Taking Risks With The Artists on Amazing Spider-Man

[Mister Mets]

I had an interesting conversation with a Spider-Man fan a few weeks back.

The takeaway was that during the Brand New Day era, Amazing Spider-Man took some risks with the artists. Chris Bachalo was one of the first four. Eric Canete had an issue. Paul Azaceta had ten. They were controversial, but they were certainly interesting.

For the last few years, Marvel's been playing it relatively safe. Main artists Ramos and Camuncoli have been on the book for years. Sometimes an A-lister will have an arc, but it's not exactly a risk for Marvel to put Oliver Coipel or Andy Kubert on the book.

There are several views on this. Some guys like being exposed to new talent, and prefer a book like Amazing to have variety. Others might think that the flagship Spider-Man title isn't the time or place for this, and that there's an advantage to stylistic consistency. How do you guys feel about this?

[Tuck]

Keep the art and panel layouts coherent, and generally clean (not busy), and I can enjoy the book.

Also keep it in a certain range between not too realistic and not too cartoony (Ramos is fine, Lafuente was too much).

If they do that, either works for me.

[boots]

my personal tastes probably agree with what tuck described, though now when i look back on the marvel 90s artists i can see why they were so popular despite the technical deficient. there was a crazy energy and mood created and that was hard to ignore and an exciting departure from the more dependable styles that preceded. i think there’s always room for extremes of style- but it’s always polarizing.


as to playing safe- it’s a hard one. taking risks and being experimental is usually what makes you top-dog and then once you’re there- you try to minimise risks in order to stay. there might be a way to have the cake and eat it by slowly introducing new artists for smaller arcs whilst keeping your trusty guy/gal plugging away.

generally speaking, the exciting experimental stuff tends to happen on the fringes, that’s where a lot of creatives develop (in any medium) then they become the kuberts and coipels.

anyone aware of how these guys got started and what books they were initially put on? i know kubert has the family legacy on his side and that the industry has likely changed a bit, but i also imagine they had to pay their dues before being put on the heavy hitter books.

[cyberhubbs]

my personal tastes probably agree with what tuck described, though now when i look back on the marvel 90s artists i can see why they were so popular despite the technical deficient. there was a crazy energy and mood created and that was hard to ignore and an exciting departure from the more dependable styles that preceded. i think there’s always room for extremes of style- but it’s always polarizing.


as to playing safe- it’s a hard one. taking risks and being experimental is usually what makes you top-dog and then once you’re there- you try to minimise risks in order to stay. there might be a way to have the cake and eat it by slowly introducing new artists for smaller arcs whilst keeping your trusty guy/gal plugging away.

generally speaking, the exciting experimental stuff tends to happen on the fringes, that’s where a lot of creatives develop (in any medium) then they become the kuberts and coipels.

anyone aware of how these guys got started and what books they were initially put on? i know kubert has the family legacy on his side and that the industry has likely changed a bit, but i also imagine they had to pay their dues before being put on the heavy hitter books.

Paul Azaceta worked on some stuff with Mark Waid prior to ASM, namely Potter's Field and covers for Irredeemable, and some Marvel work before that like Punisher Noir. Max Fiumara did Four Eyes with Joe Kelly. Nimura, who did like one short story, did I Kill Giants with Kelly also. Seems most had working relationships with some of the writers beforehand.

[JTait]

I loved the art during the Brand New Day era, and have been mildly underwhelmed since. The likes of Stegman and Camuncoli are good artists but aren't particularly innovative. I find Ramos more interesting, but I preferred his work when it was inked by Wayne Faucher back in his PP:SM days.

If Slott really wants a more 'traditional' Spider-Man artist then I think that there are better options out there than those currently on the book. Romita Jr for example.

I haven't read Spider-Verse yet, so I'm not including Coipel in this comments, although I do really like his work.

[ishikabe]

I love Romita's Spider-Man, but I'm not a fan of his humans.

[Tuck]

Romita's on Superman for the time being anyway.

[Kuwagaton]

I think "safe" is the biggest insult you can give an artist.

Canete is a huge favorite, but I'll admit he didn't quite fit. In fairness, he's not really into doing superhero comics.

Bachalo blew the doors off. Ramos is like the son of Todd, and I'm glad that he might have paved the way for less typical art styles in the near future. Bring on Lafuente 2.0, Wimberly, Rudy, etc.

[Rahul]

I find Ramos more interesting, but I preferred his work when it was inked by Wayne Faucher back in his PP:SM days.

Yeah same here. His art just doesn't have that pop anymore.

[Scott Taylor]

To me its great when the artist is switched up, even during a long run with the same writer. The key for me is to ensure that each storyline has a similar feel. And to have a "safe" place to go back to for most of the stories. This approach seems to work for most major mags. Ramos seems to be the safe go-to artist for ASM. And that has been fine by me, he's earned that spot.