Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Good god man...that's not right.

That's probably what Space Marines look like under the armor, lol. No wonder 10 won't fit in a rhino.

Some things just can't be unseen. Why has Captain America got huge tits? I feel confused and horny.

Rob Liefield = worst comic book artist ever.

Well, it looks like he's at least finally learned that people do, in fact, have 2 feet rather than one little spindly appendage and a leg that always ends behind a patch of dirt so he doesn't have to draw it.

mattyrm wrote:
Yeah i was a teenager back when he was popular, i got a great X-force paperback where X-Force team up with Spiderman and knack the Juggernaut and the pencils were great. He drew a good Cable as well.

Yea, I was getting into comics when Liefeld was hot, and Image had popped into existence not long after, but (besides X-Force, 'cause Deadpool occasionally showed up there - vs today, where he has multiple books!) I grew up and had until today just dismissed Rob's style as ridiculous drek from the '90s ... Revisiting the madness now is both far more horrifying and hilarious

- Salvage

EDIT: Damn, I've got that X-Force/Spider/Jugger comic too!

That pic looks like me except my chest has slipped a bit.

Where's Frazzled? I only looked at this thread to see his reaction.

Liefield is one of those proud "self-trained" artists that never learned paltry things like human muscle structure and how many teeth people have. Or perspective. Or anything that anyone who was educated in art would have the good sense to keep in mind so they don't draw humans with 4 biceps per arm and 80 teeth that are 5 inches long when they smile menacingly yet 2 when they frown.

reds8n wrote: I know the story you mean. You can't deny he was incredibly popular, but when I look at his stuff now, like in the link above..so much of it is terrible...that Captain America drawing especially...I think they could have done him for treason for that.

Are you by any chance referring to his version of Bucky? The act that got him fired from Marvel.

...do tell ..I don't know that story..I thought he left to do the Image thing.
I meant the picture Mr. Gonads posted...I know he's fond of it and it wold have been cruel to deprive him of this simple pleasure.

Looking back most of the Image stuff was rubbish, fair play to Larsen for being consistent and I did dig the Maxx even if it made almost no sense. Quite liked the cartoon they did of that, captured the feeling very well if memory serves.

Liefeld redrew Bucky as a teenage girl. That got him fired from Marvel back then. So he worked for another company and did a superhero called "the Fighting American", which was a thinly veiled rip of Captain America.

Anyway, you can read a great Liefeld article here.

BrookM wrote:Liefeld redrew Bucky as a teenage girl. That got him fired from Marvel back then. So he worked for another company and did a superhero called "the Fighting American", which was a thinly veiled rip of Captain America.

Anyway, you can read a great Liefeld article here.

The timeline goes something like this...

1991 - the great X-odous when Marvel's 7 hottest artists leave to make their own company with none of those pesky writers or editors to tell them what to do. What do they call it? Image! Most of the books are horrid crap and rarely come out but when they do they sell...

1995 - citing unfinished contracts Marvel brings back some of them to reboot Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Avengers and Captain America (which is where that picture comes from). For whatever reason (quality, blown deadlines, personalities, story content) Liefeld is fired after 6 issues.

1996 - Liefeld either quits or is fired from Image and starts his own company with none of them damn accountants or lawyers to tell him what to do. What does he call it? Awesome Comics! Oh and somehow he gets Alan Moore to write for him.

1998 - AWESOME COMICS! goes bankrupt.

1998 to present - Liefeld keeps popping up promising new comics and never managing to put out 2 issues in a row.

Looks like Testiment is one of the ones that never got off the ground. That being said I'd buy it in a minute if it came out.

This has been done before (and better):



http://www.mmbibleheroes.com/images/MMBH.jpg

Todd McFarlane went to Image too, didn't he? I kinda like Spawn, but honestly that's another comic I never actually got into (though I did buy Spawn #1 at least). I like the toys though, and I still watch the Spawn movie now and then.

Liefeld was fired from image. He tried to lure Micheal Turner away from Top Cow behind Marc Silvestri's back. Top Cow separated from Image for a time as a result.

malfred wrote:Pffft, it doesn't match the fluff.

In the Bible, David was totally naked when he rolled his stone in a sack and teabagged Goliath.

I think it implied that David was unarmoured while Goliath wore a bronze helmet, breastplate, greaves and shield. In ancient (and medieval) literature, being "naked" in combat does not mean naked of clothing, but it means not having any armour.

Herohammernostalgia wrote:

malfred wrote:Pffft, it doesn't match the fluff.

In the Bible, David was totally naked when he rolled his stone in a sack and teabagged Goliath.

I think it implied that David was unarmoured while Goliath wore a bronze helmet, breastplate, greaves and shield. In ancient (and medieval) literature, being "naked" in combat does not mean naked of clothing, but it means not having any armour.

No offence, but considering the bible was written in Hebrew, translated to Greek, translated to Latin, translated back into greek, translated BACk into latin, Translated to English, and has had large chunks of it just wholesale removed whenever Rome Felt like it...

Gwar! wrote:

Herohammernostalgia wrote:

malfred wrote:Pffft, it doesn't match the fluff.

