TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Love for Liefeld?

Go To

Jhimmibhob Since: Dec, 2010
#1: Mar 6th 2012 at 11:22:42 AM

I spent nearly the entire 1990s taking a break from comics, and so missed most of The Dark Age Of Comic Books. Pretty obviously, Rob Liefeld is one of that era's symbols and chief whipping boys. And anyone who has a modem can get a rundown of his artistic shortcomings and annoying signature traits—I sure have.

However: for a brief period, the man was close to #1 in the industry. Buyer's remorse kicked in hard, obviously, but if Liefeld was such a total artistic disaster, it strains belief that he'd have become famous in the first place, that readers would have bought his stuff, or that his contemporaries would have imitated anything about him.

So my question is this: What were the good things about Liefeld's style and artistic choices that caused his initial rise? Were there aspects in which he was skilled or far-sighted? In short, are there any babies to be salvaged from the Liefeldian bathwater? He's been a Hype Backlash victim for decades now, and it'd be nice to give him his due, if any's there to be given.

C0mraid from Here and there Since: Aug, 2010
#2: Mar 6th 2012 at 11:48:31 AM

I've often heard it said that people who like Liefield can't articulate why, and those who hate him can rattle off a large number of reasons.

That said, I think there is something about some of his earlier work. For one thing he doesn't seem to have picked up a large number of Liefieldisms, it's a bit like watching William Shatner in that Twillight Zone episode. I think there's an enthusiasm that translates to his work, but unfortunately only in the bits where he is actually interested in. That said, I can't understand how he got so popular.

Am I a good man or a bad man?
TeChameleon Since: Jan, 2001
#3: Mar 6th 2012 at 12:44:48 PM

Not being a fan of the guy's stuff myself, I can't say for certain, but a moment's reflection provided this insight; Liefeld's art is aggressive, actually somewhat dynamic, and has a certain style to it. It is also, unfortunately, almost universally terrible in all technical aspects, particularly anatomy, composition, and design.

I can almost understand liking Liefeld- he definitely has a certain energy to his work; heck, if he could actually be arsed to learn how to draw, he could be phenomenal. Sadly, we're instead stuck with high-energy lazy slop that I'd be hard pressed to call elementary sad

TiggersAreGreat Since: Mar, 2011
#4: Mar 6th 2012 at 2:06:34 PM

Maybe one of the problems with Liefeld is that he's living in a time and place where people expect to see "realistic" art. His art style is most certainly not realistic. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I guess people equate "unrealistic" with "ugly"!

Oh, Equestria, we stand on guard for thee!
TeChameleon Since: Jan, 2001
#5: Mar 6th 2012 at 8:20:39 PM

Maybe one of the problems with Liefeld is that he's living in a time and place where people expect to see "realistic" art. His art style is most certainly not realistic. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but I guess people equate "unrealistic" with "ugly"!

... if you're responding to me, you're talking to someone who lists Sergio Aragones as one of his favourite artists (he's just barely edged out by Jack Kirby for the top spot). Realistic the man's work is not, but he knows how things are supposed to look, and boils them down to their most basic elements in a wild, cartoony style that looks absolutely amazing.

Liefeld's lack of realism isn't the problem. It's his lack of skill. His page designs are weird and occasionally nearly incomprehensible, his panel layouts are muddled and confusing, his costume designs are uninspired, often ugly, and if anything even more muddled than his panel layouts, lacking any kind of the iconic cohesion that's vital for a successful superhero costume. His anatomy is flat-out wrong... not just exaggerated or cartoonified, just plain old wrong- even a brief web search will reveal a virtual cornucopia of bizarre grotesqueries (like the ever-popular 'Captain America with breasts', or his broken-spined female figures).

There's a spark of something there... some raw talent that lets him put tremendous energy into scenes every once in a while, almost to a Kirby-esque level... but he doesn't really look like he has any clear idea of what he's doing on a strictly technical level, and if he can't bring that talent into play, well, we get the usual array of Liefeld-isms.

Gray64 Since: Dec, 1969
#6: Mar 6th 2012 at 10:17:41 PM

Liefeld's action scenes were very dynamic (even if their compositions were frequently stolen from old New Teen Titans comics) and his panel compositions, when original, were often very creative and visually interesting (no less than DC's Mike Carlin said as much on one occasion, referring to when Liefeld drew the early 90's Hawk and Dove). When paired with a good inker, his work could be quite impressive. Unfortunately, he got very popular a bit too fast and, at Image, was set free to do whatever he wanted, however he wanted, before he was, in my opinion, ready.

