|
Post by mrp on Aug 29, 2016 3:47:53 GMT -5
Picked up my copy Sunday afternoon and read it this morning. I like it for the most part, but there is room for improvement. In the opening pages, Krylo looks too much like the worn and haggard Conan who we saw wounded last night and if not for the lettering the characters resembled each other too much to be clearly distinguishable. It's the kind of thing comic artists can get way with when drawing super-heroes in distinctive costumes, the faces can be similar and of a type but the costume makes them stand out, but when characters faces resemble each other too much and they wear similar garb (whether it's suits in a modern comic or loincloths and armor in a fantasy comic), it muddles the visual storytelling making it harder for the visuals to carry the reader's eye through the story and know who is who and what is happening. It got batter later int he issue, but those opening pages, which had to establish the players and the plot in this issues place in the larger story arc, would have been better with more distinctive facial features and renderings of features.
-M
|
|
|
Post by Jason Aiken on Sept 1, 2016 20:09:21 GMT -5
I'm a week late, but picked up #2 at the comic shop today. I thought this was a very promising issue and was happy to see some excellent action scenes. I love it when Conan fights with a sword and board.
It's true the chieftain's son does look a bit too much like Conan with a mustache, but that's a fairly minor criticism.
Loved the weird elements in this, both with the undead broker and the giants at the end.
I hope the quality of this issue causes people to keep in on their pull lists and shops to keep ordering it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2016 21:18:57 GMT -5
Haven't read it yet, but flipped all pages. There are some very good panels in this book. I will read it later, but from what I've seen, I will definitely give # 3 a shot. This issue is better than the first artwise. I liked it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 13:32:26 GMT -5
Picked up this issue last weekend and read it a couple of times on the way home. It's not bad, not great, but it's a thousand times better than what we've had over the last 4 years.
|
|
|
Post by lordyam on Sept 2, 2016 22:33:06 GMT -5
Same. It's not as good as Conan the Cimmerian but it blows the Black Coast out of the water. THAT was the low point.
Avenger was odd in that it WASN'T badly written. The art was just so bad it dragged it down. I really think that had the art been better it would have sold much more
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2016 16:14:11 GMT -5
What are those giants in the end of the story?
|
|
|
Post by mrp on Sept 5, 2016 16:23:22 GMT -5
I'm a week late, but picked up #2 at the comic shop today. I thought this was a very promising issue and was happy to see some excellent action scenes. I love it when Conan fights with a sword and board. It's true the chieftain's son does look a bit too much like Conan with a mustache, but that's a fairly minor criticism. Loved the weird elements in this, both with the undead broker and the giants at the end. I hope the quality of this issue causes people to keep in on their pull lists and shops to keep ordering it. In my opinion, the #1 priority of the artist is to visually tell the story clearly, so that a reader can tell what is happening sans text if need be. If two characters are visually indistinguishable, the visual storytelling fails in its primary objective. The posing, draftsmanship, anatomy, etc. can all be fantastic, but the primary goal of comic art is to tell the story. It is the difference between illustration and comic art-an illustration just has to look good, comic art has to tell a story, and anything that detracts from the storytelling is a flaw in comic art. It's the #1 thing masters of the medium like Joe Kubert, Jack Kirby, Will Eisner and others stress, storytelling comes first and the visuals have to serve the story. Making the characters distinct is very important to that ends, so I strongly disagree that it is a minor criticism, it cuts right to the heart of the storytelling. Could you tell if that was the chieftain's son or Conan in the opening pages without text to tell you? If you can't tell what is going on in a comic just by looking at the art, then the art is not doing it's job. Rescuing bad art with text should not be required. I think the draftsmanship and other illustrative aspects of the art is very good, but it falls down on the storytelling level for me because of flaws like indistinguishable characters. -M
|
|
|
Post by Jason Aiken on Sept 6, 2016 10:01:21 GMT -5
It's just one character on the opening pages for this issue. Given how bad and/or unsuitable the art has been for the last four years, I'm willing to give him a pass until he finds his footing.
Hell, even guys like Jim Lee draw similar male and female faces. They're usually in different costumes and have different hair to set them apart, though.
The new art is the biggest improvement over the Avenger, it finally looks like a Conan book again.
