Critisizing Rob Liefeld, who makes more than most of us ever will

[Luminus]

http://progressiveboink.com/archive/robliefeld.html

All true. But he gets PAID unlike most of us, so who's really laughing here?

Personally, I've never had a problem with empty backgrounds featuring random lines or colors. Sometimes they just highlighted the mood of the scene. Lines meant action or danger, while color just meant focus on the character.

 

[Christopher]

Well, random lines are probably the only thing Rob Liefeld can be trusted to draw accurately.

 

[Luminus]

^Ouch.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I'm willing to admit I like his style for what it is--or rather, I like aspects of it. He is a piss-poor artist, on the whole. I do not understand what is up with the way he draws feet, hands, and women. Or his obsession with pouches.

...

Yeah, I guess I have low standards, but I'd say most of the criticism of his artwork is pretty accurate. He sucks, and I can enjoy his work for its level of suckitude.

 

[Canadave]

So what are you saying? We can't criticize people who make more money than we do?

 

[A beaker full of death]

Lots of talentless people make more money than I do.
Lots of really dumb people make more money than I do.
That doesn't bother me.
What bothers me is that a talentless, untrained hack like Liefeld can rise to a position of prominence because the great unwashed masses don't know art from garbage, and because today's editors are willing to hire hacks regardless of merit.

 

[broberfett]

So what are you saying? We can't criticize people who make more money than we do?

Exactly what I was thinking.

 

[Chaos Descending]

So what are you saying? We can't criticize people who make more money than we do?

Exactly what I was thinking.

I think what he's saying is simply that we can mock Liefeld all we want, and he'll just be laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Luminus]

So what are you saying? We can't criticize people who make more money than we do?

Exactly what I was thinking.

I think what he's saying is simply that we can mock Liefeld all we want, and he'll just be laughing all the way to the bank.

Precisely.

 

[Tom Hendricks]

The thing about Liefeld is that yes he is a mediocre artist but he could turn out pages very quickly. His books were always on time and at the time, Mavel was at its hight. They had more on going books then any other time. They could count on him to churn out the art and they could sell tons.

 

[scnj]

I don't have any real problems with his style. Yeah, his feet suck, but who focuses on the feet in a picture of Juggernaut?

I'd put more value in the criticism if they put their money where their mouth was and proved that they could do better drawings on time for a comic deadline constantly.

 

[barnaclelapse]

I do have to wonder about a guy who would devote that much of his time to criticizing a comic book artist, although I will say that I agree with much of it and always have.

I do actually like some of Liefeld's work though. I love that X-Factor cover with Juggernaut.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

I didn't know that guy was still around.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

The thing about Liefeld is that yes he is a mediocre artist but he could turn out pages very quickly. His books were always on time and at the time, Mavel was at its hight. They had more on going books then any other time. They could count on him to churn out the art and they could sell tons.

That's a good point. A lot of those Image guys wouldn't know a deadline if it punched them in the face.

 

[scnj]

The thing about Liefeld is that yes he is a mediocre artist but he could turn out pages very quickly. His books were always on time and at the time, Mavel was at its hight. They had more on going books then any other time. They could count on him to churn out the art and they could sell tons.

That's a good point. A lot of those Image guys wouldn't know a deadline if it punched them in the face.

Todd McFarlane for example. Still waiting on Spawn 200 and Image United 3.

 

[A beaker full of death]

I don't have any real problems with his style.

Inability to draw is not a style.

I'd put more value in the criticism if they put their money where their mouth was and proved that they could do better drawings on time for a comic deadline constantly.

First of all, that's not a basis for whether or not criticism is valid. Secondly, thousands of artists do it every month.
This guy shouldn't even be in the same industry with, say, Ariel Olivetti or Mauro Cascioli.

 

[scnj]

I don't have any real problems with his style.

Inability to draw is not a style.

As much as I hate the affective fallacy, you cannot outright prove he has an inability to draw. While many people may dislike his drawing, there will be some people who like it, and outright saying they're wrong is absurd.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Of course they're wrong. Some people like piss in a cup, too. That doesn't make it lemonade.
He is untrained. He does not know the rudiments of composition, anatomy or perspective; this is clear from his work. This is not a matter of preference, it is objectively demonstrable. This is not a matter of style.

 

[FPAlpha]

Liefeld is just a bad artist but for some reason he manages it to sell his stuff and has found his market so he gets work.

And basing an argument about the quality of something just because it/he makes a ton of money is just dumb. Michael Bay makes a shitload of money yet his movies are for the most part utter garbage (story and acting wise.. pretty explosions not always make a good movie).