|
Post by kirby101 on Dec 6, 2020 10:24:02 GMT -5
I respect his achievements in the comic field but I would never buy a book he did just for his art. Neither did I, but I enjoyed the books I did read where he did the art, like his Star Lord work.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Dec 6, 2020 11:10:39 GMT -5
Infantino was very much a part of my youth in high school. He was in many favorites of Marvel for me, Star Wars, Nova, Spider-Woman, John Carter. Enjoyed his DC return on Flash and Supergirl as well loved to find his stories in reprints. During this time into the early 80's I began the back issue hunting fun scoring elusive classic Batman, Flash and Adam Strange issues from that crazy new place called the LCS.
So I may be a wee bit prejudiced when it comes to appreciating his stylistic art. I can think of iconic covers he layed out or drew himself and as another said Infantino has a signature style which is instantly identifiable. Despite what the imaginary green rabbit feels, Infantino Star Wars was killing it for me and many others and I still say the Marvel comic would have been gone way quickly without his and Goodwin building a strong visualization for comic readers.
The techniques Infantino created to make the fastest man alive are still utilized now decades later. His Batman became the classic look in designs for merchandise and is still slick, elegant and stylish today. I will ALWAYS sing the praises of the art of Carmine Infantino.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2020 11:12:59 GMT -5
Loved Silver Age Infantino art. His Bronze Age art was meh.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Dec 6, 2020 11:18:59 GMT -5
The techniques Infantino created to make the fastest man alive are still utilized now decades later. His Batman became the classic look in designs for merchandise and is still slick, elegant and stylish today. I will ALWAYS sing the praises of the art of Carmine Infantino. I do remember his Batman drawings being used as posters and ads but I also remember those pieces being made more palatable by great Murphy Anderson inks.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Dec 6, 2020 11:22:07 GMT -5
Can agree on this one brudder. Murphy Anderson makes everyone look that much better.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Dec 6, 2020 11:57:51 GMT -5
Infantino Star Wars was killing it for me and many others and I still say the Marvel comic would have been gone way quickly without his and Goodwin building a strong visualization for comic readers. True. If the publishing numbers are accurate, the title was most successful during Infantino's run, so it is quite clear readers loved his (and Goodwin's) building of the then-young Star Wars universe. At the time, most movie (and TV) adaptations rarely lasted a calendar year, or were so inferior to the source that there was no way it would capture the imagination (and monthly support) of those who loved the movie. Failure was the standard for most movie and TV adaptations Star Wars during Infantino's run never had that problem, as title flourished, becoming one of Marvel's best books of the period. He understood sci-fi / space-fantasy like few others (being one of the key creative forces for DC's legendary titles Strange Adventures, Mystery in Space, etc.), bringing a needed otherworldly, detailed interpretation of what was then then latest space-fantasy on the block. Well said, and quite accurate. In addition to Julius Schwartz, if not for Infantino, there would be no Batman to speak of today; his "New Look" innovations revitalized a dying character, making him one of the biggest superhero standouts in a revolutionary decade for that genre. Yes, Infantino was one of the forces in that revolution.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Dec 6, 2020 12:26:01 GMT -5
If not for him, Robert Kanigher and Julie Schwartz, there might not be a Silver Age.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 6, 2020 12:39:11 GMT -5
I fall into the same category as many others: love Infantino's Caniff-influenced work from the 40s; love his slick, graceful, fluid, sophisticated Adam Strange/ Flash/ Batman work from the 50s and 60s, but beyond that, it's almost like sticking pins in my eyes. And yes, his pencils never looked better than when inked by Anderson, but they also looked good under Sid Greene's brushes. Unfortunately, more often than I would have liked, Infantino was stuck with the increasingly lackluster Joe Giella, whose inks I can only liken to Vince Colletta's; I don't know if Giella erased details as Colletta did, but the flat, dull, minimalist Giella approach ruined Infantino's dynamic pencils. My guess is that Giella was a nice guy who worked fast and reliably.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Dec 6, 2020 13:04:40 GMT -5
I disagree, I prefer Giella to Greene on Infantino. Greene
Giella Same for Gil Kane.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Dec 6, 2020 13:57:36 GMT -5
I like Giella, Greene, Anderson, Giacoia and Cuidera over the Silver Age Infantino's pencils about equally (with Anderson at the top), but I love when he inked himself on the early Elongated Man stories in Detective best. Schwartz didn't,so there's not much of it. When I met Infantino and Giella at ComicCon back in the early 2000s (they autographed some Showcase volumes for me), I told Carmine the above, which tickled him.
Cei-U! I summon the Ductile Detective Delineator!
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 6, 2020 16:38:34 GMT -5
I'm with Cei-U! on Giacoia, less so on Cuidera, though I preferred his inks to Giella's. Cuidera wielded such a heavy brush that the characters often looked as if they'd just been working under a crankcase. And I would rank Greene beneath Anderson and Giacoia, kirby101, but still ahead of Giella, who never seemed to vary the weight -- if that's the right term -- of his line. And let me emphasize that Giella seemed more prone to that fault in the 60s and beyond than in the 50's. And further qualification: his covers were far superior to his interiors.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Dec 6, 2020 16:51:03 GMT -5
So the question arises, why such a large difference between the 70s Infantino and the earlier? Did he personally like the look of his new stuff better? Or was it easier or faster to draw that way? Or could he have thought it was more in keeping with the current (70s) supehero aesthetic? Or was it just a matter of rustiness after ot having worked much as an artist for many years?
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Dec 6, 2020 16:54:55 GMT -5
So the question arises, why such a large difference between the 70s Infantino and the earlier? Did he personally like the look of his new stuff better? Or was it easier or faster to draw that way? Or could he have thought it was more in keeping with the current (70s) supehero aesthetic? Or was it just a matter of rustiness after ot having worked much as an artist for many years? I wish I could tell you. As an earlier poster said, his many years on the Flash in whatever it was, the 80's, I guess was unreadable (again, much blame to Bates) and unviewable. Many a poorly written comic has been saved, or at least rendered fun to look at, with good art. Alas, this was never the case with Carmine's late-career work on the Flash.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Dec 6, 2020 17:08:14 GMT -5
Very few rank above Anderson and Giaccoia.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 6, 2020 17:39:46 GMT -5
So the question arises, why such a large difference between the 70s Infantino and the earlier? Did he personally like the look of his new stuff better? Or was it easier or faster to draw that way? Or could he have thought it was more in keeping with the current (70s) supehero aesthetic? Or was it just a matter of rustiness after ot having worked much as an artist for many years? Yes. He liked the change. He was experimenting with style and felt it worked and it was what he wanted to do. He was tired of his old style I can add that a lot of his sixties inkers buried a lot of what he was doing, particularly Anderson. Fans my like it...Infantino didn't. I can say that he was happiest with his work on Elongated Man, which validates what Cei-U! has to say.
|
|