All DC comics to relaunch with Issue #1 in September

[King Snarf]

Exactly what type of blackmail material do YOU think Rob Liefield has over the honchos at DC?

From what I've heard, to get continued work in comics (and probably most other fields), you have to be at least two of three things- good, fast, or nice. From what I've heard, Liefeld has the last two down, with the fast option coming provided he's got an editor keeping tabs on him.

OK, but there has to be a minimum standard for all three. Surely even if work is delivered on time and the creator is pleasant to work with, if the material is fanzine level at best it should be rejected by a major professional publisher.

This was actually the first stuff I'd read from Liefield in years. His work has deteriorated even from where it was-and Lobo and Deathstroke should have been characters he could handle, at least in over-the-top 90s style.

AND, if he hadn't been in the business for 20 years, yeah, he might have been canned. But the fact is that at this point, his name is considered to have some meaning.

[Arcane Guyver]

But the fact is that at this point, [Liefeld's] name is considered to have some meaning.

Hmm... I'm not sure if that meaning is "Broken backs and missing bones" or "Never enough bandoliers and pouches."

[JetstreamGW]

But the fact is that at this point, [Liefeld's] name is considered to have some meaning.

Hmm... I'm not sure if that meaning is "Broken backs and missing bones" or "Never enough bandoliers and pouches."

Everyone likes to mock him, but the fact of the matter is he brings in sales.

He has done so fairly consistently since the 90s. Hate him all you want, he'll keep getting work as long as his work turns a profit.

[Arcane Guyver]

Hate him all you want...

Sure. I treat him like the various other aspects of life I don't like but have no real control over - shake my fist in the air occasionally, make snarky comments, then go about my business.

[saint_matthew]

But the fact is that at this point, [Liefeld's] name is considered to have some meaning.

Hmm... I'm not sure if that meaning is "Broken backs and missing bones" or "Never enough bandoliers and pouches."

Everyone likes to mock him, but the fact of the matter is he brings in sales.

He has done so fairly consistently since the 90s. Hate him all you want, he'll keep getting work as long as his work turns a profit.

So did simians on motorcycles, but i'm pretty sure i don't ever want to see that again either.

[JetstreamGW]

Everyone likes to mock him, but the fact of the matter is he brings in sales.

He has done so fairly consistently since the 90s. Hate him all you want, he'll keep getting work as long as his work turns a profit.

So did simians on motorcycles, but i'm pretty sure i don't ever want to see that again either.

People still pay to see that at circuses too.

Doesn't matter what YOU want, it only matters what makes them money. You know that.

[saint_matthew]

People still pay to see that at circuses too.

That would explain where Liefeld learned anatomy from? Drawing the clowns, contortionists & muscle man.

Look, regardless of whats said, the guy is an objectively bad artist, with no sense of proportion, movement, or nuance. The fact that he still sells well says more about the gullibility of some people, then any actual appreciable level of skill he has demonstrated as either a writer, or an artist.

We have so many great creators out there, that it is disappointing as hell that DC & Marvel fixate on sucha small group of entrenched creators, on the basis that you can sell a ship load of low end books by slapping there name on the cover.

But of course that fact alone really shows exactly how much humans want to subscribe to the concept of celebrity, even to there own detriment.

[greycrusader]

But the fact is that at this point, [Liefeld's] name is considered to have some meaning.

Hmm... I'm not sure if that meaning is "Broken backs and missing bones" or "Never enough bandoliers and pouches."

Everyone likes to mock him, but the fact of the matter is he brings in sales.

He has done so fairly consistently since the 90s. Hate him all you want, he'll keep getting work as long as his work turns a profit.

But does he really bring in sales at this point? In the 1990s, sure. But Hawk and Dove was one of the first nu52 titles canceled. His recent work outside the Big Two hasn't resulted in any hits, unless I've overlooked some Liefeld title entirely.

Frank Miller, yes-even though All-Star Batman and Robin was heinous people still bought the thing (until Miller decided it was a bi-yearly title). But Liefeld? I'm thinking not so much anymore. I predict Hawkman and Deathstroke will be gone really soon.

All my best.

[tomorrow]

People still pay to see that at circuses too.

That would explain where Liefeld learned anatomy from? Drawing the clowns, contortionists & muscle man.

Look, regardless of whats said, the guy is an objectively bad artist, with no sense of proportion, movement, or nuance. The fact that he still sells well says more about the gullibility of some people, then any actual appreciable level of skill he has demonstrated as either a writer, or an artist.

We have so many great creators out there, that it is disappointing as hell that DC & Marvel fixate on sucha small group of entrenched creators, on the basis that you can sell a ship load of low end books by slapping there name on the cover.

But of course that fact alone really shows exactly how much humans want to subscribe to the concept of celebrity, even to there own detriment.

LOL

[Mr Mole]

People still pay to see that at circuses too.

Hey... Wait a minute, there... I was in the circus for seven years... Don't go knocking the circus by making comparisons between it and Liefeld...

[saint_matthew]

People still pay to see that at circuses too.

Hey... Wait a minute, there... I was in the circus for seven years... Don't go knocking the circus by making comparisons between it and Liefeld...

Oh good, you can settle this debate for us: Did you circus have any crying simians on motor cycles?

[Mr Mole]

People still pay to see that at circuses too.

Hey... Wait a minute, there... I was in the circus for seven years... Don't go knocking the circus by making comparisons between it and Liefeld...

Oh good, you can settle this debate for us: Did you circus have any crying simians on motor cycles?

Not the circus I was in, no... But we were very small-time, as far as circuses go... For something flashier and closer to your home, there's the Ashton Family Circus in Australia... I've known a few people who've performed with them over the years... I haven't talked with her in person since I was seventeen, but I have Bekki Ashton friended on Facebook... I can see if they have any crying simians on motorcycles... I don't recall hearing mention of any, but it's possible I haven't payed close enough attention...

[NOTE: And in case anyone's wondering, no, Bekki wouldn't have any idea who "Mr Mole" is... Most people knew me by a totally different nickname back then...And, no, I don't feel like sharing it just now...]

[HappyDaze]

People still pay to see that at circuses too.

That would explain where Liefeld learned anatomy from? Drawing the clowns, contortionists & muscle man.

Look, regardless of whats said, the guy is an objectively bad artist, with no sense of proportion, movement, or nuance. The fact that he still sells well says more about the gullibility of some people, then any actual appreciable level of skill he has demonstrated as either a writer, or an artist.

We have so many great creators out there, that it is disappointing as hell that DC & Marvel fixate on sucha small group of entrenched creators, on the basis that you can sell a ship load of low end books by slapping there name on the cover.

But of course that fact alone really shows exactly how much humans want to subscribe to the concept of celebrity, even to there own detriment.

LOL

I quite agree. The idea that art can be taken as objectively good or bad is quite hilarious to me.

[saint_matthew]

I quite agree. The idea that art can be taken as objectively good or bad is quite hilarious to me.

Actually it can. See art is split into two seperate components. The first component is artistic merit, which can be judged subjectively & is open to interpretation. However the second component is technical skill within any given medium, which is judged objectively.

Hence, objectively Liefelds art is bad.

The excuse of "art can't be judged objectively" is the catch cry of every untalltented wannabe artist & hipster with a cell phone & instagram account. Professional art can be & IS jedged objectively every day: If we couldn't do that DC & Marvel would not be hiring professional artists, they could just hire three year olds, with crayons.

[HappyDaze]

And... I'm still laughing...