|
Post by seymourbarf on Sept 19, 2018 8:33:38 GMT -5
I like the purple~ something new I do like the addition of a new parallel color, because it will allow you to fill out a nine-card frame without having a printing plate or a sketch. You could have the base card & parallels surrounding an autograph card in the middle. But as for the set as a whole, I think my feelings are the same as the 80s set - there are a few that I like, but I'm not a fan overall. But that's okay. New GPKs are like new U2 albums. If I can get one or two good cards/songs out of it, that's about the best I can hope for these days.
|
|
|
Post by rockholt on Sept 19, 2018 9:22:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jamfish on Sept 19, 2018 9:29:57 GMT -5
I’ve only seen about half so far I wonder why they are having so many concept parodies of Bony Tony recently there is Living Levi in this series and previously they had Shedding Sam/Lizard Lou in the 30th anniversary, Billary Hillary, Unmasked Matt and Gary Old Man in the online series, Open Scully/Disguised Dana in Trashy TV and He Manny/Skel-Etor in we hate the 80s
|
|
|
Post by seymourbarf on Sept 19, 2018 9:37:47 GMT -5
I’ve only seen about half so far I wonder why they are having so many concept parodies of Bony Tony recently there is Living Levi in this series and previously they had Shedding Sam/Lizard Lou in the 30th anniversary, Billary Hillary, Unmasked Matt and Gary Old Man in the online series, Open Scully/Disguised Dana in Trashy TV and He Manny/Skel-Etor in we hate the 80s I noticed the same thing and I am sick of it. Is Bony Tony even that classic of a GPK that they feel the need to copy it with every new release? I mean, Bony Tony is good, one homage was fine, but stop it already!
|
|
|
Post by antiqueman98 on Sept 19, 2018 12:31:19 GMT -5
I like the purple~ something new I do like the addition of a new parallel color, because it will allow you to fill out a nine-card frame without having a printing plate or a sketch. You could have the base card & parallels surrounding an autograph card in the middle. But as for the set as a whole, I think my feelings are the same as the 80s set - there are a few that I like, but I'm not a fan overall. But that's okay. New GPKs are like new U2 albums. If I can get one or two good cards/songs out of it, that's about the best I can hope for these days. I feel the same it was just exciting to buy new ones I just want to like this set but it’s average and like you said a couple good ones and that’s fine
|
|
|
Post by seymourbarf on Sept 19, 2018 13:53:24 GMT -5
I do like the addition of a new parallel color, because it will allow you to fill out a nine-card frame without having a printing plate or a sketch. You could have the base card & parallels surrounding an autograph card in the middle. But as for the set as a whole, I think my feelings are the same as the 80s set - there are a few that I like, but I'm not a fan overall. But that's okay. New GPKs are like new U2 albums. If I can get one or two good cards/songs out of it, that's about the best I can hope for these days. I feel the same it was just exciting to buy new ones I just want to like this set but it’s average and like you said a couple good ones and that’s fine It's definitely exciting to buy new ones. I'm excited for Topps Vault to list the new blank backs! Even though the set as a whole might not be great doesn't mean there aren't treasures to be had. I found one of my favorite GPKs ever (Dee & D) in the 80s set. The new set could have gold in it as well!
|
|
|
Post by aligator on Sept 19, 2018 19:25:19 GMT -5
There are some imaginative ones in this set ... and doing a quick count, I actually like about 60 in total out the 100 base set, so that is pretty good. My favourite in terms of composition and colour, and general GPK feel is "Bob Blob" -> Something about it just feels right at home, as though it would exist in a clasic GPK series. It looks like a Layron Dejarnette piece as far as I can tell (although I could be wrong?), and I always think he captures that classic GPK look well!
|
|
|
Post by creamedkeith on Sept 20, 2018 6:59:37 GMT -5
I must say, I do like the look of those red packs, with Nick on front! I would have gone crazy if Topps did that back in the 80s, on a wax wrapper.
