Author	Topic:   JLA\Avengers *BIG* disapointment...!
Avengers Fan	posted 10/11/03 1:25 PM     Wow... what can i say... totally disapointed... I started getting scared when i heard some of the villains and plots, but when i actually read it... "oh my god" - Even worse than i thought. .Colours - Would have preferred another colour guy \ team... Tom is great at old-school-turned-new vibrant ultra-saturated coloring, but with all the new stuff out there including some great coloring studious, it's a real let down they went with the 3-year-old-over-saturated-grade colouring type. This was to be a special book after all... in the meanwhile JLA gets Alex ross next month... in Liberty & Justice. Writing - Kurt with me has only had 2 modes, copies Jim Shooter & Steve Englehart old storylines from the 70's and kicks major ass (Avengers Forever, ie) or comes up with it's own ideas... and it's so childish, patheticly dependent on suspension of disbelief it'd probably put off even someone as dumb as dumb'ya it self. Unfortunately JLA|AVG fits in the latter. What a shame, after all, in 20's they did have a lot of time to put up a decent story. As is, it's a Jim Starlin copycat without his flair, creativity and instinct for the intergalactic bang up. Horrible. Perez pencils - Probably the best part, still, not as insanely good as hardcore nutcase fans attempt it to make... george is kinda amateurish on the inks\final art, and i'd probably like to see eith Bryan hitch, Phill Jimenez or Carlos Pacheco, and i'm sure there's some other few that would do a better of right now - Perez has already gone past it's hey-day unfortunately. Again, Avengers Forever, anyone? In the mean while JLA gets Alex Ross'ed. Triathlon - ? Give me a break. Want to play PC, use Falcon or whatever. Im glad Busiek is out of Avengers just to drop this pathetic excuse for a super-hero. Again, Busiek does his best when he doesn't create himself, be it plots or characters. Honestly, right now, i'd rather have had Geoff Johns doing it. Hey, hindsight is always 20-20. All in all, what a major disapointment. No doubt the usual hardocre fan simpleton and over-hysterical nutballs will have a blast with this overly simplified marketting juggernaut and it'll sell good, that said, the same happens with Pokemon or DBZ and it's still the steeming pile o' crap that it is. Quality-wise, JLA|avengers really disapoints BIG TIME... and it's nearly uncanny that with 20 years on the make it's easily worst, plot & art wise, from many regular monthly books out there. What a shame: A giant star that poops hundreds of little stars - At least they surprised me on the fact that i never expected it to be this bad.
Starro Sucks	posted 10/11/03 1:40 PM     Unfortunately, i have to say i agree. I mean ... 20 years to do the book, c'mon!!! Is this all they can come up with? Probably not bad if it was a regular LS made up in a hurry, BUT 20 years!?
Larry Stevenson	posted 10/11/03 1:51 PM     if i had to say "was it better than i expected, or worse". Yes, i probably would say yes, it was worse. Alot or a little, ill wait for more #'s... Yes, 20 years in the making deserved a bit more.
Catch22	posted 10/11/03 2:10 PM     you guys are assuming 20years is a good thing. to me it isn't. i got no doubt that if this was released when it was supposed to, it'd be a lot better, even Perez art was better at that time. so, it seems too much delay does not a good book made, contrary to what may be popular belief.
Justine	posted 10/11/03 4:42 PM     yeah disapointed myself too... i agree with the review on the front page... too much suspension of disbelief needed. looks like a kids cartton which isn't what i was expecting at all :-\
vu	posted 10/11/03 5:44 PM     I know this is a joke, but I would like to point out that all the above posts were made by the same author, according to his/her IP address. I don't think these qualify for abuse, but one day someone is going to try and pretend they're George Perez and write something inappropiate. I have thought about getting another messageboard... something to authenticized its authors, but I don't want the hassle to make users "register" for an account. I know this board is outdated and not-spam protected, but it does have its charm (and easy to use). If you know of a good (free) board, you know where to reach me.
Buddydave	posted 10/16/03 5:20 PM     If it's all from the same IP address, I say remove the thread. I'm all for allowing criticism, but this qualifies as trolling. P.S. I'd take Perez over Alex Ross any day of the week.
David Burcham	posted 10/16/03 6:43 PM     I say leave the thread up vu. This person may be trying to make a joke, but he tries TOO hard to sound like he actually READ the book! Unlike the "Perez-hater" on the guestbook ;) the person has prven to be a true Perez-hater...probably an Eric Larsen mark. Leave the posts up so everyone (INCLUDING the person who started this thread) will know what a complete and total jackass of a spineless joke that poster is. In other words......YOU DONE BEEN BUSTED JERKY!
David Burcham	posted 10/16/03 6:47 PM     And just for the record, i wouldn't walk across the street for a free Alex Ross piece of "art" signed with his own blood. If Ross ever had an ORIGINAL artistic idea his head woul explode.
Fanhalen	posted 11/8/03 8:08 AM     And if you had any kind of talent whatsoever David, you would probably be making the kind of cash Mr. Ross is now. I can't believe you have the nerve to criticize a guy who has brought something never before seen in comics...a sense of realism. And if you hadn't noticed, there are not too many artists that come up with "original ideas", that's the job of the "writer" can you tell the difference? One guy writes and the other draws.
David Burcham	posted 11/13/03 7:44 PM       okey-dokey "Fanhalen"....Justin timberlake has more money than Alex Ross, so that debunks your "talent" theory. Second, BY ABSOLUTLY NO MEANS was Alex Ross the FIRST to bring a sense of realism to comics. Ever heard of a fellow by the name of NEAL ADAMS!??! The most impressed (and VERY impressed, I must admit) with Alex Ross was the CRISIS hardback cover as well as other pecilers Ross has painted over. Ross is an exceptional colorist! But as far as his original (defined as taking five or six different sources and making "homages" to them to "create" a single work ) paintings are concerned, i have never been bowled over by them. "Ooooo...he make super hero looky like they be in REAL clothes! He be a genius!" His work is over-posed and his characters are stiff as a board. He is great at posters and covers, but his sequential STORY-TELLING impresses me NONE! BTW....how do YOU know how much money I make?
