• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Steve Ditko actually wrote about Spider-man... A LOT
5 5

583 posts in this topic

6 minutes ago, Chuck Gower said:

I've long thought it strange how much Kane is vilified (and maybe deservedly so, I haven't really researched it), while Stan gets a pass.

Saw a post about Steranko defending Stan Lee from Twitter while doing this and... that was a response to ME! (Below) LOL. We got into it one night on Twitter and he didn't like the questions I was asking, so that was how he responded: "You guys may know a lot more than I do about Stan swindling Jack --- I was only there at the time!"

To which I replied, "Not in 1961 you weren't."

He didn't care for that.

Steranko is a big phony. He's milked more out of 29 comics worth of work than any creator in history. As big of a huckster as Stanley is.

image.png

@Chuck Gower ha, I didn't know that was you. That is the exact tweet I was referring to when I mentioned he defended Stan Lee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, kav said:

I can draw!  Look here's proof!!! :roflmao:

seriously anyone who has worked for Disney drawing mickey mouse you draw a circle, then 2 smaller circles.  The entire approach is 100% wrong.

Screenshot 2020-02-16 at 1.15.59 PM.png

He never worked for Disney or Fleischer. Kane was a true con artist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Larryw7 said:

He never worked for Disney or Fleischer. Kane was a true con artist.

"I was creative consultant which means I didnt do anything but fly on a plane"
"So I worked on the Batman movie-"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steranko also confirms that the artists even supplied some of the dialogue - something I'd heard before - and that they weren't just artists.

 

Edited by VintageComics
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Bronty said:

I only need to read so much ranting before I get the gist Chuck.

As for your narrative around why few gave credit before that, I don't believe that for a second.   My experience in collecting illustration has generally taught me that the reason illustrators were uncredited is because if the names were out there, there was a risk the competition would poach.    I wasn't there, but to me that is the most logical reason as to why credits weren't given.    That, and they were effing kids books.   Who cared.

That, and many artist worked for  multiple publishers and didn't want that known. Jack and Joe Simon once had a second studio set up so they could get work done besides their main jobs.

The way I see it nothing Jack, Stan or Steve did, before or after , comes close to what they achieved when working together. They were all  journeymen in the unforgiving environment  of the late 1950s  comic industry who  got a second shot at it. If Jack was worried about his family finances, imagine how a fortysomething man who had only one job his whole civilian life felt about it. Anyone in that situation would engage in as much puffery as needed to keep his job.

 Whatever the settlement with Disney was, it was his work with Stan that got it for him.  

I once tried to read the Hunger Dogs   imagining how it would  read if Stan had a hand in it.I also tried to do the reverse with the Galactus trilogy. It got ugly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"We had worked together for years, on all types of strips and stories.  Most importantly, we had a unique successful method of working.  I had only to give Jack an outline of a story and he would draw the entire strip, breaking down the outline into exactly the right number of panels replete with action and drama.  Then it remained for me to take Jack's artwork and add captions and dialogue, which would, hopefully, add the dimension of reality through sharply delineated characterization." 

Stan Lee - Origins of Marvel Comics 1974 (introducing the FF chapter)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Chuck Gower said:

Based upon what criteria?

Let their body of work stand on its own.  What did Kirby  after Joe Simon left comics? What did he do after 1969 ? For whatever reasons, he couldn't last three years at DC. His 4th World storyline was rambling, at best. His great Darkseid was reduced to starring in a kids cartoon for years. Atlas the Great? Dingbats of Danger Street? Kobra? Devil Dinosaur? Battle of the Planets?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, shadroch said:

Let their body of work stand on its own.  What did Kirby  after Joe Simon left comics? What did he do after 1969 ? For whatever reasons, he couldn't last three years at DC. His 4th World storyline was rambling, at best. His great Darkseid was reduced to starring in a kids cartoon for years. Atlas the Great? Dingbats of Danger Street? Kobra? Devil Dinosaur? Battle of the Planets?

 

That's your interpretation of it and you're entitled to it.

But I'm not sure which it is... are you saying a comic has to run for a certain period of time to be considered successful? If so, what is that? Number of years? Issues?

Or are you saying based upon your OWN valuation you don't think the material is good?

And why is Jack's work with Joe Simon not included in this? Because he was working with someone else? If that's the case then Stan's entire career has to be considered moot, because as a non-artist he ALWAYS had to have someone to work with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comics that ran for a shorter period of time than the 4th World saga, but are still considered worthy:

O'Neil/Adams Green Lantern/Green Arrow

Bernie Wrightson's Swamp Thing

Pretty much Steranko's whole comic book output

Neal Adams X-Men

Barry Windsor-Smith's Conan the Barbarian

Stan Lee's Silver Surfer B|

Thomas/Kane's Warlock

Starlin's Warlock

Starlin's Captain Marvel

 

Not sure how long a series lasts has anything to do with how good it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I'm getting is ignore functions. That's ok, I'll continue. 

I believe the 4th World work is on par with anything Jack ever did.

I know there are people here who'll contest that and anything else they think might hurt their little childhood memories of stanley - it's like their brainwashed.

I mean can you really argue that Spidey and the FF is as good as Iron Man or DD? Of course not. Because Ditko and Kirby didn't really work on those characters. 

Meanwhile the 4th World is still amazing.

Did Stan ever have a million copy selling comic with anyone he worked with?

Nope. Jack had two - Captain America and Young Romance. :banana:

And they ran for 13 years and 16 years, so they meet the criteria according to Shadrock.

Edited by Chuck Gower
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To paraphrase Ramses from the Ten Commandments  
 

“Let the name of Stan Lee be stricken from every book and tablet.. stricken from all pylons and obelisks, stricken from every monument of Comicdon. Let the name of... Stan Lee be unheard and unspoken erased from the memory of men.. for all time”

 

96FFDA60-51E0-49DC-A3E0-AF8E9EAE46DE.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
5 5