Peter Parker was bitten by a radioactive spider as a teenager, granting him spider-like powers. After the death of his Uncle Ben, Peter learned that "with great power, comes great responsibility." Swearing to always protect the innocent from harm, Peter Parker became Spider-Man.
So I am really getting tired of how lousy the artwork in Amazing Spider-Man has been. I mean Ramos can't draw worth a crap, but I know art tastes very- What are your thoughts?
I actually like Ramos, his Wolverine looks really cool! but his Spider-man looks kinda ridicules... it's not that bad but it's look like something for litlle kids, and Spider-man should not be a kid! If He should be a kid only in Ultimate Spider-man.
And it is very far from the worst but I really don't like the way alex ross draw him... he draw his costume like a regular costume for Halloween and it looks kinda bad.
Oh definitely Humberto Ramos. I cringe every time I see his name on a cover of Amazing Spider-Man. His facial expressions are just scrappy and his outlines are ridiculous. If I were reviewing it, I'd only give Ramos a 4 or 5 out of 10.
@Strider92 said:
Eric Canete:
Though this might change my mind. What the actual hell?
I don't know the persons name but They did a short comic during in the Spider Man Election Day Book that was really bad really blocky and somewhat Anime...
I have seen this picture more than once, yet I am still amazed at how terrible this picture is. Dear God this guy makes liefeld look like a well trained Doctor on human anatomy.
I have seen this picture more than once, yet I am still amazed at how terrible this picture is. Dear God this guy makes liefeld look like a well trained Doctor on human anatomy.
hey hey now. lets not lose our heads here. the art is bad but not liefeld bad. he is the king. this is bad but its funky a certain style. liefeld is 5 year old level drawing. seriously. if you showed a pic of something drawed by liefeld to a kid and tell him to replicate it, he can do it. perfectly.
It's kinda sad to see how many people dislike Ramos. I mean yeah, his style is not for everyone, but i think his more recent artwork in the amazing spider-man is just pretty good, at least a lot better than his older one. I think his style fits to the character, due to his character( you know being funny and all, it's not that bad to see a style that fits to that character ), but i wouldn't expect Ramos to draw batman and give you the dark feeling that it should! Just my opinion though! :)
Guys i know i might sound too accepting, but these artists try hard. You guys insulting there artwork is probably making them feel bad. I bet half you guys cant even draw as good as the "crappy" artists.
@PaperDemon: I don't think Ramos has bad art I just don't like it.
Also of course we can't draw as well as them THEY GET PAID to be professional artists, they should be good and trying hard isn't good enough. The Buffalo Bills try hard and are better at football than me but I still think they suck.
I remember when all of Marvel's best artists bailed on them to go form Image comics back in the day. And I remember how awful it was there for a while after the exodus. Web of Spider-man, Spectacular Spider-man, and the title once called "Todd McFarlane's Spider-man". All of those books suffered. Marvel knew people would buy Spider-man comics no matter what so they just shoved whatever hacks they had left in the slots left empty by the Image guys and thus began the dark times.
Everything I see in modern comics is better than it was back in those days. Even that weird Lade Stilt-man panel buries the work from back then.
@ZZoMBiE13: I'm still in love with McFarlane's Spider-man. His art is just beyond awesome. I'd have given anything for him to do the art on the 50th anniversary issue!
Spider-man never looked more spidery (or as threatening) than when Todd drew him! David Finch also draws a very good Spider-man.
@Strider92: I loved the way Todd drew spider-man. With his giant bug-eyes, 3d webbing , and the fact that he was always crouching, swinging, doing things like only Spider-Man could do. I loved it, although I didn't really like the way he drew the regular people, always looked weird to me.
Some of you guys must be art snobs or something cause besides the one picture that looks like spiderman is missing limbs the rest just look like the type of art style. Just my opinion it's for sure not the greatest by a long shot but the way you guys were talking thought they were stick figures lol.
David Lafuente. Not the worst, but his style seems too childish for Spider-Man. I hate it. Also, he makes Peter look a lot smaller than all the other characters. It just doesn't fit Spider-Man.
@punkaiser While David Lafuente wasn't the best Ultimate Spider-man artist, with Mark Bagley sitting on that throne with David Marques as the successor to it, I feel like he was better for the role than Stuart Immonen was before him. When I was a kid, after reading almost all previous volumes of the series and reaching the 19th volume, I was so disappointed because Immonen's art seemed out of place, like he could not draw any of the character's correctly. Spider-man's body seemed deformed and cartoony to the point his anatomy looked completely wrong. Peter, Mary, Aunt May and others looked like they had been transformed into different people. While I have seen Immonen create beautiful comics, such as some of his Captain America and Superman stuff, even most of the covers were amazing, the interiors of his 22+ issues seemed shoddy and felt like big blotches, differing from Bagley and Lafuente. At least Lafuente was able to bring back the same kind of tone Bagley took so long to build. While lafuente's work was more like manga (just look at the original hair due of Peter Parker), it still looked more in place with the standard of Ultimate Spider-man than Immonen's work. I wouldn't say Immonen is, based on this work, exactly a "terrible artist", he is just not cut out for Spider-man.
David LafuenteStuart Immonen
Between the two, Lafuente felt like he fit more to the characters and series, adopting a style that was common and familiar to Ultimate spider-man.
@m12: I agree with you more or less. I used to not normally pay attention too much to the art, but I immediately noticed there was a slight difference when I first saw Immonen's art. I'm going to have to put Lafuente and Immonen on the same level of art style I have grown a disdain for. On another note, I just love the other David's(Marquez) art so much. It fits well with Bendis' clever and witty writing and has a strong presence within itself. Like some of the other modern art in today's comic books, Marquez's art has a beautiful, vibrant, and colorful feel. Unlike other artists, however, the art does not feel so digital that just seems plastic. An example might be Tony Daniel's art for Battle for the Cowl. It looks dark and gritty and pretty, but also just feels fake. You know what I mean? Marquez just seems to have a deeper grip to my attention, I guess. I can really feel the message he tries to convey in his art. It feels real in the most artistic sense.
Tony DanielDavid MarquezThis One Really Touched MeDon't Take This Out Of Context(It's not racist, I promise)This version of Gwen Stacy is a lot better than David Lafuente and Sara Pichelli's. I hated the Emo look. I was fine with Mark Bagley's New Age Punk, but that later on Emo look had to go.
This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along
with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely
increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.
Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other
Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll
send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment