|
Post by beccabear67 on Jan 21, 2019 23:55:35 GMT -5
One thing about the Wonder Woman Spectacular circa 1978 (DC Special Series #9) I did like was how they had Steve Ditko draw the scenes in the abode of 'the Gods'. I really liked those parts and I thought it worked really well that this other reality looked different (and sort of reminded me of some dimensions Doctor Strange visited when Ditko drew and co-created it).
Didn't the very first crossover have Marvel people making sure Spider-Man looked 'correct', and DC people making sure Superman did also?
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Jan 22, 2019 0:04:39 GMT -5
What happened with the pre-COIE potential, Hondo? Shooter saw the potential : great characters with editors stuck in the past.
He ran it up the flag pole to the powers that be and it came back they didn't want them, but Shooter saw the potential.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jan 22, 2019 0:05:31 GMT -5
Ross Andru did the pencils and I believe he was working on or had recently done Spider-Man work and Dick Giordano inked. Gerry Conway was writing and had handled both characters, by that point. The editors of both company had to sign off on things, on all of the crossovers. I believe this one and the Oz books were more of a mix of talent, while the second wave rotated between teams at each company (Marvel did Supes/Spidey 2 and Teen Titans/X-Men and DC did Batman/Hulk and was supposed to do JLA/Avengers). The third wave had a book from each company or mixed talent.
On average, I found the crossovers with independent companies more satisfying. There were fewer politics involved and there were usually much better story ideas. Batman/Grendel was so much better than Batman had been, in a long time, in his solo work.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 22, 2019 1:42:36 GMT -5
Didn't the very first crossover have Marvel people making sure Spider-Man looked 'correct', and DC people making sure Superman did also? Yes... ...and no.
Full story here.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2019 5:16:29 GMT -5
I enjoyed DC VS Marvel to a certain extent. I mean, there were some cool match-ups (and what about Batman VS Bullseye?!). But I didn't necessarily like the separate universes policy. There's a scene in one issue where Clark Kent is looking at a photo of Spidey battling Man-Bat. He recognises Man-Bat, but not Spidey. I'm thinking, 'But you teamed up with him twice!'
I do think the JLA/Avengers crossover was cool. And Busiek did make good use of the separate universe policy. Unless I am misremembering, wasn't there something about how the JLA couldn't believe how hostile Marvel Earth's inhabitants were towards superheroes?
But I think shared earth is a much better policy. The big, cosmic explanations can get boring after a while. I prefer the simplicity of a wandering Bruce Banner getting a job with S.T.A.R. Labs or Jimmy Olsen trying to persuade Peter Parker to transfer to Metropolis.
Simple but effective moments like that work for me far more than "Let's figure out a way for Marvel Earth and DC Earth to interact again".
I do recall reading how those early DC/Marvel crossovers had their own Earth. Seems pointless. Why not just have them taking place on the regular Earth?
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jan 22, 2019 7:58:18 GMT -5
I do recall reading how those early DC/Marvel crossovers had their own Earth. Seems pointless. Why not just have them taking place on the regular Earth? Because then the continuity hounds will start baying about where the JLA was when Galactus came, or where the Avengers and FF were during Final Crisis, etc.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,625
|
Post by Confessor on Jan 22, 2019 8:19:08 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I didn't like any of the DC/Marvel crossovers very much. I'm a big fan of early-to-mid '70s Amazing Spider-Man and Ross Andru's art, but the Spider-Man vs Superman crossover was really boring and nothing to write home about story-wise either.
Kurt Busiek's JKA/Avengers was also really unmemorable. Worse, Busiek seemed to be so terrified of offending either Marvel zombies or DC fanboys, that his script mostly read like an insincere, back slapping exchange from an awkward dinner party: "But seriously, you're great" -- "No, no...you're the greatest" -- "Oh no, you're the absolute best" -- "Ah, thank you, but I really must insist that you are, in fact, the best", and so on and so forth.
I dunno, I know a lot of comic fans love these inter-company crossovers, but who is the strongest hero or who can beat up who has never been a reason why I read superhero comics.
I like DC's characters fine, and am a big fan of Marvel, but as far as I'm concerned, never the twain shall meet.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2019 8:34:05 GMT -5
...but the Spider-Man vs Superman crossover was really boring and nothing to write home about story-wise either. I'd probably agree with that. For me, the second Superman/Spider-Man team-up is the strongest, story-wise. It's dense, in a good way, and there is a lot going on, but it all feels relevant. I like how they included Hulk and Wonder Woman in it whilst still making it a Supes/Spidey team-up. Doctor Doom and Parasite are an odd pairing, but it works. I prefer it to the 1976 one. Oh, and it's frustrating for me that the Wizard of Oz publication by DC/Marvel prevents Superman VS The Amazing Spider-Man from being the first DC/Marvel collaboration. Grrrr!