Buddydave	posted 11/14/03 0:03 AM     I'd have to agree with Mr. Burcham. Alex Ross can paint a pretty picture from time to time, but his storytelling leaves something to be desired. I finally bit the bullet and bought "Kingdom Come" last month, and boy, was I disappointed. Many of his panels were tough to figure out and his artwork lacked the "punch" that a series like this should deliver. The story wasn't the greatest either and it slowly meandered to a less-than-awe-inspiring finish. Both Ross and that series seem heavily over-rated, in my opinion.
Rich	posted 11/14/03 5:56 PM     I have to agree with David B. -- Alex Ross' art, though technically sound (to a degree) is hardly creative. It's static, lacking all dynanism and feeling all too "Polaroid"-ed (i.e., posey). There is little sense of either motion or emotion conveyed in his work. In addition, it is hardly as photorealistic as many fans make it out to be. His work tends to be blurry, with shadows lacking all their subtle gradations and features lacking detail. At best, his work has a "photo-pastel"-ism quality to it. I feel that the overwhelmingly positive acclaim his work has garnered is owed far more to the scarcity of competent painters within the comics industry than to his skills. If you want to see TRULY photorealistic work . . . go to Tom Nguyen's Yahoo group and scour through the Paintings section of his art files. No exaggeration . . . quite a few of them I simply cannot believe are anything but photographs. Seriously, with respect to realism, Nguyen's work puts Ross to shame. Take care, Rich
Fanhalen	posted 11/18/03 9:37 PM     You're right David, I'm wrong and was out of line. Yes I've heard of Neal Adams, he's great but to bash Alex Ross is just wrong, I mean I enjoy the guys art and could care less about his writing.
David Burcham	posted 11/20/03 0:14 AM       Aw, shucks, Fanhalen. Don't beat yourself up over it. Check out my venom-filled response to "Dr. Doom" on another thread on this board. We are ALL passionate about our faves...as well as those we don't like. It's just a messageboard. We should ALL take everything we read with a grain of salt. NEWS FLASH: Eminem, george Clooney, and Alex Ross suck! ;)
David Burcham	posted 11/20/03 0:30 AM       Whoopsie! I meant "Patriarch" over on the "Avengers #2" thread, not Dr. Doom. Can you ever forgive me for such a horrid mistake, Doc? That was very much MY bad! I am ashamed. <:(
Buddydave	posted 11/20/03 0:56 AM     For my own part, I wasn't bashing Ross, but offering my own criticisms of him. He's often treated as the greatest artist to every grace a comic book, and I find that to just not be true. . Besides, if people are allowed to slam GEORGE PEREZ on the GEORGE PEREZ MESSAGE BOARD (look at the first 3 or 4 posts of this thread for an example), then we should also be allowed to critique other artists.
David Burcham	posted 11/23/03 6:01 AM     Make no mistake on my part, I think Ross is the greatest at repainting classic covers and painting over other peoples' pencils. Was that a "bash" ?
Pablo	posted 11/24/03 6:06 AM     Are you guys high or something? 20 years is a long time to wait for anything. Personally I like how JLA/Avengers is going so far. Sure the plot is slow as heck, but can any of you out there come up with a better story than Kurt and George came up with, reply and let me know. The series is not even done yet so hold on to your negative opinions til at least #4.
Assemblerforever	posted 11/24/03 5:30 PM       I am sure plenty of others could come up with stories of equal or superior substance! I do agree that we should let the final two issues play out before we make any more derrogatory statements!!
David Burcham	posted 11/25/03 1:32 AM       Of for the luv of....It's the AVENGERS...It's the JLA...It is a friggin' SOOPER-HERO TEAM-UP! Mindless fun and action is what this book is SUPPOSED to be about! Who gives a flying flip Superman beat Thor or if Iron Man beat Cpatain America!??! THEY ARE NOT REAL! THEY DO NOT EXIST! THEY ARE IMAGINARY CHARACTERS! THEY DO NOT HAVE REAL FEELINGS! THEY ARE MADE OF PAPER AND INK! THIS IS THE ULTIMATE FAN-BOY DREAM OF SUPER-HEROES KICKING BUTT! GET OVER IT! THE UNIVERSE WON'T END! IT IS JUST A STINKING COMIC BOOK! AAAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!! Ah,crap.........I think I broke the exclamation and shift keys.
Edgar	posted 12/8/03 8:08 AM       Yes it's fiction but they are not true to the characters that we know off. It's like Superman wearing Wonderwoman's outfit (which is close by the way) that would be mindless fun. But taking it all on context, so far the book is biase. In a way, I can understand why. This is the only way DC would play along. FYI- No way Superman can beat Thor. It would take more than a single punch to put away the God of Thunder, who fights till the end. Thor's mystical hammer should have ended Superman.
Torsten B. Abel	posted 12/11/03 2:09 PM       I *still* don't get that "bias" thing... If someone writes the Living Tibunal as being more powerful as Spider-Man, does this mean he's biased in favor of the tribunal?!? Now, if Kurt actually wrote DC characters as being more *interesting*, "realistic", better for the readers to "identify" with, I'd call this "bias", but power levels... not necessarily, no. Personally, I see a *huge* Hawkeye bias in issues 1&2. ;)

georgeperez.com  | Post New Topic