For me it will always be Neal Adams. I read in an article(they had Kirby as the # 1 penciller of all time, although I think it is mostly because of his great creations and body of work rather than quality and accurate anatomy), that the history of comic books has 2 parts. Before Adams and after Adams. Neal changed EVERYTHING. No disrespect to Kirby fans. He influenced every artist on the block but he was not my personal favorite.
@Tabish29 Since I love both artists way too much, let's not pit them one against another, please (although there are many criteria to objectively evaluate a piece of work/art, I think, besides the common saying that 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder').
@Tabish29 Art is never objective. Yes there is some criteria and you sound like you know what they are more than I do but I go by how the art affects me. I think that's what art is supposed to do. To see if they fill the criteria, you would have to compare them which would be like pitting them against each other as you say. BUt Don't see it like that. So what's your 1st criterion?
@Tabish29 You're absolutely right, T29... but evaluation of it can come close to. Ok, for example: 1) What about historical significance... For instance: What genres/comic book universes/coherent worlds of lasting importance to fictional history did Neal CREATE (not innovate, he was a proven master THEREof)?
PS: Now we're already in this game, which I don't like very much...:-)
But am with You 100 % that communication is impact, not intention, if I got You right.
@jmedia1 I think Neal's first work for a major player was the X-Men and some Avengers work before moving onto DC. Kirby scores a point there. What about anatomy? Realism? Consistency of characters looks and appearances.I hold those more important than historical significance.Because Neal and Aparo were my first artists in DC on my favorite title. In Marvel,Buscema was and still is the master for me. His work leapt out at me. Starlin's run on Captain Marvel is still a sentimental fav for me
@Tabish29 That's because Jack wasn't an illustrator in the first place, but a creator and a storyteller, a concept guy and a groundbreaking visionary; he didn't care about pretty pictures or anatomic accuracy too much. His point was to get his story and message across and just to create new characters, new worlds, new modern myths. So a comparison on illustration techniques or skills alone isn't really helpful, I feel. What about comparing - more fact-focussed - their outputs?
@jmedia1 Neal was an illustrator. I already mentioned that he didn't introduce new characters to the comics universe. But such was his skill and power that he did not have to. He took on existing characters and rendered them such that his version(on Batman at least) is to this day, still considered the definitive look. Some Batfans would argue about him vs Rogers. You chose outputs as the criterion. I am choosing images and illustration. Neal wins that round hands down.
@Tabish29 Some strange conclusions there, Tabish29: So - the other way round - Jack HAD to invent most of modern comic book world - because he couldn't illustrate...?!
OK, next point: OUTPUT: While Jack was producing 3 to 4 books a month for decades, You sometimes had to wait YEARS for another one book from Neil. Please don't fall for the misconception, that everything rare is excellent and everything 'common' out of productive people is 'hack'...
@jmedia1 You keep bringing up the output. Neal worked on B$B, Batman, Deadman and GL/GA probably not at the same time. However since he IS an illustrator, and Kirby was a concept storyteller, his work took more time. Not rareity, rather to take an established figure and define it as THE look takes immeasurable talent and creativity as well as creating them from scratch.
@Tabish29 What about the impact and importance to popular cluture outside comics: Without Jack's co-creations there wouldn't have been all those worldwide Hollywood-Blockbusters HULK, X-MEN, FANTASTIC FOUR, IRON MAN, CAPTAIN AMERICA, upcoming AVENGERS, THOR etc. pp.
@jmedia1 You're a Marvel fan that's y u discount Batman and Superman, without who there may not have been all these other super heroes. Didn't Dark KNight take in more overall than Spidey? What about how Neal changed the way comic books were drawn period? One man comes along to a medium and then the entire industry is saying huh? Oh God. Now this is one heck of a standard he's set that we are going to have to live up to.
It is not Jack Versus Stan. It is just SAD that people do not know Jack was the greater creative force. Comics are a visual medium. It is like a screenwriter getting credit over a director even when the director created half of the story. They were the top team EVER and without Stan, Jack's work would not be as great BUT without Jack, Stan would be UNKNOWN. Also, Stan did not say A SINGLE THING on Jack's behalf when MARVEL tried to STEAL his original art. Jack got screwed and Stan did not help.
