John Byrne??? (Talkback)

[JTolliver]

So, what do you think of this guy and his work???

 

[Domino]

Wow, what a loaded question. I'll wait until I have a free hour to answer.

 

[Damien]

I think all I've experienced of his stuff is Man of Steel, which wasn't bad.

 

[jadrax]

I think my opinions upon him and his work vary quite wildly.

Some of the stuff he has written on his blog has disgusted me, other stuff he has said I agree with totally. Some of his work I think is really quite good and other bits of his work I do not care for at all.

 

[JTolliver]

149 views and only 3 replys, I was positive this guy's controversy would spark well over 3 replys, to say the very least.

 

[Antiyonder]

I would say he and Chris Claremont did a swell job during their Uncanny X-Men run. Same for his work on Fantastic Four and The Sensational She-Hulk. I'm with the majority that his revamp on Spider-Man was the crapper.

His best bits on Spider-Man would be:
1. The Amazing Spider-Man #6/445 and 7/446 (The story with Flash Thompsons Fantasy)

2. Spider-Man Chapter One #2- The biggest improvement he made on the Stan Lee/Steve Ditko (that's not saying much though), would be when the bank manager would accept a demonstraton of Spider-Man's Powers when going through the check cashing thing as opposed to denying him service on lack of id.


I'm curious as to what everyone else thought of his X-Men The Hidden Years series. I even went to the trouble to get X-Men #94 (Hidden Years Prologue). I thought it was a fun read, but agree with most of the readers that Byrne should have had more time pass as the series was "Hidden Years" not "Hidden Days/Weeks/Month".

I heard it was cancelled because Quesada thought that a series set in past continuity was too complicating for readers.

 

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

149 views and only 3 replys, I was positive this guy's controversy would spark well over 3 replys, to say the very least.

I'm sure it's the profanity filter that's keeping people away .

As an artist, I find him pretty good. He's not my favorite, but he turns out solid, distinctive, and identifiable work. Not my first choice as an artist, but he's miles ahead of a lot of other people. And while I don't agree with his assessment that late artists shouldn't do comics at all, I do admire his professionalism in getting work done on time.

As a writer, I can't say I'm as impressed. Recently revisiting his Man of Steel mini-series reveals a bunch of things that strike me as either unnecessary or implausible. I think he has a real problem of over-explaining things, like how Superman gives himself a haircut or a shave, which are just not necessary for the story. I think it's great that he's thought of these things, but I don't think I really needed to know them unless it's relevant to the story somehow. I can't read anything he's written lately.

As a human being, I don't care for many of his opinions or his public statements. At best, he strikes me as someone willfully ignorant or attempting to be deliberately controversial. That by itself isn't enough to get me to abandon his work, though -- I think opinions held by the likes of Dave Sim or Bill Willingham are wrong on a fundamental level, but the work they produce is still compelling enough that I can overlook that. However, Byrne is no Sim. At most, he's a Chuck Dixon in my head, where he can produce stuff that's OK but not anything I'll go out of my way or pay money for.

If anything, I think I'm more repelled by the Byrne groupies who are intent on defending every word and work that the man produces. I love creators like Brian K. Vaughan or Dave Sim or Kurt Busiek, but I'm also willing to point to stuff they've done and say, "Gee, I didn't like that a whole lot." It seems that there's a sizeable number of Byrne fans who are unwilling or unable to conceive a thought like that regarding Byrne.

-- Ed/Ace

 

[Jor-El]

I like how he bailed on penciling the recently-announced Krypton to Earth special that would serve as a prequel to the upcoming film Superman Returns. Here he has a chance to get back into the public eye and do something that even non-comic fans may possibly be interested enough to buy, and he won't do it because it's not an adaptation of the 1978 movie. God forbid the man do something that will bring the character and mythology to a larger audience and may spark people's interest in the source material.

I'm pleased he's off the book. This will give DC room to bring in an artist whose style doesn't look quite so dated.