|
|
|
Post by dejarnette on Sept 20, 2018 9:54:48 GMT -5
There are some imaginative ones in this set ... and doing a quick count, I actually like about 60 in total out the 100 base set, so that is pretty good. My favourite in terms of composition and colour, and general GPK feel is "Bob Blob" -> Something about it just feels right at home, as though it would exist in a clasic GPK series. It looks like a Layron Dejarnette piece as far as I can tell (although I could be wrong?), and I always think he captures that classic GPK look well! Thanks for the comment! Yes, I painted the GPK Blob. This is the only card I did for the Horror-ible series.
|
|
|
Post by rockholt on Sept 20, 2018 15:10:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by aligator on Sept 20, 2018 15:20:58 GMT -5
Thanks for the comment! Yes, I painted the GPK Blob. This is the only card I did for the Horror-ible series. Excellent - It is very cool! I've always liked your GPK art, captures the GPK feeling perfectly!
|
|
|
Post by rusVan on Sept 23, 2018 15:58:08 GMT -5
So... anybody seen all the cards out of the horror set? Any great ones?
|
|
|
Post by aligator on Sept 23, 2018 18:08:17 GMT -5
So... anybody seen all the cards out of the horror set? Any great ones? Some of my personal favourites ...
|
|
|
Post by aligator on Sept 23, 2018 18:41:24 GMT -5
And some more...
|
|
|
Post by DJR on Sept 23, 2018 21:08:13 GMT -5
They look nothing like Cabbage Patch kids. Why are these called Garbage Pail Kids? Just another pathetic money grab
|
|
|
Post by Fuzz on Sept 24, 2018 7:11:03 GMT -5
Is it just me, or does TREM-MURRAY kinda look like a tit?
|
|
|
Post by peacheswithpeaches on Sept 24, 2018 7:26:25 GMT -5
That Loch Ness monster one is terrible. I've also been wondering why they make the colored borders so ugly... Probably to save on ink the cheapskates.
|
|
|
Post by billo on Sept 24, 2018 14:10:51 GMT -5
F'.... was this Colin's middle finger to GPK collectors on his way out? There are a couple good cards (the Hell Frasier is awesome! IMO), but this set is really a disappointment.
|
|
|
Post by rockholt on Sept 24, 2018 14:39:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by DJR on Sept 24, 2018 15:59:27 GMT -5
Also, it's too late to start getting edgy. Do we really want to look up Full Moon's corn hole
|
|
|
Post by antiqueman98 on Sept 24, 2018 18:55:21 GMT -5
There are some imaginative ones in this set ... and doing a quick count, I actually like about 60 in total out the 100 base set, so that is pretty good. My favourite in terms of composition and colour, and general GPK feel is "Bob Blob" -> Something about it just feels right at home, as though it would exist in a clasic GPK series. It looks like a Layron Dejarnette piece as far as I can tell (although I could be wrong?), and I always think he captures that classic GPK look well! Thanks for the comment! Yes, I painted the GPK Blob. This is the only card I did for the Horror-ible series. Well you sure picked a great idea. The Blob is classic and loved by true horror fans!! Good one
|
|
|
Post by seymourbarf on Sept 24, 2018 19:01:27 GMT -5
Without a doubt, HK is better! I have similar feelings about the HK vs. GPK "The Thing" cards: I definitely prefer the HK version - it features the alien, which I think is a great subject for CPK parody. The art itself is great. Add in the fact that the kid actually looks like a CPK, and the HK card is the clear winner. The GPK card has a lot going on - it has a Kurt Russell character, the infected blood is a character, and it has the alien as a side character. It's too busy for my tastes, and the art just isn't as good as Mark's. Though I do stress that the art isn't bad. Plus, why is the GPK card named "Mac Ready"? Why is Kurt Russell the Garbage Pail Kid in this one? I would think the card should be named for the blood character. Especially since this set has *another* Kurt Russell card in it: ***Edited to remove any unintended assertions***
