Kirby (and Simon earlier) were well-versed in trends, tropes and memes in related fields, and Kirby wasn't shy about borrowing extensively from mythology, and in this case, the rich trove of dystopic science fiction extant for many decades prior to this mining. Some say this borrowing is a kind of genius, and I'm not prepared to disagree.
That's too cool! I haven't seen that particular book yet but glad to see IDW giving resources to more projects like this. Invaluable work is being done by people who genuinely love this stuff and I support them and their product.
So Kirby’s work was too tight and complicated and needed to be simplified so Colletta could ink it better... But Kirby’s pencils are just cartoony sketching... You confuse me.
I have to get my hands on that book, absolutely love the comparisons from pencils to inks. As a comic artist myself, I learn from it all! Opinions vary. There were no betters when it comes to what Kirby brought to comics! No one could match his majesty and power on the comic page! His so-called cartoony sketching blew everyone's mind and made artists realize they had to up their game! For the most part Colletta was just a terrible match for Kirby, and seemed too lazy to be faithful with all the detail Kirby put into the artwork! A clear case of the penciler being better than the inker! I have to give a shout out to a Kirby inker no one has mentioned, the fantastic Wally Wood! The Sky Master series with Kirby is pure gold! Absolutely fantastic!
I think you've confused yourself, but that's okay - we're just having a friendly conversation. If you'd like to respond to what I wrote rather than rewording it & mischaracterizing it by so doing, I'm ready to reply!
Check this out, and think about the time it was drawn, the 70s. No one was touching Kirby! Absolute brilliant penciling!
Kirby was certainly a fine artist, but a bad match with Colletta, and not due to Colletta's alleged laziness. I'd love to have seen what Jackie or Helen could have done with Kirby's pencils, as noted.
Lovely derivative work indeed. You might really enjoy the artists from earlier decades whose work inspired Kirby.
Colletta was lazy on Kirby's pencils, it has been mentioned many times over the years, by many different people! He was Kirby's absolute worse inker!
I have to say that these sorts of double page splashes of machinery, which Kirby seemed to fall in love with in the early to mid-70s, are not my favorite aspect of his artistry. I still agree with the conventional wisdom that his best work was done in the 1960s with Sinnott inking him on the Fantastic Four.
That’s very interesting to see just how much Colletta departed from Kirby’s pencils. It’s a shame that the reproduction process didn’t allow the comics to be printed straight from Kirby’s pencils, or, I guess, that Sinnott couldn’t ink every single page Kirby drew. Having said that, on the New Gods, I still find Colletta’s inks more appealing than Royer’s. Whatever feathery lines Colletta did choose to put down on the page resonate with me more than Royer’s blobs of ink.
A professional doesn't have excuses! A professional would put in the time to really bring the pencils to life, not just blob ink over details. I don't agree with that conventional wisdom, because I think Sky Masters is some of Kirby's best work along with his Marvel period continuing right into his DC period! Royer was the most faithful to Kirby's pencils, whereas Colletta was too lazy and couldn't be bothered! I'll take Royer's faithful so-called blob of ink, over Colletta's lazy blobs of cover-up! It's all just a matter of taste.
“Lazy” isn’t the best way to describe him. He did hackwork because he took on too many jobs, which forced him to rush his work and cut corners in order to complete it on time. So he was more a hardworking hack than lazy.
No need to re-read... there’s plenty of fresh new examples in the last few days... backhanded compliments, veiled insults, even an attempt to impugn Kirby’s character. Good times!
Does anyone know how many kids Colletta had? He seemed to have quite a few to support, I'm thinking at least five. He did some great work I think, but generally he would've seen his work rightly as being ephemeral like the generally low priced publications it appeared in, on sale for a month or two than gone and quickly forgotten. It's like now asking a daily television serial of the day to have the quality of a major motion picture! Getting something to the printers and onto the stands on time was the bottom line of the business, that counted for a lot more than some unused background or extra characters in the pencil art. These are not excuses in any way, they are the hard reality from a different time. Luckily Kirby photocopied a lot of his later work so we can have the best of both worlds some of the time if wanted. Stan Lee visits the Colletta household (note first Spider-Man comic and an early Daredevil, as well as a reel to reel tape units!) 'Nuff said about Vince... I found the above photo through a wondrously informative blog on: Timely-Atlas-Comics Which is also where I found this 1941 Jack Kirby spot cartoon for a detective magazine...
Agree on all of these points. When you think about how Silver Age comics were viewed as disposable trash for children, and sold for 10 cents or 12 cents a copy, a price that stuck for years and years, and had to be cranked out 12 times a year, not even counting annuals and king-size editions, it’s a minor miracle than creators like Kirby, Ditko, or many lesser lights were able to produce works of the quality they did produce. Everything was stacked against them. I’ve often thought the same of the first two seasons of Star Trek, given the show’s budget constraints and the limitations of special effects technology of the era. Some of the episodes were mediocre or bad, but, given what they were fighting against, that they hit the bullseye roughly half the time is miraculous.
Yes, I will admit that Colletta was a very important person to be able to get delayed projects on the stands without penalties. And even I will admit that his work is pretty good on Thor due to the more naturalistic settings. It’s just a shame he was put on titles he was so obvious not meant for like his run on FF or the early 4th world material.
For all his faults, Colletta did better work on the early Fourth World issues than Royer did when he replaced him. In my opinion.
Although I liked it, I think even Chic Stone inking Kirby is an acquired taste... nobody came near Joe Sinnott for quality when inking Kirby, except Wally Wood and his disciple Dan Adkins (especially good on the '70s covers). Royer was from a bit later (loved him on early Keith Giffen). Joe Sinnott 'owned' The Fantastic Four, and in a way Jack Kirby. Later when inking John Byrne or Ron Frenz it's still perfect Fantastic Four. I believe he would only take on so much work and then that was it, he wouldn't do more even if physically he could've.