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Jan 22, 2019 8:55:02 GMT -5
Didn't the very first crossover have Marvel people making sure Spider-Man looked 'correct', and DC people making sure Superman did also? Yes... ...and no.
Full story here. I remember the crossover tabloid when it was released, and I never had an issue with the Romita and Adams touch-ups; for such a major project, why wouldn't companies want to make sure their characters (and big licensed characters in that decade) put their best face forward, so to speak? At the time, Superman and Spider-Man's image--particularly on covers and licensed products--were most associated with the work of Adams & Romita, respectively, so short of having the artists illustrate the entire project, its understandable that facial (and some body) touch-ups represented those popular appearances.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Jan 22, 2019 9:15:37 GMT -5
I do recall reading how those early DC/Marvel crossovers had their own Earth. Seems pointless. Why not just have them taking place on the regular Earth? Because then the continuity hounds will start baying about where the JLA was when Galactus came, or where the Avengers and FF were during Final Crisis, etc. It's not about that at all (I mean, c'mon, where were the Avengers when Galactus came?). It's the fact that the histories of the two realities* don't jibe. There are irreconcilable differences: Atlantis sank for one reason at Marvel, for another at DC; Mars was populated by J'onn Jonzz's people in one universe, by H. G. Wells' tentacled globs in the other; there are different versions of the Olympian Gods, of Frankenstein's Monster, of King Arthur, etc, etc. For DC and Marvel's heroes to co-exist in the same reality, you have to throw out huge chunks of the histories of one, the other, or both. Personally, I don't want them living side-by-side, no more than I wanted the DC and Fawcett characters doing so. Let each company have its own identity and if you must have crossovers, use either interdimensional travel like the old school JLA/JSA team-ups or postulate a third reality where they do co-exist like Superman/Spidey, Batman/Hulk, et al.
Cei-U! I summon the fine print!
* Speaking here specifically of pre-COIE DC and Shooter-era Marvel, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2019 9:26:17 GMT -5
Can't argue with that logic, you know. It's why the Star Trek/Planet of the Apes crossover had to feature interdimensional travel as the histories of Earth presented in those two franchises were vastly different. So interdimensional travel was the way to go. But I could have ignored that for DC/Marvel. After all, Hercules appeared in an early Avengers tale (the one where Immortus brought figures from the past to battle the Avengers). The Hercules in that certainly wasn't the Hercules that came later. I can live with ignoring *some* continuity, especially if the price to pay was having DC/Marvel on the same Earth. That said, you made a very compelling case, Cei-U. If this were a courtroom, I'd be conceding...
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 22, 2019 9:32:41 GMT -5
What Kurt said, and also...
It always bothered me when DC writers began to include New York City and later Chicago, San Francisco, etc. into the mix of cities where their heroes lived. It screwed things up unnecessarily, especially since part of the fun of the imaginary cities was figuring out their real-world analogues. Always felt as if it were a bit of Marvel-envy on their parts, as if the DC Universe were that much less sophisticated because there was no New York.
For me, Midway City corresponded to Chicago (Midway Airport was the clue), Coast City was LA ("flying to 'the Coast' tomorrow"), Central City was Kansas City, and Ivy Town was probably New Haven, but certainly somewhere in New England. Appropriate that, as a smaller city was the bailiwick of a small superhero.
Middletown (J'onn J'onzz) and Star City were indeterminate.
Gotham and Metropolis were a conundrum, though, weren't they? It was as if each represented an aspect of New York, with Metropolis the face the city shows to the world and Gotham its fish-belly white underside, to borrow from Mark Twain's horrific description of Pap Finn's appearance.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2019 9:39:14 GMT -5
It always bothered me when DC writers began to include New York City and later Chicago, San Francisco, etc. into the mix of cities where their heroes lived. Me too, Prince Hal.
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Jan 22, 2019 11:44:12 GMT -5
Gotham and Metropolis were a conundrum, though, weren't they? It was as if each represented an aspect of New York (...) Yeah, so in my view it's not even a conundrum. Metropolis and Gotham were supposed to be divided by a river, so you can just see the former as, say, Manhattan (with Suicide Slum as the analog for Harlem), and the latter as Brooklyn/Queens, or maybe even the Bronx.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 22, 2019 12:07:52 GMT -5
Gotham and Metropolis were a conundrum, though, weren't they? It was as if each represented an aspect of New York (...) Yeah, so in my view it's not even a conundrum. Metropolis and Gotham were supposed to be divided by a river, so you can just see the former as, say, Manhattan (with Suicide Slum as the analog for Harlem), and the latter as Brooklyn/Queens, or maybe even the Bronx. Nice. In a role-playing game circa 1990 there was a map showing the locations of Metropolis and Gotham, with the former in Delaware and the latter on the Jersey shore, probably meant to be Atlantic City. Your idea is much better, especially if they are where NYC is.
|
|