|
|
|
Post by dejarnette on Sept 24, 2018 19:01:34 GMT -5
Thanks for the comment! Yes, I painted the GPK Blob. This is the only card I did for the Horror-ible series. Excellent - It is very cool! I've always liked your GPK art, captures the GPK feeling perfectly! Here's a CU detail of the GPK Blob:
|
|
|
Post by antiqueman98 on Sept 24, 2018 19:24:13 GMT -5
Excellent - It is very cool! I've always liked your GPK art, captures the GPK feeling perfectly! Here's a CU detail of the GPK Blob: Amazing!! Love it
|
|
|
Post by slamjim on Sept 24, 2018 19:52:01 GMT -5
Not going to get into a big debate on this stuff but the idea that anyone ripped off Mark's cards is laughable. My Thing concept from last November in the Halloween set came before Mark's which is basically the same gag with the mini Thing replacing the Kurt Russell in mine (and I'm not saying Mark took my gag. I don't care about this stuff). Second, we finished our concepts for this GPK release in early January and the paintings in April which is 7 months (roughs) and 4 months (finals) before Mark's set even came out. Third, I have over 50 more roughs completely drawn (and the other guys have a tons as well). I'm not going to care if Mark does one that comes out before mine. My roughs are done, I like them and I'll still use them regardless if he gets one out ahead of it. No one is competing anyway. The people buying the cards have already made up their minds on if they are buying his, ours or both. No one cares.
|
|
|
Post by seymourbarf on Sept 24, 2018 20:03:48 GMT -5
Not going to get into a big debate on this stuff but the idea that anyone ripped off Mark's cards is laughable. My Thing concept from last November in the Halloween set came before Mark's which is basically the same gag with the mini Thing replacing the Kurt Russell in mine (and I'm not saying Mark took my gag. I don't care about this stuff). Second, we finished our concepts for this GPK release in early January and the paintings in April which is 7 months (roughs) and 4 months (finals) before Mark's set even came out. Third, I have over 50 more roughs completely drawn (and the other guys have a tons as well). I'm not going to care if Mark does one that comes out before mine. My roughs are done, I like them and I'll still use them regardless if he gets one out ahead of it. No one is competing anyway. The people buying the cards have already made up their minds on if they are buying his, ours or both. No one cares. Understood. I'm not actually suggesting anyone ripped off Mark. I know I played it fast and loose with the language I chose, but my point was that the sets are very similar, and since Mark's came first I am going to hold the new GPK set to his standard. I was trying to be colorful but I came across as saying something I didn't intend. I apologize and I hope I didn't offend.
|
|
|
Post by slamjim on Sept 24, 2018 20:12:52 GMT -5
It's cool. I don't care about the other aspects of the cards sets but if it's being implied (or may seem implied) that anyone took any ideas from him that's flat out untrue. To point out that Mark did a Tarman and Brent did a Tarman is silly. Return of the Living Dead is not a niche movie. In fact, it's my favorite 80s horror film. Unlike most of the GPK fans I actually saw it in the theater and had the original poster on my wall as a teen (I was super bummed when Brent got that film over my rough). Would also like to note Mark and all of us are on good terms. We occasionally chat in PM and all go to the conventions together. There isn't any rivalry except in the heads of some of the fans. His set has no affect on our sales and vice versa. Most people that buy them buy both.