In the Bible, David was totally naked when he rolled his stone in a sack and teabagged Goliath.

I think it implied that David was unarmoured while Goliath wore a bronze helmet, breastplate, greaves and shield. In ancient (and medieval) literature, being "naked" in combat does not mean naked of clothing, but it means not having any armour.

No offence, but considering the bible was written in Hebrew, translated to Greek, translated to Latin, translated back into greek, translated BACk into latin, Translated to English, and has had large chunks of it just wholesale removed whenever Rome Felt like it...

I think Im going to agree with GWAR on that one. I think the bible needs more sombreros and mexican gun fighters. OH and Clint Eastwood. That would be a cool bible. And narrated by the guy that played Mr. Blonde

KingCracker wrote:I think Im going to agree with GWAR on that one. I think the bible needs more sombreros and mexican gun fighters. OH and Clint Eastwood. That would be a cool bible. And narrated by the guy that played Mr. Blonde

And it should be Co-Directed by Quentin Tarantino and Michael Bay!

When Moses parts the Red Sea, it explodes. The final plague that kills all of the first born sons? Explosions. Raining frogs? Explode. Darkness? So many explosions everyone goes blind. Moses' staff transforms into a snake to fight the priests' snakes? It explodes, makes the transformers noise, and kills them with eye lasers. Moses receives the 10 commandments on Mt. Sinai? They are given to him in a peaceful, solemn ceremony with no particular fanfare. Then when he goes back down and sees his people worshiping false idols, they explode.

Damn! thats one hell of a chest burster coming!

Gwar! wrote:

Herohammernostalgia wrote:

malfred wrote:Pffft, it doesn't match the fluff.

In the Bible, David was totally naked when he rolled his stone in a sack and teabagged Goliath.

I think it implied that David was unarmoured while Goliath wore a bronze helmet, breastplate, greaves and shield. In ancient (and medieval) literature, being "naked" in combat does not mean naked of clothing, but it means not having any armour.

No offence, but considering the bible was written in Hebrew, translated to Greek, translated to Latin, translated back into greek, translated BACk into latin, Translated to English, and has had large chunks of it just wholesale removed whenever Rome Felt like it...

Right. An no one, aboslutely no one has ever thought of that before and tried to reconstruct the process to assure accuracy. Oh no.

There certainly aren't libraries filled with commentary, word by word analysis or books in the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek (FYI the gospels were written in Greek, not Hebrew).

Oh no. The Bible is about as good as a Hong Kong fan sub of Japanese pornamation.

Thank you Gwar for opening my eyes.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Oh no. The Bible is about as good as a Hong Kong fan sub of Japanese pornamation.

Thank you Gwar for opening my eyes.

I am glad you agree!

mattyrm wrote:Purely speculative nonsense. What does that even mean? Being as i am frequently whined at for giving my entirely scientific rational opinion about the fact that it is extremely unlikely there is a higher power, i cant sit here and say nothing when someone makes a statement that is entirely unfalsifiable.

It means god made the whole universe, so if he has important stuff to tell people (like don't cut your hair, or something), it works in space too, because god invented both space and ancient Israel.

Easy peasy.

Roid-fiend bible stories? A neat idea, I guess.

I think Brock Samson would totally mash his Samson.

reds8n wrote:

witness the horror

Thanks for sharing this. I haven't laughed this hard in a while!

You're welcome.

..if we could stick to making entirely warranted attacks and comments on Rob Liefield and not religion ( on dakka ! Surely not ! ) that'd be cool and save us the bother of locking the thread.

Gwar! wrote:

Herohammernostalgia wrote:

malfred wrote:Pffft, it doesn't match the fluff.

In the Bible, David was totally naked when he rolled his stone in a sack and teabagged Goliath.

I think it implied that David was unarmoured while Goliath wore a bronze helmet, breastplate, greaves and shield. In ancient (and medieval) literature, being "naked" in combat does not mean naked of clothing, but it means not having any armour.

No offence, but considering the bible was written in Hebrew, translated to Greek, translated to Latin, translated back into greek, translated BACk into latin, Translated to English, and has had large chunks of it just wholesale removed whenever Rome Felt like it...

Heh, for all I know the Hebrews, Greeks and Romans had only one word for both unclothed and unarmoured and modern English-speakers are too perverted to make the distinction :p.

It's true though, the whole lost in translation thing. If you ever want a job were you can have endless discussions with your colleagues and peers about what specific age old phrases might mean: do something with religion (become a theologist, a priest, a rabbi). There will be no end to the dialogues!

At least the Romans tried to give it some structure.

Herohammernostalgia wrote:

malfred wrote:Pffft, it doesn't match the fluff.

In the Bible, David was totally naked when he rolled his stone in a sack and teabagged Goliath.

I think it implied that David was unarmoured while Goliath wore a bronze helmet, breastplate, greaves and shield. In ancient (and medieval) literature, being "naked" in combat does not mean naked of clothing, but it means not having any armour.

Again, I pffft! How else are you going to teabag a giant but without any clothing on?