To anyone who thinks KING KIRBY was just drawing Stan Lee's ideas, you better think twice. Kirby joined Marvel and soon after, they had uncountable new and inventive characters. Kirby left Marvel and created an entire UNIVERSE for D.C... Stan, at this time, QUIT WRITING. Jack soon returned to Marvel and created more characters that are still big. FACTS ARE FACTS. Stan was good but JACK WAS KING. Jack created DARKSEID, THE DEMON, MR. MIRACLE and MACHINE MAN AFTER STAN. STAN DID SQUAT.'NUFF SAID!
I hear a PANTHER MOVIE is finally in the works with that African actor from BLOOD DIAMOND... he is a far better choice than Snipes though I bet Snipes is producing. I only hope they LAY OFF AMERICA since, believe it or not, BUSH, has helped them more than any other in recent times. Not that I would vote for him... lol. GO T'CHALLA!!! KIRBY IS KING!!!!!!!
For me it will always be Neal Adams. I read in an article(they had Kirby as the # 1 penciller of all time, although I think it is mostly because of his great creations and body of work rather than quality and accurate anatomy), that the history of comic books has 2 parts. Before Adams and after Adams. Neal changed EVERYTHING. No disrespect to Kirby fans. He influenced every artist on the block but he was not my personal favorite.
Tabish29 1 year ago
@Tabish29 Well, we could discuss THIS subject for hours....;-)
jmedia1 1 year ago
@jmedia1 anyitme. Although u gotta keep an open mind that what we are saying is totally subjective.
Tabish29 1 year ago
@Tabish29 Since I love both artists way too much, let's not pit them one against another, please (although there are many criteria to objectively evaluate a piece of work/art, I think, besides the common saying that 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder').
jmedia1 1 year ago
@Tabish29 Art is never objective. Yes there is some criteria and you sound like you know what they are more than I do but I go by how the art affects me. I think that's what art is supposed to do. To see if they fill the criteria, you would have to compare them which would be like pitting them against each other as you say. BUt Don't see it like that. So what's your 1st criterion?
Tabish29 1 year ago
@Tabish29 You're absolutely right, T29... but evaluation of it can come close to. Ok, for example: 1) What about historical significance... For instance: What genres/comic book universes/coherent worlds of lasting importance to fictional history did Neal CREATE (not innovate, he was a proven master THEREof)?
PS: Now we're already in this game, which I don't like very much...:-)
But am with You 100 % that communication is impact, not intention, if I got You right.
jmedia1 1 year ago
@jmedia1 I think Neal's first work for a major player was the X-Men and some Avengers work before moving onto DC. Kirby scores a point there. What about anatomy? Realism? Consistency of characters looks and appearances.I hold those more important than historical significance.Because Neal and Aparo were my first artists in DC on my favorite title. In Marvel,Buscema was and still is the master for me. His work leapt out at me. Starlin's run on Captain Marvel is still a sentimental fav for me
Tabish29 1 year ago
@Tabish29 That's because Jack wasn't an illustrator in the first place, but a creator and a storyteller, a concept guy and a groundbreaking visionary; he didn't care about pretty pictures or anatomic accuracy too much. His point was to get his story and message across and just to create new characters, new worlds, new modern myths. So a comparison on illustration techniques or skills alone isn't really helpful, I feel. What about comparing - more fact-focussed - their outputs?
jmedia1 1 year ago
@jmedia1 Neal was an illustrator. I already mentioned that he didn't introduce new characters to the comics universe. But such was his skill and power that he did not have to. He took on existing characters and rendered them such that his version(on Batman at least) is to this day, still considered the definitive look. Some Batfans would argue about him vs Rogers. You chose outputs as the criterion. I am choosing images and illustration. Neal wins that round hands down.
Tabish29 1 year ago
@Tabish29 Some strange conclusions there, Tabish29: So - the other way round - Jack HAD to invent most of modern comic book world - because he couldn't illustrate...?!