|
|
|
Post by LuCypher on Sept 25, 2018 8:05:33 GMT -5
Well that didn’t take long
|
|
|
Post by seymourbarf on Sept 25, 2018 9:35:49 GMT -5
Without a doubt, HK is better! I have similar feelings about the HK vs. GPK "The Thing" cards: I definitely prefer the HK version - it features the alien, which I think is a great subject for CPK parody. The art itself is great. Add in the fact that the kid actually looks like a CPK, and the HK card is the clear winner. The GPK card has a lot going on - it has a Kurt Russell character, the infected blood is a character, and it has the alien as a side character. It's too busy for my tastes, and the art just isn't as good as Mark's. Though I do stress that the art isn't bad. Plus, why is the GPK card named "Mac Ready"? Why is Kurt Russell the Garbage Pail Kid in this one? I would think the card should be named for the blood character. Especially since this set has *another* Kurt Russell card in it: ***Edited to remove any unintended assertions*** I want to clarify what I was trying to say in my post yesterday, because I want to make it clear that I don't think that the GPK artists are ripping off Mark's concepts or subjects, or that they are competing against him in any way. I also want to expressly state that I think most of the current GPK artists are great at what they do. However, I am frustrated with the latest GPK releases because they do not encapsulate what I consider a true GPK to be. The card stock is too thin. The cards aren't die-cut. There isn't any card back art. This is Topps' fault, not the GPK artists' fault. Also, in my opinion, I don't think the kids look very much like CPKs. And on this point too, I don't hold it against the artists because I know they are working within the confines of the post-settlement world. But then Mark left Topps and came out with his own sets that, for the most part, captured what I was looking for. His latest release has thicker card stock and card back art. His sets are die-cut and in my opinion have more subjects that look like CPKs (or perhaps rather, look more like classic GPKs). Mark, more than anyone else, certainly more than Topps, is giving me what I want to see. And to be clear, I want to see something that reminds me of the magic of GPKs from when I was a kid. But again, that's not the GPK artists' fault. They are working within the limitations that Topps has placed upon them. So when Topps released its latest horror set, I viewed it with two lenses: (1) the lens of "Topps sucks because they have drastically changed (for the worse) their approach to GPKs since the 80s", and (2) the lens of "Mark just released an updated horror set that captures many more of the hallmarks of classic GPKs than any release I've seen in a long time." Almost none of the concepts between Mark's set and the new Topps' set are the same. And though there is a lot of overlap in subject, that is virtually unavoidable given the nature of the sets. When you have two sets parodying classic and popular horror, you are bound to have subjects duplicated. You can't blame Topps or the GPK artists for having Jason Vorhees or Candy Man in a horror set, even if Mark had them in his first. And on that point, the GPK artists didn't know what subjects Mark was working on. They didn't share notes or have advanced notice. These were purely coincidences. But, my post last night made it appear like I was saying that the GPK artists did rip off or copy Mark. It wasn't my intent to do that, but I chose my words poorly and irresponsibly. I was attempting to vent my frustration with Topps, and having just seen Mark's set that covered a similar topic, I thought that voicing my preference for his set was a way to "s**t on Topps". That is all I was trying to do with my post. I wasn't trying to bad-mouth the GPK artists, because I think most of them do great work. I admire David Gross' work, and have bought a final from him. I admire Brent Engstrom's work, and have bought a final from him. Layron has multiple pieces that I think are great (his latest Blob piece and his Cheese Louise piece immediately come to mind). I also really liked Miran Kim's Flo Worm piece from the 80s release. And those are just to name a few. It is hard not to compare Mark's Horrible Kids with Topps' "Oh, The Horror-ible" sets. They cover the same subject matter and were released at roughly the same time. But I wasn't trying to pit Mark against the GPK artists in some kind of Mortal Kombat competition. I don't think they have a rivalry or dislike each other. And I apologize for giving the appearance that I was suggesting that, or that any GPK artist was ripping off Mark's work. That simply is not the case. Mark is a great artist, but he isn't perfect. He's just giving me what I want to see more so than Topps is. And I don't doubt that if the GPK artists had more freedom to produce exactly what they wanted to (which is the freedom that Mark has), they would be delivering just like Mark is.
|
|
|
Post by Cory on Sept 25, 2018 10:29:05 GMT -5
Without a doubt, HK is better! I have similar feelings about the HK vs. GPK "The Thing" cards: I definitely prefer the HK version - it features the alien, which I think is a great subject for CPK parody. The art itself is great. Add in the fact that the kid actually looks like a CPK, and the HK card is the clear winner. The GPK card has a lot going on - it has a Kurt Russell character, the infected blood is a character, and it has the alien as a side character. It's too busy for my tastes, and the art just isn't as good as Mark's. Though I do stress that the art isn't bad. Plus, why is the GPK card named "Mac Ready"? Why is Kurt Russell the Garbage Pail Kid in this one? I would think the card should be named for the blood character. Especially since this set has *another* Kurt Russell card in it: ***Edited to remove any unintended assertions*** I want to clarify what I was trying to say in my post yesterday, because I want to make it clear that I don't think that the GPK artists are ripping off Mark's concepts or subjects, or that they are competing against him in any way. I also want to expressly state that I think most of the current GPK artists are great at what they do. However, I am frustrated with the latest GPK releases because they do not encapsulate what I consider a true GPK to be. The card stock is too thin. The cards aren't die-cut. There isn't any card back art. This is Topps' fault, not the GPK artists' fault. Also, in my opinion, I don't think the kids look very much like CPKs. And on this point too, I don't hold it against the artists because I know they are working within the confines of the post-settlement world. But then Mark left Topps and came out with his own sets that, for the most part, captured what I was looking for. His latest release has thicker card stock and card back art. His sets are die-cut and in my opinion have more subjects that look like CPKs (or perhaps rather, look more like classic GPKs). Mark, more than anyone else, certainly more than Topps, is giving me what I want to see. And to be clear, I want to see something that reminds me of the magic of GPKs from when I was a kid. But again, that's not the GPK artists' fault. They are working within the limitations that Topps has placed upon them. So when Topps released its latest horror set, I viewed it with two lenses: (1) the lens of "Topps sucks because they have drastically changed (for the worse) their approach to GPKs since the 80s", and (2) the lens of "Mark just released an updated horror set that captures many more of the hallmarks of classic GPKs than any release I've seen in a long time." Almost none of the concepts between Mark's set and the new Topps' set are the same. And though there is a lot of overlap in subject, that is virtually unavoidable given the nature of the sets. When you have two sets parodying classic and popular horror, you are bound to have subjects duplicated. You can't blame Topps or the GPK artists for having Jason Vorhees or Candy Man in a horror set, even if Mark had them in his first. And on that point, the GPK artists didn't know what subjects Mark was working on. They didn't share notes or have advanced notice. These were purely coincidences. But, my post last night made it appear like I was saying that the GPK artists did rip off or copy Mark. It wasn't my intent to do that, but I chose my words poorly and irresponsibly. I was attempting to vent my frustration with Topps, and having just seen Mark's set that covered a similar topic, I thought that voicing my preference for his set was a way to "s**t on Topps". That is all I was trying to do with my post. I wasn't trying to bad-mouth the GPK artists, because I think most of them do great work. I admire David Gross' work, and have bought a final from him. I admire Brent Engstrom's work, and have bought a final from him. Layron has multiple pieces that I think are great (his latest Blob piece and his Cheese Louise piece immediately come to mind). I also really liked Miran Kim's Flo Worm piece from the 80s release. And those are just to name a few. It is hard not to compare Mark's Horrible Kids with Topps' "Oh, The Horror-ible" sets. They cover the same subject matter and were released at roughly the same time. But I wasn't trying to pit Mark against the GPK artists in some kind of Mortal Kombat competition. I don't think they have a rivalry or dislike each other. And I apologize for giving the appearance that I was suggesting that, or that any GPK artist was ripping off Mark's work. That simply is not the case. Mark is a great artist, but he isn't perfect. He's just giving me what I want to see more so than Topps is. And I don't doubt that if the GPK artists had more freedom to produce exactly what they wanted to (which is the freedom that Mark has), they would be delivering just like Mark is. That's Snake Plisken card is a rip-off of a OS16/ANS card. Also, the art on that card sucks. There are a few cards I like in this set but the majority aren't that good. It's mostly the concepts that are weak, but there is a lot of bad art as well. By bad art, I mean that it doesn't look like a CPK/GPK or anything PK. Brent's are once again the best of the set. Layron's lone card is pretty good too. Mark had more great cards in his set than this entire bloated mess of a set. Hopefully, the next brand manager knows what the fugg is going on when it comes to GPK
|
|