are you "yuck"ing about the art or Claremont writing? I don't have a problem with that sketch at all. actually i like it a lot. Clairmont hasn't exactly been hitting it out of the park lately but I'll absolutely check this out.
i'm not feeling Nauck too cartoony... maybe this series will be about the little Bamfs?
You think that particular image is too cartoony? It’s very stylized (and the blacks aren’t spotted in a way I find appealing), but I wouldn’t call it cartoony. You must hate that Ed McGuiness is drawing Amazing X-Men.
Nauck is suited well for Nightcrawler. I just hope Claremont is up to the task here. Considering his history with the character, I'm cautiously optimistic.
Nauck is suited well for Nightcrawler. I just hope Claremont is up to the task here. Considering his history with the character, I'm cautiously optimistic.
I agreed with you right up until you said “cautiously optimistic.” I’m afraid I am cynically pessimistic as far as Claremont is concerned. I doubt I'll pick it up right away, but rather wait until I hear feedback on it.
yeah i really like McGuiness but i dont like Nauck... maybe coz McGuiness is cleaner and more polished? Nauck tends to look more scratchy and rushed
Nauck was a fan of McFarlane, and he worked at Extreme Studios when he was breaking in, so a bit of that McFarlane/Scott Williams scratchiness still comes through in his work. But McGuinness is very cartoony with his proportions. He pushes the shapes and forms much more so than Nauck even.
So it’s not the so much the cartoony aspect of Nauck you’re opposed to, but the over-rendering (which he does tend to do)?
i guess it's the combo of cartoony and scratchy that i do not like... plus i dont recall nauck producing a nice polished run on any comic... seems kind of weird that they'd put this guy on the series... aren't there more consistent and proven talent out there? maybe marvel has 0 confidence in Claremont... =P
steve epting is scratchy but not cartoony... so i like his art
i guess it's the combo of cartoony and scratchy that i do not like... plus i dont recall nauck producing a nice polished run on any comic... seems kind of weird that they'd put this guy on the series... aren't there more consistent and proven talent out there? maybe marvel has 0 confidence in Claremont... =P
steve epting is scratchy but not cartoony... so i like his art
just personal preference i guess
Nauck isn’t my favorite artist by any stretch, but he’s a solid storyteller, and I think he is both consistent and proven. He proved himself 15 years ago with a 55-issue run on Young Justice, where he drew all but two issues, plus some specials. Maybe he’s not an A-list talent, but he gets a solid B from me, and I think his sensibilities match up well with a character like Nightcrawler.
And I wouldn’t call Epting scratchy either. He’s much more realistic in his rendering, but he keeps his blacks very simple and clean. Not to the point of minimalism like Samnee, but more like Michael Lark and Sean Phillips. But I think I know what you mean.
Nauck is one of those artists I like on Monday and hate on Wednesdays... I just can't make up my mind about him. I feel the same way about Paul Pelletier.
On the subject of Chris Claremont however, there is no debate in my mind. Instantly no chance of me buying this book.
The more recent promo images/sketches that Nauck did looked pretty good. Forget where I saw them. Newsarama, maybe?
I think Claremont gets hated on too much for his recent work. I think X-Men Forever was fairly good -- started out a solid "good", then ran too long and ended up in the last "season" averaging maybe 2 out of 5 stars in the writing department.
I'm cautiously optimistic about this Nightcrawler series. I'll give it a try. When Claremont is "on", I enjoy him quite a bit. I enjoyed X-Men Forever for a good year or so at first, and it was double-shipping then. I enjoyed a good portion of his most recent Uncanny X-Men run (when Alan Davis and Chris Bachalo were doing the art).
Odds on this Nightcrawler series being GREAT? Almost zero percent. Odds on it being good enough? Eh, 50/50.
I'm not sure I really follow all the Claremont hate I keep running across. I really enjoyed his "returns" to the X-Titles, although they were always short, since his departure in the early 90's. I'm interested.
I am pleasantly surprised when I heard about this book. From the promo I figured it would be a new Excalibur book. (Which I also would have bought.) Looks good.
Comments
too cartoony... maybe this series will be about the little Bamfs?
So it’s not the so much the cartoony aspect of Nauck you’re opposed to, but the over-rendering (which he does tend to do)?
steve epting is scratchy but not cartoony... so i like his art
just personal preference i guess
And I wouldn’t call Epting scratchy either. He’s much more realistic in his rendering, but he keeps his blacks very simple and clean. Not to the point of minimalism like Samnee, but more like Michael Lark and Sean Phillips. But I think I know what you mean.
On the subject of Chris Claremont however, there is no debate in my mind. Instantly no chance of me buying this book.
I think Claremont gets hated on too much for his recent work. I think X-Men Forever was fairly good -- started out a solid "good", then ran too long and ended up in the last "season" averaging maybe 2 out of 5 stars in the writing department.
I'm cautiously optimistic about this Nightcrawler series. I'll give it a try. When Claremont is "on", I enjoy him quite a bit. I enjoyed X-Men Forever for a good year or so at first, and it was double-shipping then. I enjoyed a good portion of his most recent Uncanny X-Men run (when Alan Davis and Chris Bachalo were doing the art).
Odds on this Nightcrawler series being GREAT? Almost zero percent.
Odds on it being good enough? Eh, 50/50.
I really enjoyed his "returns" to the X-Titles, although they were always short, since his departure in the early 90's.
I'm interested.