OK, next point: OUTPUT: While Jack was producing 3 to 4 books a month for decades, You sometimes had to wait YEARS for another one book from Neil. Please don't fall for the misconception, that everything rare is excellent and everything 'common' out of productive people is 'hack'...
jmedia1 1 year ago
@jmedia1 You keep bringing up the output. Neal worked on B$B, Batman, Deadman and GL/GA probably not at the same time. However since he IS an illustrator, and Kirby was a concept storyteller, his work took more time. Not rareity, rather to take an established figure and define it as THE look takes immeasurable talent and creativity as well as creating them from scratch.
Tabish29 1 year ago
@Tabish29 What about the impact and importance to popular cluture outside comics: Without Jack's co-creations there wouldn't have been all those worldwide Hollywood-Blockbusters HULK, X-MEN, FANTASTIC FOUR, IRON MAN, CAPTAIN AMERICA, upcoming AVENGERS, THOR etc. pp.
jmedia1 1 year ago
@jmedia1 You're a Marvel fan that's y u discount Batman and Superman, without who there may not have been all these other super heroes. Didn't Dark KNight take in more overall than Spidey? What about how Neal changed the way comic books were drawn period? One man comes along to a medium and then the entire industry is saying huh? Oh God. Now this is one heck of a standard he's set that we are going to have to live up to.
Tabish29 1 year ago
@Tabish29 I didn't discount anything! (For a broader scope watch my 100 favorite comics here on yt, if You like).
jmedia1 1 year ago
I became a cartoonist because of Jack Kirby. His pencil work is unmatched!
thumbsaloft 3 years ago 10
His imagination, too, I think. (& same here in a certain way, great;-)
jmedia1 3 years ago
To me it never was Jack vs. Stan.
TOGETHER they sure produced MAGIC.
jmedia1 3 years ago
It is not Jack Versus Stan. It is just SAD that people do not know Jack was the greater creative force. Comics are a visual medium. It is like a screenwriter getting credit over a director even when the director created half of the story. They were the top team EVER and without Stan, Jack's work would not be as great BUT without Jack, Stan would be UNKNOWN. Also, Stan did not say A SINGLE THING on Jack's behalf when MARVEL tried to STEAL his original art. Jack got screwed and Stan did not help.
itzjoeymac 3 years ago
Alright, I will drop it. How about that Buscema tribute you talked about? Lots of good stuff to choose from!
itzjoeymac 3 years ago 3
You find it on my channel as 'Big John B.' - featuring art from his personal own favorite book of all.
Enjoy;-)!
jmedia1 3 years ago
To anyone who thinks KING KIRBY was just drawing Stan Lee's ideas, you better think twice. Kirby joined Marvel and soon after, they had uncountable new and inventive characters. Kirby left Marvel and created an entire UNIVERSE for D.C... Stan, at this time, QUIT WRITING. Jack soon returned to Marvel and created more characters that are still big. FACTS ARE FACTS. Stan was good but JACK WAS KING. Jack created DARKSEID, THE DEMON, MR. MIRACLE and MACHINE MAN AFTER STAN. STAN DID SQUAT.'NUFF SAID!
itzjoeymac 3 years ago
I hear a PANTHER MOVIE is finally in the works with that African actor from BLOOD DIAMOND... he is a far better choice than Snipes though I bet Snipes is producing. I only hope they LAY OFF AMERICA since, believe it or not, BUSH, has helped them more than any other in recent times. Not that I would vote for him... lol. GO T'CHALLA!!! KIRBY IS KING!!!!!!!
itzjoeymac 3 years ago
Still is, yes;-)...
jmedia1 3 years ago
Since some of You seem to dig the idea behind this show: Anybody interested in a tribute-vid to BIG JOHN BUSCEMA (cause I'd love to do one;-)?
jmedia1 4 years ago
Thanks, one of my faves also. Especially this character must have been special and dear to Jack, too, since the panther's creation in the mid 60's.
jmedia1 4 years ago
Sweet video, The Kirby Black Panther series was always one of my favorites
doubleaamazin 4 years ago 3