Even the art shouldn't be reason to stick around
While I know that this is a newspaper columnist in focus here, it still seems a bit odd that the comics columnist for the Pennsylvania Express-Times would stick around on Spider-Man after the debacle of One More Day just for the art:
In short, I think I detect a bit of sensationalism here. Not exactly how to report in the papers about a subject like this.
There may be some cases where the artwork can be worth it, but this is definitely not one of them.
The only really good thing about the first part of "Brand New Day" is Steve McNiven's art.Really, really, really. Even the artwork shouldn't be reason enough to stay around, when the premises Brand New Day stems from are as awful as they are. It could be George Perez, Scott Campbell, and plenty of other talented artists, but even that wouldn't justify the bad directions that Brand New Day stems from, nor Civil War. One certainly shouldn't have to pay to get a look at the artwork, that's for sure.
The first book that I ever noticed McNiven's art was in "Civil War." His work on that book was amazing. Every issue he seems to get better and better.
He keeps that same high quality art for "Amazing Spider-Man" and for now is the only reason I'll stay with the book.
In short, I think I detect a bit of sensationalism here. Not exactly how to report in the papers about a subject like this.
There may be some cases where the artwork can be worth it, but this is definitely not one of them.
Labels: marvel comics, Spider-Man
