FOOM #2 – The First Appearance Of Wolverine, In 1973?

[joe_collector]

His Wolverine is a robot. I agree.

 

Agreed, and his drawing looks like those Fembots from Six-Million Dollar Man.

 

 

And hopefully someone has mentioned the most obvious prototype for Wolverine, Timber Wolf, who debuted in 1964, well ahead of Foom #2.

 

[comix4fun]

His Wolverine is a robot. I agree.

 

Agreed, and his drawing looks like those Fembots from Six-Million Dollar Man.

 

 

And hopefully someone has mentioned the most obvious prototype for Wolverine, Timber Wolf, who debuted in 1964, well ahead of Foom #2.

 

 

 

The conversation was centering mostly around what Andy Olson may have been influenced by and what his drawing looked like really.

 

We didn't get into where our Wolverine came from, but that's a good path to go down. I think we've beaten the rest of the topic to death.

[Logan510]

Where the claws not of metal in 180/181? .

 

I don't think there is any indication in the Hulk issues that Wolverines claw is part of him, or that he can retract it.

 

Len Wein's original intention was that the claws were part of the gloves. Claremont is the one who decided they would be part of the man.

Stan & Steve's original intention was that the webbing would come from a web shooter. Sam Raimi is the one who decided that it should come from the man.

 

 

Peter David can lay claim to this idea via Spider-Man 2099. I don't think he asked for any compensation for this.

 

Can he? I thought that the treatment James Cameron wrote for a Spider-Man movie in the late 80's / early 90's also had organic web shooters

 

I read that in his CBG column. Maybe he meant in printed form. What a pompous ---but he's still one of my favortie writers.

 

 

I honestly don't recall which one came first off the top of my head, though for some reason I remember reading about Cameron's treatment first.

 

 

Edit:

 

Cameron wrote his treatment in 1991 and Spider-Man 2099 debuted in 1992.

 

I think what we can surmise from this is that they both somehow stole this idea from a creative 12 year old.

 

Checking out the ever-reliable Wiki, Leslie Stevens wrote about the organic web-shooter back in 1985.

 

This treatment reflected elements in previous scripts: from the Stevens treatment, organic web-shooters

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man_%28film%29

 

Maybe Leslie was 12 years old then.

 

 

Actually, I heard Leslie stole that idea from Jack Kirby

[Comicopolis]

Where the claws not of metal in 180/181? .

 

I don't think there is any indication in the Hulk issues that Wolverines claw is part of him, or that he can retract it.

 

Len Wein's original intention was that the claws were part of the gloves. Claremont is the one who decided they would be part of the man.

Stan & Steve's original intention was that the webbing would come from a web shooter. Sam Raimi is the one who decided that it should come from the man.

 

 

Peter David can lay claim to this idea via Spider-Man 2099. I don't think he asked for any compensation for this.

 

Can he? I thought that the treatment James Cameron wrote for a Spider-Man movie in the late 80's / early 90's also had organic web shooters

 

I read that in his CBG column. Maybe he meant in printed form. What a pompous ---but he's still one of my favortie writers.

 

 

I honestly don't recall which one came first off the top of my head, though for some reason I remember reading about Cameron's treatment first.

 

 

Edit:

 

Cameron wrote his treatment in 1991 and Spider-Man 2099 debuted in 1992.

 

I think what we can surmise from this is that they both somehow stole this idea from a creative 12 year old.

 

Checking out the ever-reliable Wiki, Leslie Stevens wrote about the organic web-shooter back in 1985.

 

This treatment reflected elements in previous scripts: from the Stevens treatment, organic web-shooters

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man_%28film%29

 

Maybe Leslie was 12 years old then.

 

 

Actually, I heard Leslie stole that idea from Jack Kirby

 

Nah, that was some kid called Stanley.

[joe_collector]

The conversation was centering mostly around what Andy Olson may have been influenced by and what his drawing looked like really.

 

Then I think he just got done watching an episode of Six-Million Dollar Man with the Fembots in it, then turned to Marlin Perkin's Wild Kingdom where he learned how 'the wolverine is one of nature's most vicious predators and can take on a grizzly bear if provoked', then took out a pencil and paper to bring his new robot-animal hero to life.

[Logan510]

Where the claws not of metal in 180/181? .

