I wish people could get past the "ugly" art in this book. I honestly think it's one of the best Batman stories written, and the art's uncanny valley actually helps give it that really unsettling feeling, but because it isn't aesthetically pretty people call it shit.
>>82052416
As long as the story is good I can get past the art.
Storytime?
>>82052416
I feel like that pic is from an old resident evil game.
>>82052416
FUCK YOU!
>>82052416
It's a classic.
And a great story, and i agree but this is /co/ where people care abiut how prety the art is instead of how fuild the panels are or how much information is given in image form or the thematics of the comic. and when it comes to movies people defend movies that look like TV shows saying "Photography has nothing to do with a movie being good".
/co/mblr has the shittiest taste.
I agree. The Joker reinvention angle was great.
>>82052416
The prose is way too purple for my liking, but the content is pretty good.
>>82052416
Comics are a visual medium. Art matters. Also, Morrison's prose needs some polishing.
All in all, it was an experiment that just didn't pan out. So enjoy it as much as you like, but don't try to gloss over the flaws and call it a masterwork.
>>82053036
>Art matters.
I completely agree, and the art in Clown at Midnight does exactly what it's meant to do. It's ugly and makes the reader see the characters as not-quite-right approximations. Well *that's the whole point.* Just because art isn't pretty doesn't mean it's not good.
>>82053036
>Art matters
And art doesnt mean PRETTY
>>82053104
It's not good though. It's shoddily made 3D models that look incredibly outdated. All of Van Fleet's art looks like that except sometimes he puts a pretty filter over it.
>>82053104
Bad guys doing bad things need to look sexy.
>>82053286
More shitty art, pretty drawing.
>>82052416
is Cedric the Sorcerer?
>>82053131
you know what art also doesn't mean though? poser comic. effort-wise you're barely even a step above pasting sprites outta a snes megaman game at that point. also i have never read the comic in ops pic but looking at it i automatically assume it is some kind of bizzare fetish porn. guessing joker turns into a bad graphics centaur and gets batman mpreg, how far off am i.
>>82055586
Art doesn't even mean drawings you pleb. The whole purpose of art is to evoke an emotional response and if that response is best served by creepy models overlaid on prose , then that's what you should use.
>also i have never read the comic in ops pic
Oh ok you just have no idea what the fuck you're talking about
>>82052416
He looks like he belongs in Whoville.
>>82052416
Well you can ignore the art and still read it. The whole issue is prose.
>>82052416
Storytime it you fuck
>>82052416
>>82052416
That looks like the FMV for some shitty early 2000s game.
>>82052611
>>82052775
>>82055586
>>82059027
>>82059470
Jesus Christ I knew most of /co/ is casual plebs but this is ridiculous
>>82052589
>>82057897
Alright, storytime time
>>82059550
>>82059561
>>82059580
>>82059580
Reading this shit for the first time was legit unnerving.
Though the visuals came off as a cheap attempt to recapture the aesthetic anarchy of A Serious House.
>>82059598
>>82059608
>>82059619
>>82059602
Like I said, I think the off-kilter character models legitimately add to the unnervedness
>>82059639
>>82059639
>Like I said, I think the off-kilter character models legitimately add to the unnervedness
It works until you're shown Batman and Harley's faces.
Then it goes from creepy uncanny valley to cheap uncanny valley.
>>82059658
>>82059711
>>82059724
Jesus fucking Christ this is terrible.
>>82059743
I mean, it's barely even a comic book though, right? 25% of the page having art makes it more of a picture-heavy storybook or something, plus explaining all the dialog in prose instead of speech bubbles.
I realize defining media by their conventions is typically a retrograde way of looking at things, but you have to draw a line somewhere.
>>82059762
>>82059777
>>82059787
I mean, you can't fault them, 3d rendering and modelling was hard back in the early ninet--2014? It's shit.
>>82059814
This is awful. Stop OP, please
>>82059830
Keep going, this comic is great
Why is this art so fucking weird
>>82059846
>>82059862
And that's it
Let me ask again: Is this really a comic?
>>82052823
comics are about a blend of good art and good writing. IF one of those is in the extreme shitter, i.e. this book, I ignore it.