I am, however, by no means a fan of Liefeld's. For a whole host of reasons, not least of which his invention of muscle groups and insistence on drawing heads as small as he possibly could...

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#7: Mar 6th 2012 at 10:32:40 PM

Probably the large amount of physical greebling he puts on his characters. Makes for very "detailed" designs.

Fight smart, not fair.
PennyDreadful Since: May, 2010
#8: Mar 7th 2012 at 6:32:32 AM

Liefeld's art has kind of become a shtick at this point: bulging muscles, lots of pouches, weird anatomy, and plenty of screaming, squinting, scowling superheroes waving large weapons. I just find him unintentionally hilarious.

TheMightyHeptagon Since: Aug, 2011
#9: Mar 7th 2012 at 12:05:09 PM

I got a crash course in his work after some comic book store in Cleveland gave away the first twenty issues of X-Force for seven bucks. Reading them all at once like that, the way a kid in the 90s might have (alas, I spent most of that blessed decade watching Sesame Street) I could see a lot of what people might have appreciated when it was new and hot. It's frenetic, fast-moving, over-the-top, and skewed from reality enough that you can digest thirty pages of scowling mutants spraying each other with bullets without taking it too seriously. It's the artistic equivalent of cotton candy—tasty and easy to digest, as long as you don't care too much about about complex technique or intellectual content.

Yeah, the guy definitely isn't my favorite, and I never would have counted on him being as successful as he was, but he's not the worst artist I've ever suffered through. I remember reading New X-Men back when Igor Kordey was drawing it. I'd take Liefeld over that guy any day of the week.

edited 7th Mar '12 12:06:37 PM by TheMightyHeptagon

Jhimmibhob Since: Dec, 2010
#10: Mar 8th 2012 at 8:37:22 AM

Yeah ... from what I've seen of his reproduced stuff, the man certainly doesn't lack for zest. With a bit of study, self-discipline, and the right writers/editors, he could've really been something (in a positive way).

P.S.: even though Liefeld's grasp of anatomy is horrendous, I can't totally hold even that against him. Many good artists get their effects by stretching or breaking the anatomical rules (a lot of John Byrne's dynamism comes from making his figures slightly more curved & elongated than actual humans ever were). And a lot of acknowledged masters commit regular outright sins against anatomy—Kirby, anyone? With discipline & guidance, Liefeld might have learned to make his signature drafting oddities work for him, instead of against him. It's a shame.

So maybe a lot of his Hatedom comes from disappointment over how he could have developed.

Gray64 Since: Dec, 1969
#11: Mar 9th 2012 at 9:44:58 PM

[up] I understand your point, but there's a difference between an artist exaggerating anatomy and an artist who never bothered to learn it in the first place. Exaggerated but otherwise accurate anatomy still looks believable. Liefeld's guiding star seemed to be consistency; if he was going to draw it inaccurately, at least he was going to draw it inaccurately the same way every time.

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#12: Mar 10th 2012 at 12:29:53 AM

Well, he does have several builds that he seems to use. The generic Top-Heavy Guy (as seen on Knight Templar) vs the Mac Truck look.

Fight smart, not fair.
Gray64 Since: Dec, 1969
#13: Mar 10th 2012 at 10:40:18 PM

Yeah, Liefeld helped to codify the generic 90's Super Hero team line up as the Leader Man, the Big Guy, the Psycho, Earth/Wind/Air/Fire Woman and Well Endowed Woman. He didn't invent it (he wa basing his archetypes on the X-Men and the New Teen Titans), but with Youngblood, and with the aid of a lot of other early Image team books, he certainly distilled it. I'm sure there's a trope for that somewhere around here.

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#14: Mar 11th 2012 at 3:11:59 AM

Probably a derivative of the Five-Man Band.

Fight smart, not fair.
Willbyr Hi (Y2K) Relationship Status: With my statistically significant other
Hi
#15: Mar 12th 2012 at 9:26:39 AM

I remember reading New X-Men back when Igor Kordey was drawing it. I'd take Liefeld over that guy any day of the week.
Amen...that art was hideous.

*goes back to lurking*

Add Post

Total posts: 15
Top