 

I don't think there is any indication in the Hulk issues that Wolverines claw is part of him, or that he can retract it.

 

Len Wein's original intention was that the claws were part of the gloves. Claremont is the one who decided they would be part of the man.

Stan & Steve's original intention was that the webbing would come from a web shooter. Sam Raimi is the one who decided that it should come from the man.

 

 

Peter David can lay claim to this idea via Spider-Man 2099. I don't think he asked for any compensation for this.

 

Can he? I thought that the treatment James Cameron wrote for a Spider-Man movie in the late 80's / early 90's also had organic web shooters

 

I read that in his CBG column. Maybe he meant in printed form. What a pompous ---but he's still one of my favortie writers.

 

 

I honestly don't recall which one came first off the top of my head, though for some reason I remember reading about Cameron's treatment first.

 

 

Edit:

 

Cameron wrote his treatment in 1991 and Spider-Man 2099 debuted in 1992.

 

I think what we can surmise from this is that they both somehow stole this idea from a creative 12 year old.

 

Checking out the ever-reliable Wiki, Leslie Stevens wrote about the organic web-shooter back in 1985.

 

This treatment reflected elements in previous scripts: from the Stevens treatment, organic web-shooters

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man_%28film%29

 

Maybe Leslie was 12 years old then.

 

 

Actually, I heard Leslie stole that idea from Jack Kirby

 

Nah, that was some kid called Stanley.

 

You just blew my mind.

[comicwiz]

The conversation was centering mostly around what Andy Olson may have been influenced by and what his drawing looked like really.

 

Then I think he just got done watching an episode of Six-Million Dollar Man with the Fembots in it, then turned to Marlin Perkin's Wild Kingdom where he learned how 'the wolverine is one of nature's most vicious predators and can take on a grizzly bear if provoked', then took out a pencil and paper to bring his new robot-animal hero to life.

 

This may be true. His letter is well written, and it doesn't surprise me his Uncle who was a commercial artist would have made the remarks he did because spec theft and contests run in this manner are heavily frowned upon in the art community. I can't remember if it was the comic character or the Michigan Wolverines football team that first piqued my curiousity enough to learn about the actual animal.

 

I won't speculate on the coincidence of the timing of this contest and the first appearance of the character, but the contest walks and talks like a spec contest. The fact that The Wolverine became one of the best selling characters of all time for Marvel makes the whole situation reek of opportunism if not outright theft.

[joe_collector]

This has got to be the craziest thread on CGC, and that's saying a lot.

 

Look, it's neat that this guy sent in a fembot character sketch when he was a kid, and happened to put The Wolverine on the picture, but that's all it is. The character looks more like Machine Man than anything else, and it's obviously totally unrelated to the character that became Wolverine. I mean, you do realize that a wolverine is an animal that has been around before the 70's and that animal-themed characters were in vogue back then (just check out issues of Luke Cage), right?

 

Anyone seriously advocating that Len Wein & co. actually stole the idea from this nonsensical and totally unrelated sketch for what was intended to be a throw-away, one-shot character should take a close look at the four padded walls that surround him/her and realize you're totally off your rocker.

 

It's a neat little coincidence, and nothing more.

[slym2none]

It's a neat little coincidence, and nothing more.

 

 

 

 

-slym

[Boboset]

This has got to be the craziest thread on CGC, and that's saying a lot.

 

Look, it's neat that this guy sent in a fembot character sketch when he was a kid, and happened to put The Wolverine on the picture, but that's all it is. The character looks more like Machine Man than anything else, and it's obviously totally unrelated to the character that became Wolverine. I mean, you do realize that a wolverine is an animal that has been around before the 70's and that animal-themed characters were in vogue back then (just check out issues of Luke Cage), right?

 

Anyone seriously advocating that Len Wein & co. actually stole the idea from this nonsensical and totally unrelated sketch for what was intended to be a throw-away, one-shot character should take a close look at the four padded walls that surround him/her and realize you're totally off your rocker.

 

It's a neat little coincidence, and nothing more.

Couldn't have said it better myself. 100% agree.

[AlexanderM]

...

[slym2none]

***EDIT*** I will edit my post too... but leave the important part. Otherwise, I would just delete the whole post instead of editing it.

 

::

 

As Logan suggested, why don't you contact all these creators and get the scoop yourself, then come back and tell us what happened?

