Prince Namor

I could (and should) write a book on just the factual errors in this!

I just got around to watching the first one and loved it... can't wait to see this sequel...

ON NEWSSTANDS DECEMBER 1970 Forever People #1 - Written, Drawn and Edited by Jack Kirby (inked by the horrible Vince Colletta) Al Plastino (Superman alterations, uncredited) Part TWO:

ON NEWSSTANDS DECEMBER 1970 Forever People #1 - Written, Drawn and Edited by Jack Kirby (inked by the horrible Vince Colletta) Cover by Jack Kirby (inks by Frank Giacoia) Al Plastino (Superman alterations, uncredited) An amazing, action packed first issue! Part ONE:

ON NEWSSTANDS JULY 1964 Fantastic Four #31 - Kirby, Lee, Stone, Rosen This one is non-stop from beginning to end! Part TWO

ON NEWSSTANDS JULY 1964 Fantastic Four #31 - Kirby, Lee, Stone, Rosen This one is non-stop from beginning to end! Part ONE

Why am I not familiar with that? Thank you so much!

If anyone has a copy of World's Finest #302, can you find the Statement of Publication info in it? I just need the Total Paid Circulation number, usually listed under 10C. Thank you!

ON NEWSSTANDS JULY 1964 Fantastic Four Annual #2 - Kirby, Lee, Stone, Rosen The FINAL VICTORY of DOCTOR DOOM Part TWO

ON NEWSSTANDS JULY 1964 Fantastic Four Annual #2 - Kirby, Lee, Stone, Rosen The FINAL VICTORY of DOCTOR DOOM Part ONE

ON NEWSSTANDS JULY 1964 Fantastic Four Annual #2 - The Pin-ups

ON NEWSSTANDS JULY 1964 Fantastic Four Annual #2 - Kirby, Lee, Stone, Rosen The ORIGIN of DOCTOR DOOM - Kirby only has two hands, but he gives us two stories for this annual... The lead story is 12 pages, followed by those cool 'Rogues Gallery' pin-ups... It still seems weird to me that someone can read that Ant-Man story and then read THIS and think it's the same writer.

Was he wrong? Or wrong in some people's opinion? Wrong in the Court of Public Opinion? I get that most of society may see it as creepy or 'wrong', but depending on the state... it was not illegal. Not by far. In fact, it somewhat SHOCKED me to look into this... in only 11 of the 50 states is 18 the legal age of consent. What??? In 31 of the 50 states, 62% (!!!!) it's STILL only 16 years of age. (8 of the states it's 17!) That means that in 39 of the 50 states (an overwhelming 78%), even if Ed had ACTED on what he said (and he DIDN'T) ... it would NOT have been illegal. (He's from Pennsylvania, where it's 16...) Now I know... the virtuous members of this unorganized, online, non-community are going to jump to show us how gross this is, and that they hate it and yada, yada, yada... I'm just pointing out FACT. Go write your Congressperson. I don't have anything to do with it. YOUR LOCAL LEADERS in 78% of America, look at 17 years of age as old enough for your daughters to make their own decisions about who they date. They've left it in YOUR hands to defend their virtue. Just sayin'.

Well... usually it exposes it after it happens, so it doesn't actually stop it.

Here was my take: The Marvel Method Recently, I was reading what Will Byron had put together about Roy Thomas (Houseroy) and his right hand partner in Historical Manipulation, John Cimino. Roy wants to become co-creator of Wolverine. Or rather HAS become. Marvel green lit the whole idea pretty easily. And to me that is what says everything about this event. See Houseroy, as an editor wants to be seen as a, what they call, first sayer. According to him, he got the idea of wanting to have a character that was Canadian and who was called Wolverine and thus he is considered the originator of the idea. Keep in mind nobody loves the character of Wolverine because his name is Wolverine and because he's Canadian, …or really even what he LOOKS like in that silly bright yellow costume. His popularity grew because of what Chris Claremont, and John Byrne did with the character in the pages of the X-Men a number of years later. But that’s not how Houseroy thinks. Because that's not how Marvel thinks. Because that's not how Stan Lee thought. See, back in the 40s, as much as Lee wants to pretend like he was a real writer… he wasn’t. He was an editor. He did a little bit of writing here and there. Nothing that anyone would pay attention to as special or landmark. He primarily was a dude who had a job because of nepotism. There is nothing he did in the 40s that really benefited the company that can be seen. And that extends into the 50s. He was surrounded by creative people who made comics. And those comics that Marvel did (as Atlas) in the 50s were all primarily created and put together by other editors, writers and artists. Stan wrote less than 5% of that material. And again, none of it is anything that anyone really notices. Stan oversaw the editors who were doing the creating. He was a Goodman go-between, handling the business of making sure others were doing their job. Occasionally, he might've come up with an idea and given it to someone. From what we know he handed out scripts to some. That's what editors do. But in general, 95% of what was done was not written by Stan Lee. When the implosion happened, and it looked like Goodman was going to close the comic book portion of the business down at the very least... and make no mistake… The proof is out there… Goodman was going to shut the comicss down, plain and simple as that... Stan had nowhere else to go. Goodman, had no one else to rely on. And the reasoning behind it is very simple. Stan Lee was an editor of editors. He wasn't a writer. Sure he had written some stories, but mainly he just gave ideas to some of the people and told them to do the real work. He certainly wasn't then, in the aftermath of the implosion, someone who was going to save the company. He just didn't have the talent or the means to be able to do that and keep things running. So Goodman was going to close it down. Enter Jack Kirby. Kirby COULD and DID save Marvel Comics. He could, and did, write and draw his own stories. And at first that's exactly what he did. No one thought anything of it at the time because they were on the verge of going out of business. As soon as the Fantastic Four became a success... the company, started to think about it in terms of ownership of creativity. Was that Stan? Maybe. Most likely it originated from Goodman. He WAS the one who cheated Kirby and Simon out of Captain America originally. Maybe he TAUGHT Stan. An interesting quote from writer Leon Lazarus, that I just recently read on Wikipedia: "…Goodman started pressuring [editor-in-chief and head writer] Stan [Lee] to have other writers do some of the stories. He wasn't sold on [the Marvel Method] of doing stories [in which writers would supply artists with a plot synopsis, rather than full script, allowing artists to tell the story's visual narrative with their own pacing and details]. He became concerned that Stan would have too much leverage over him, and he worried about what would happen if Stan ever decided to leave the company. Goodman wanted other writers as a back-up in case he needed them, so he ordered Stan to use other writers. ... Goodman told Stan to, 'Have Leon write stories.' Stan called me and up and asked if I was willing to come in and work there again. ... I didn't want to say 'no' because I was working for Goodman's men's magazines, and didn't want to lose the account. ... I only did this one story, because I wasn't comfortable with the way Stan wanted writers to work with the artists, though I see now how right he was…" The Marvel method wasn't created out of Stan having too many stories to write. I suspect that Stan rarely if ever actually wrote a script or a story. If he did, I doubt it was on a regular basis. I suspect that he didn't really even write synopsis’ that he alone came up with. I suspect, he’d have a meeting or phone call with an artists and push THEM for an idea - maybe interject some stuff like “What if the Human Torch guest stars???” And then it would get typed up. That’s what an EDITOR does. The Marvel Method is simply him doing what he always did: give out instructions as an editor and then let the creative people do the work. As he reminded us a few times in the 60s, for some people like Jack Kirby he didn't even have to do that much. Sometimes he didn't have to do anything at all. That’s how EDITORS talk. John Romita: "The only thing he used to do from 1966-72 was come in and leave a note on my drawing table saying “Next Month, the Rhino.” That’s all; he wouldn’t tell me anything; how to handle it." - Comic Book Artist #6 Fall 1999. THAT’S WHAT EDITORS DO. And when it comes to Kirby, why would he try and do more? What had he ever done that could compare to anything that Kirby had previously ever done? (Well… we SAW what happened when he took himself seriously as a writer and tried to do more. Read the Silver Surfer original series and see what really lame storytelling, combined with overwrought dialogue looks like. Great art… but what a turd of a writing job.) Understanding this makes the idea of Larry Lieber as writing for Kirby, the biggest joke in the history of the industry. Larry Lieber writing for Jack Kirby is a bigger joke than Stan Lee writing for Jack Kirby. Stan Lee, you could at least say had worked in the business for 20 years and had been around the month-to-month, daily operation of the business. He’d probably given plenty of ideas to people from various sources, handled thousands of other people scripts, overlooked thousands of pages of artwork, made judgment calls, etc. What the (heck) had Larry Lieber ever done? He didn't even own a typewriter. Most likely, based upon just common sense, Goodman made Stan give Larry some work. Stan probably took those finished Kirby stories from Thor and Strange Tales and Tales to Astonish and had Larry actually type up the script for him after the artwork was already done. And when Jack Kirby saw that Larry Lieber was getting CREDIT (and pay) for those scripts, he blew his top. He no longer worked on those books. And Larry Lieber on his own without Jack Kirby was a mess. Never again did we see a Larry Lieber credit on a Jack Kirby story. Kirby eventually returned to Thor and eventually brought Nick Fury to modern times as an Agent of Shield and Larry Lieber limped out of the picture and went on to do some basic genre western stories. Stan Lee didn't create the credit boxes to give other people credit. He created them to call himself a writer, even though he was no more than just an editor. He did it to take the pay away from the artists, the true writers of the work, and give it to himself. He just dressed it up in a way that people didn't question. The Marvel Method, was simply a term of distraction from what was really going on. Ownership of Intellectual Property. And Houseroy is just gladly putting his hand out to try and get his share. He's spent 5 1/2 decades being a manipulative shill publisher for Marvel, I suppose he thinks he's owed that. ‘With Great Power’ Indeed.

More: https://fourcolorsinners.com/2024/04/02/i-hope-his-widow-gets-rich-off-it-more-on-roy-the-ghoul-and-the-power-of-recorded-statements/?fbclid=IwAR23wns97DfcAPBUWece0O1EvRHq26lPvYGVsIJTd8PWQMcKBXiT_JjRwuA_aem_AV60Vd1x8Q-wc7F3rbG4BHB3jPzeTVIGc0VQTBEIJqKahXEEwyziG5Z3oObDdCUiqJdmbus3IBV9LBtkNlK31rI2

No. Roy Thomas and his 'handler' John Cimino (who stuck a camera in Steve Ditko's face) have been planning this for some time. It's all outlined here: https://fourcolorsinners.com/2023/12/29/such-a-shame-that-a-little-fame-and-attention-began-to-get-to-lens-head-on-roy-thomass-erasure-of-the-real-creators-of-wolverine/

No, I DON'T think it's beating a dead horse. There are still most here who are giving Molly D the benefit of the doubt and automatically accepting that what she is saying is true and MUST be taken as true, as that is what society tells us we should now do. Anyone who even SLIGHTLY questions it, is automatically hit with questions like, "I don't like where you're going with this..." and comparisons to sexual assault victims and 13 year old girls being put in harms way. And then, because ED is the ACCUSED, he is NOT afforded that same courtesy, but rather what he has said has been picked apart and doubted and seen as completely fabricated to play to an audience. HE, because he is the accused, and I would suspect to some degree because he is an ADULT MALE, has been found guilty, without the benefit of all the facts. The complete opposite of the way the American Justice System is supposed to work. Most, just take for granted that a 17 year old girl could never be more wiley than a 40 year old man. And one of the people doing that, not surprisingly, found your meme funny.

I think that, some have gone to considerable lengths to give the original victim the benefit of the doubt and 'empathy toward how she feels', regardless of if they even completely agree and certainly in light of what happened as a result. That's a GOOD thing to have and to do for others. I don't think everyone has extended the same empathy towards Ed.

Maybe. As much as social media is a part of some people's every waking moment, he was going to get blasted every time he was online for... how long? 3 years? 4 years? That's a long time to deal with people who... well just look at the virtue of some of the people in here. There was no physical contact between Ed and Molly and yet we got a barrage of people comparing it to sexual assault and 13 year olds and letting us know how much THEY are against those things. He had a long road ahead of him... not saying he was RIGHT. Just saying... the WAY people react to a situation like this is different than, say... if it had been a 17 year old MALE. Kevin Spacey is just now starting to get work again after being ERASED from a movie, losing a starring role, and pretty much blacklisted for 5 years. And he WON his case against Anthony Rapp. Ed obviously felt, either he couldn't handle however temporary it might've been or just that he couldn't handle it at all. Not saying he was RIGHT. Just that... it was a tough road ahead. This is looking at it sensibly. There are no good answers here. We ASSUME she did it to ease some pain she felt because of what had happened. She should have the right to do that. Most sensible people SUPPORT her right to do that. BUT, it sent an immediate backlash that she obviously didn't see coming, because... the internet and court of public opinion is a fickle little pickle. That's not condemning it. That's just what happened. And now... she has to live with what happened to ED. I ASSUME she didn't want to see that. Ultimately... did sharing her story make her life better? Did she gain piece of mind from it? Or is it so much more complicated and painful than it was? No judgement here. It does, as you say 'suck all around'. But everyday we all make decisions that could have an effect on other human beings... it helps to think long and hard about how easy it is for just a single Instagram post to open the world up to our entire life... for people who don't know us or care about us or will ever have anything to do with us to suddenly be privy to and make judgements about us that will be seen by hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of other people. And how, we can do that to someone ELSE just as easily... Again... no judgement for Molly. I assume she did what she thought was right. But it just makes me think... for myself and anyone else who takes part in this social media monster we've created.

Lori Maddox alone could've canceled about 15% of the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame.

Well... Sheriff John Brown always hated him. For what, we don't know. Every time that he would plant a seed, he'd say, "Kill it before it grows." Not sure if that justifies the shooting, but he swears it was in self-defense.

I didn't see any of it, but according to someone in the know, it was bad. She didn't deserve that. The Internet is an ugly beast.

You see art you like. You imitate it. That's how. Has nothing to do with who they are. An artist shows you what they want to show you. What people's reactions are to it, is usually more telling than how it reflects the artist. Bob Marley didn't really shoot the sheriff. It was just a song.

This is why it's almost impossible to have a discussion of this type on the Internet. Everyone has their own view on what they think the discussion is about and they can only speak from that angle.