuman, is a n/a point. Everything is stylized. It's all intentional for that vibe and that feeling that you felt.

You don't have to like his style. You can say "I prefer a more realistic representation" But to attack his style as if he didn't do it on purpose is kind of silly. Like you speak as if his art is drawn in a manner that makes many mistakes....

'nuff said!
 
I'm mixed on Todd Mcfarlane.

No one can deny the affect that he has had on the character of Spider-man. He will go on as one of the most influencial artist for the character. He revolutionized the way artist draw the "webbing" and also began that whole trend of Spider-man in "spider-like" poses.

At the same time though, his work did seem a bit "messy" at times. I understand like someone mentioned above that he intended for it to be like that. Personally I just didn't care for it. Also his "people" were horrible in my opinion.

Like I said though.

Personally he isn't one of my favorites.

But I did enjoy some of his work and as a fan of the character Spider-man..you have to respect the guy's work.
 
1)Todd does have some preportion issues, but it isn't like Liefeld, who does it unintentionally. For Todd, it is more a stylistic choice. His poses are unrealistic (as are most modern takes on spidey movements while slinging) but they do give Spider-Man a unique character. Most non-vehicular mobile heroes, tend to travel with the same standard poses. Spider-Man is really the only one to engage in aerial mobility, with the style that he does. I think it makes him interesting, and there is no denying that McFarlene is chiefly responsible for the shift in a pose taking Spidey, or even his large eyes. Prior to that, most people adhered to the Ditko eyes (which I actually like a little more, in some cases), but now, everybody uses the larger lenses. Todd is a credit to his work.

2)I agree about the statements about Alex Ross. Anybody who can't tell that he is drawing actual humans, either doesn't understand art or they don't understand anatomy. Or possibly both. Humans just don't look like they do in comic books, when they put on any kind of suit. Super costumes in comics, always look painted on...and it works in a book, but in real life, you just won't get that look. It should also be noted, that Alex Ross doesn't frequently paint from independent derivation. He tends to use body models for references to shadow casting, size and preportion. So what you see, is always a representation of actual human range of motion and appearence. I like his take on super heroes.
 
Ross is awesome. Mcfarlane isn't as bad as liefeld? That isn't saying much.
 
As I was reading my way through the past 40 years of Spider-Man, at some point the art started to really annoy me... I thought the direction it was veering off in... sucked, quite frankly. UGLY and sloppy were words that often came to mind...

I've since learned the history... and I'm not going to call him a bad artist... I just know my first gut reaction was - yuck. I guess I'm just one of those "don't care for McFarlane's influence on Spidey" folks.

*shrugs*

Oh, well. Doesn't matter. :yay:
 
leftblank said:
I've heard for years now about how wonderful Todd's artwork was and how revolutionary he was to the business and yesterday, I came across Todd McFarlane: Legends Vol 3 which is a TPB of his final issues on ASM. It was a cheap price so I got it. I read the whole thing and I gotta know, what on earth was so great about this guy. I thought his artwork stank. Yeah, his Spider Man was cool with the webbing and poses but that's it and that was by no means revolutionary. All of his human faces were so terrible. Peter and the rest of the cast all look really REALLY ugly with the freaky eyes, nose and mouths. Way too cartoony and bizarre. And after awhile, looking at his art became nauseating, it's got that effect. What do you guys think?

No means revolutionary, right well I guess that since picking up a McFarlane trade recently was your first time seeing his stuff, we can assume you were not reading Spidey prior to 1988.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"