 

That way, all opinion will be gone and we'll be left with just the facts, ma'am.

 

 

 

 

 

-slym

[comicwiz]

I don't think the question of the first appearance has anything to do with the underhandedness of the actual contest. I'm going by the sources letter and sentiment, which quite frankly, I haven't seen enough to disagree entirely.

 

As for the aspect of the drawing to support his claims in the letter, there's a lot going on in that image, but it isn't entirely accurate to conclude what he drew is a robot either:

 

[joe_collector]

I just read that letter from Andy and the guy obviously has no clue on how the character evolved over the years. We all need to step back and understand that if Len Wein and co. actually stole his idea for Wolverine, none of it makes sense given the timeline.

 

When Wolverine was first conceived as a throw-away character for Hulk, he was intended to be a genetically-engineered wolverine (animal) wearing gloves with adamantium claws attached, similar to the ninja images posted earlier.

 

At that time, there was no metal skeleton, and all the major facets of the Wolverine character we know and love were added years later, in X-Men, by Claremont and Byrne.

 

So those people advocating that Andy's sketch was the basis for Wolverine are really saying that many years later, Chris Claremont somehow dredged out an issue of FOOM 2, found the Wolverine sketch and then decided to steal the "metal skeleton/cyborg" (I'm being generous to the obvious robot look) idea for his re-imagining of Wolverine.

 

Yeah... okay.

[spidrvacc]

Yeah seems like a silly attempt to make foom 2 worth something. I don't see the connection other then the name. But people are allowed to think what they want and if there opinion is that its a prototype so be it. I don't think most collectors will care .I don't.

[comicwiz]

Like I've stated, to me the question of a "first appearance" is a non-starter, because there are dozens upon dozens of "prototype" characters which would need to be considered in the same fashion.

 

No matter whether you think this is a mere coincidence or not, from the angle I'm coming at it from, Marvel could have avoided the perception issues to the matter by NOT launching a character with the same name from an entry in it's FOOM contest.

 

It chose to use the same name, and the rest is history.

 

The resulting perception issue with the "spec contest" aspect remains. The source and his Uncle knew when it was originally brought to his attention then, and it's no different reading about this some 40 years later.

[Logan510]

Yeah seems like a silly attempt to make foom 2 worth something. I don't see the connection other then the name. But people are allowed to think what they want and if there opinion is that its a prototype so be it. I don't think most collectors will care .I don't.

 

Not all opinions are correct, especially uneducated ones

[AlexanderM]

***EDIT*** I will edit my post too... but leave the important part. Otherwise, I would just delete the whole post instead of editing it.

 

::

 

As Logan suggested, why don't you contact all these creators and get the scoop yourself, then come back and tell us what happened?

 

That way, all opinion will be gone and we'll be left with just the facts, ma'am.

 

 

 

 

 

-slym

 

If you give that a little thought it should be obvious that this is unlikely to solve anything. Do you know that Ditko feels he did not get the credit from Stan that he should have had for other Marvel characters? Do you think 'the creators' will freely say "yes, we had no idea what to do so when we saw Olson's idea we just went with it"? Don't you think they, their sons, Marvel etc. would be strongly opposed to relinquishing the honor for coming up with Wolverine? Of course. Many people have a strong interest in calling the Wolverine's completely unrelated.. that is probably why one side of the discussion calls the people with the other viewpoint off the rails and loony and what not.

 

Should I call you Ma'am too?

 

Nah, I really don't want to discuss at that level.

[slym2none]

I didn't call you "Ma'am." "Just the facts, ma'am" is a line from Dragnet, used frequently by Detective Joe Friday.

 

I also didn't ever personally call you "off the rails" nor "looney."

 

 

 

 

-slym

[slym2none]

***EDIT*** I will edit my post too... but leave the important part. Otherwise, I would just delete the whole post instead of editing it.

 

::

 

As Logan suggested, why don't you contact all these creators and get the scoop yourself, then come back and tell us what happened?

 

That way, all opinion will be gone and we'll be left with just the facts, ma'am.

 

 

If you give that a little thought it should be obvious that this is unlikely to solve anything.

 

Well, I will take the words over all the people involved over some internet speculation of something so trivial any day.

 

 

 

 

-slym