>>82059872
It's... it's just so... pretentious. Which would be fine if it wasn't also fucking terrible
The only things I can think of reading this are those awful 3D model incest porn comics and that edgy kid who wrote nothing but grimdark in highschool creative writing classes
>>82059927
>/tv/ shitposter
>hates a comic that isn't just pretty pictures of people fighting
Wow, big shocker
>>82059849
Read Arkham asylum, you will shit your pants anon.
this is awful
>>82059961
Already have, I like this more
>>82059948
instead of a comic with shitty pictures i prefer a book, faggot.
>>82059971
you are a contrarian retard thengood bait
I couldn't read more than two pages.
>>82059724
This single page is more messed up than anything Snyder did with the Joker.
>>82059984
Not fooling anyone, /tv/
>>82059829
Try 2007, casual scum.
>>82059872
Holy shit that is aesthetically terrible. Text wall picture book with shitty videogame animations from the early aughts. I couldn't give a fuck what the story is, that's one of the least appealing books ever.
>>82053104
There's a difference between an artist being able to make their work look intentionally ugly and just doing a shoddy job. The ugliness doesn't come from anything to do with the artist's skill, it's ugly because it looks cheap and mediocre. The characters don't look quite right because the uncanny valley is taking a nosedive.
>>82052416
Looks like shitty pre-rendered graphics from some early 2000's computer game.
>>82061247
calm down autismo
>>82052416
Looks like it should be a Mad Magazine cover.
>>82059724
>Bad art
>Wall of text
Jesus this is Chris Chan levels of quality.
Anyone else remember when Vanfleet gave a fraction of a fuck?
I guess this is another example of a traditional artist using computer generated graphics and it not looking good. Van Fleet's regular art, some of which you can see in this, is pretty damn good. I wish he went over the CG models with his more traditional methods.
>>82059762
the fuck am I looking at?
What the fuck even is this comic? It looks like stills from the cut-scene of a 90s era Playstation game overlaid with excerpts from someone's overwrought fanfiction.
>>82067102
One of the midgets from the Killing Joke
>>82052416
The backlash against this issue at the time made me realize how much I hated people who read comics.
Awful. Looks like something out of deviantart.
Comic readers really will eat anything, because this guy wouldn't get a job in videogames or movies.
>>82066314
>>82067344
>>82067668
God I fucking hate this site sometimes.
>>82067729
are you saying this art is good?
>>82067407
rendered in shitty cgi that looks like it was made around the time The Killing Joke came out
>seriously implying copy pasting 3d models to this degree adds to the atmosphere and isn't just incredibly lazy
Van Fleet did a good job with Batman/Poison Ivy: Cast Shadows so I don't know what happened here.
Morrison's prose is too purple. Failed experiment.
>>82059517
Yep, better to learn it later rather than never.
Why not just make this a book, publish it as a short story without the god awful "art"? This doesnt qualify as a comic, and the 3d renders look like absolute dogshit.
>/co/ thinks cheap Poser CGI is good art
Jesus christ, once a month I decide to check out this place and every single time I'm convinced there's no reason to ever come back.
I'm going back to /v/.
>>82059619
why is batman drving a honda accord with fins?
>>82067970
>/co/ thinks
There's just a single autist defending this shit.
>>82059872
I get the feeling that using other colors it would be more awesome.
>>82067970
>/v/
and stay out. also this
>>82068012
Why does the background have to be this weird pale turquoise color, though?
I think it ruins the visuals of this book even moreso than the shitty cgi
>>82067885
>two lens flares on the same page
masterpiece
>>82068164
Those are Batman's eyes, it's a side-effect of what's killing him.
>>82052416
I bet you say the same thing about War Machine Max
>>82052416
No this is just godfucking awful.
It's not even creepy, it's plain shitty.
It's like someone said "let's turn a PS2 cutscene into a comic!'
It looks like it was modeled by a 15 year old with autism and prosopagnosia, then textured using stock images.
first you said "bat epic" is good and now this
>>82052416
>visual media doesn't have to look good
...
>>82052416
Ronald Reagan as the Joker?
>>82069390
>the only purpose of visual art is to look pretty
Hai guis.
>>82069485
>good = pretty
Art can be visually appealing and well constructed without being pretty and still be considered good you know.
>>82052416
That was terrible, and i'm not talking about the visuals at all. The literal pretense is practically out of this world. I could use this as an example in a writing class of what not to do.