|
|
|
Post by mrp on Sept 6, 2016 10:26:58 GMT -5
It's just one character on the opening pages for this issue. Given how bad and/or unsuitable the art has been for the last four years, I'm willing to give him a pass until he finds his footing. Hell, even guys like Jim Lee draw similar male and female faces. They're usually in different costumes and have different hair to set them apart, though. The new art is the biggest improvement over the Avenger, it finally looks like a Conan book again. It's why I don't consider Jim Lee a good comic artist. He's an okay illustrator, but his storytelling has always been lacking and the lack of distinction in his characters is a major weakness in his stuff, and the fact he sets the direction for DC artistically now and influences so many new artists is a major reason why I think DC has taken a nosedive artistically over the last decade and so many new artists cannot tell a story visually worth a damn. And since I pay for every page of a book (and quite a lot per page with modern cover prices) and the artist gets paid the same amount for each page, there should be consistency in the pages and a few bad pages can be enough to make the book not worth the amount it costs. I refuse to support bad comics, or even mediocre comics just because I like the characters because giving the company the money sends the message the product is good enough to get what they want-your money. If you keep paying for bad or mediocre comics, you keep getting bad or mediocre comics because there is no incentive for them to put out better product. I'd rather there be no new material than the only new material be bad. Letting something lay fallow until you can produce a better product or there is a market for a better product is not a bad thing. A steady stream of mediocre to bad comics that barely sell enough to sustain itself and that aren't good enough to make new fans or draw a new audience in to grow the market for the character is not a good thing. I dropped Wood's Barbarian after Cloonan left, I dropped Avenger a few issues in, both because they were not books worth the money. I am giving Slayer a chance, but it has to deliver a product I am willing to pay for every month or it will get dropped too. I vote with my wallet and if the book is not good enough my vote is you get no money from me until it is. There is too much good stuff available (in comics and other medium, some Howard based others not) and too little in my entertainment budget for me to waste money on mediocre to bad products. Settling because it's marginally better than the bad product that came before is not the message I want to send. -M
|
|
|
Post by wulfhere on Sept 6, 2016 10:56:35 GMT -5
I'm a week late, but picked up #2 at the comic shop today. I thought this was a very promising issue and was happy to see some excellent action scenes. I love it when Conan fights with a sword and board. It's true the chieftain's son does look a bit too much like Conan with a mustache, but that's a fairly minor criticism. Loved the weird elements in this, both with the undead broker and the giants at the end. I hope the quality of this issue causes people to keep in on their pull lists and shops to keep ordering it. In my opinion, the #1 priority of the artist is to visually tell the story clearly, so that a reader can tell what is happening sans text if need be. If two characters are visually indistinguishable, the visual storytelling fails in its primary objective. The posing, draftsmanship, anatomy, etc. can all be fantastic, but the primary goal of comic art is to tell the story. It is the difference between illustration and comic art-an illustration just has to look good, comic art has to tell a story, and anything that detracts from the storytelling is a flaw in comic art. It's the #1 thing masters of the medium like Joe Kubert, Jack Kirby, Will Eisner and others stress, storytelling comes first and the visuals have to serve the story. Making the characters distinct is very important to that ends, so I strongly disagree that it is a minor criticism, it cuts right to the heart of the storytelling. Could you tell if that was the chieftain's son or Conan in the opening pages without text to tell you? If you can't tell what is going on in a comic just by looking at the art, then the art is not doing it's job. Rescuing bad art with text should not be required. I think the draftsmanship and other illustrative aspects of the art is very good, but it falls down on the storytelling level for me because of flaws like indistinguishable characters. -M For me the big droopy moustache was enough of an indicator that this was the Chieftain's son and not Conan.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Aiken on Sept 6, 2016 13:51:10 GMT -5
In my opinion, the #1 priority of the artist is to visually tell the story clearly, so that a reader can tell what is happening sans text if need be. If two characters are visually indistinguishable, the visual storytelling fails in its primary objective. The posing, draftsmanship, anatomy, etc. can all be fantastic, but the primary goal of comic art is to tell the story. It is the difference between illustration and comic art-an illustration just has to look good, comic art has to tell a story, and anything that detracts from the storytelling is a flaw in comic art. It's the #1 thing masters of the medium like Joe Kubert, Jack Kirby, Will Eisner and others stress, storytelling comes first and the visuals have to serve the story. Making the characters distinct is very important to that ends, so I strongly disagree that it is a minor criticism, it cuts right to the heart of the storytelling. Could you tell if that was the chieftain's son or Conan in the opening pages without text to tell you? If you can't tell what is going on in a comic just by looking at the art, then the art is not doing it's job. Rescuing bad art with text should not be required. I think the draftsmanship and other illustrative aspects of the art is very good, but it falls down on the storytelling level for me because of flaws like indistinguishable characters. -M For me the big droopy moustache was enough of an indicator that this was the Chieftain's son and not Conan. Yeah, I only thought it may have been Conan at a quick glance. The word balloon right below that panel makes it pretty clearly it isn't him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2016 14:20:21 GMT -5
I think what can be frustrating is that the art is o.k but not great. After what we've seen over the last 4 years or so in the main series we are content with a mediocre comic. Is that a good thing? probably not. But, I think given time Davila has the potential to improve, not just with his depiction of characters but also his storytelling skills. The art of telling a story with pictures is becoming a lost art form, it's unfortunate, but true in the modern comic book industry. The greats from the past were better at observing body language, and the understanding of weight and mass, movement and how to exaggerate these qualities in a comic panel and when to use these panels when telling a story. I've seen the rough layouts of John Buscema and been amazed how he has managed to capture everything with a few scribbles - the composition is all there, you can tell who Conan is from his confident stance, no unnecessary growl on his face, he does not even need to be in action, but you know from his body language that he is centre stage, and dangerous, he could explode into action at anytime.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2016 15:02:08 GMT -5
Right now Conan the Slayer is OK. And OK is not good enough yet. I'm giving it a chance and hoping things will get better, art and story. If quality drops I will not be back. Can't stand reading mediocre books just like our friend told us above. Grew up reading Savage Sword of Conan in the glory days and just got used to that level. If it is not great, there is a real chance I won't be following a book for too long. I have never understood what made Dark Horse change direction so much after Iron Shadows in the Moon. From that point on the great feeling of reading the main series has never come back. I hope things change. I'm not surprised at all with the low sales. People just got tired of the sub quality of recent years and do not feel like giving it a chance one more time. It is hard to conquer new readers and it is very easy to see them go away. Dark Horse did not feel that way it seems, but it is paying the price already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2016 15:18:09 GMT -5
A couple of new Conan drawings by Sergio Davila.
|
|
|
Post by Haunter of the Pits on Sept 6, 2016 15:51:02 GMT -5
Just finished Issue 2; I am content with the art. It is like anything else in life, when you start something new it takes some time to hit your full stride. Davila is still settling in and he is showing promise, he should be encouraged at this point not nitpicked.
I take the comments made on the forum as positive, if the only thing to be critical about is a moustache on a couple of panels. It was not long ago we were complaining about every panel.
I am loyal to the Conan character, good or bad. I prefer the good, and miss the great from early SSOC days, but the loyal fans keeps the character going through the bad times. Hopefully we are through the bad times for a while, enjoy it while it is here it will not last forever.
|
|