|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 14:13:14 GMT -5
We briefly discussed the two Supes/Spidey crossovers recently. Does anyone have a favourite? There's this:  And then there's this:  I don't think the 1976 crossover, great though it is, is anything special story-wise (Confessor made that point elsewhere). It's a novelty. It's great to see Supes battling Ock and Spidey battling Luthor. It's fantastic seeing Supes taking on Spidey. And the art is to my liking, but I found the story to be solid rather than spectacular. The 1981 crossover, however, ticked all the boxes for me. And I have read it countless times. It has a really good story. There's the novelty of seeing DC and Marvel characters battling each other. They fit Wonder Woman and the Hulk in without it ever seeming crowded (they find time for a Spidey/Wonder Woman scrap and a Superman/Hulk one). And, in my humble opinion, no panel seems wasted. If the action wasn't exciting enough, we've got so much occurring at the Daily Planet and Daily Bugle. It's all very wordy, but I mean that in a good way! If the first crossover was a "warm up", the second one was the "main event" for yours truly. That I have owned it in many forms, and read it several times, is about the highest compliment I can pay it. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 14:17:48 GMT -5
I liked them both, but the 1981 ... had the Incredible Hulk and Wonder Woman guest starring and that's gave that book an edge. The 1st one is an classic and no doubt about it. But, the 81 Version is gritter and more suspense and drama.
|
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Jan 23, 2019 15:00:49 GMT -5
Have to go with their 1st meeting. So much more build up and anticipation that almost any story would be a bit of a letdown to anything we might imagine for ourselves. Remember really getting anxious in hopes of finding this one. Plus it had Ross Andru on art and for me at the time he was THE Spider-Man artist and he had done plenty of Superman art as well, so he was more than capable of showing the best aspects of both heroes and their cast of characters. In addition I think there was more thought given to utilizing the larger tabloid format which really helped to show off the artwork.
The 2nd meet up was a better story and while I love John Buscema art, at this point for Marvel he wasn't doing full pencils and I don't think his Spider-Man is one of the best. It was great seeing his take on DC's folks though. And the selection for villains should have gone for broke and use some better villains or have a slug fest with a slew of Supe's/Spidey's in the crossover creating a truly Sinister Six made with Luthor, Brainiac, Bizarro, Doctor Octopus, Sandman and Rhino.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 15:21:04 GMT -5
I agree with brutalis .
The first meeting. I agree the story wasn't spectacular but the art was amazing. It really did take advantage of the tabloid size more than the second story.
The second story was better script wise but I didn't enjoy the art as much.
And I liked the Batman/Hulk one also because of Jose Luis Garcia Lopez' beautiful art. It also took advantage of the larger sized format. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2019 11:48:37 GMT -5
The art on the Batman/Hulk crossover was beautiful. Was disappointed Robin wasn't in it, though. And the Shaper of Worlds seemed a random choice, too.
What I like about the second Supes/Spidey crossover is the choice of villains. They could have been predictable and gone with Luthor (again) and Green Goblin. Doctor Doom, who is a Spidey villain but more of an FF one, and Parasite, who may not be on the same scale as Luthor and Brainiac, was an intriguing choice which made the story different.
|
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on Jan 25, 2019 20:31:42 GMT -5
The first felt like a DC-Marvel crossover. The second felt--to me, anyway--like a Marvel comic that had licensed Superman and Wonder Woman. Probably because John Buscema had come to exemplify the Marvel house style in that era, while Andru had had a significant presence at both companies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2019 7:44:57 GMT -5
The second felt--to me, anyway--like a Marvel comic that had licensed Superman and Wonder Woman. Good point! |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 26, 2019 19:41:25 GMT -5
I held my tongue for a few days but I must say, anyone that finds Ross Andru art superior to J Buscema art needs to have an eye exam.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2019 9:13:01 GMT -5
I held my tongue for a few days but I must say, anyone that finds Ross Andru art superior to J Buscema art needs to have an eye exam. If anyone does, it's called having an opinion. ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on Jan 27, 2019 10:39:11 GMT -5
I held my tongue for a few days but I must say, anyone that finds Ross Andru art superior to J Buscema art needs to have an eye exam. I haven't looked at either in a while, but I remember the Buscema volume filled with pages like this one:  and the first volume having stuff like this:  Yeah, maybe Neal Adams and Terry Austin were providing some uncredited assistance, but Andru's page layouts played to the Treasury format, with lots of huge, interestingly-staged compositions, while Buscema and Sinnott delivered the stuff you'd see in a typical issue of Marvel Team-Up. The first was historical and spectacular, and Andru gave it his all, seeming to understand that this was a blockbuster publication. Buscema gave it his usual: perfectly adequate superhero work, but he didn't appear to relish the assignment any more than he did She-Hulk or the Golem. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 27, 2019 12:25:18 GMT -5
That’s a lot of mind reading going on there. Buscema pages were beautiful. I’m not taking anything away from Andru , who I happen to like. You say Marvel style like it’s a bad thing, the layouts were dramatic and riveting, like the duel between the Hulk and Superman.
|
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on Jan 27, 2019 15:51:05 GMT -5
I plead guilty to the mind-reading accusation, Icctrombone. I stand by my perception of the level of enthusiasm for the job on display. On reflection, my ho-hum reaction to Buscema's work here (he was only doing layouts for Sinnott's finishes, I believe) may be largely attributable to writer Jim Shooter, who as an editor pushed artistic approaches that ensured clarity and readability via what I always found to be an overabundance of medium-range, straightforward panel compositions. I tire of that style quickly; it doesn't provide the kind of spectacle that I expect in a marquee event like this one. Buscema could deliver excellent work while adhering to the kind of story-telling that Shooter liked, no argument there. But I didn't find his work memorable, whereas I can still conjure up memories of Andru's work on the first crossover. The memorability is what I find superior, not necessarily the craftsmanship of individual panels. There are definitely lots of Andru's artistic characteristics that I find unappealing, and I wouldn't rate him as a superior artist, over all, to Buscema.
|
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Jan 27, 2019 18:41:37 GMT -5
I don't think I realized that those were two different team-ups.
My favorites are Batman/Hulk and X-Men/Teen Titans.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2019 18:43:55 GMT -5
Batman/Hulk is cool, although I'd have liked to have seen Robin included. And the Shaper of Worlds seemed an odd villain to include. I like the X-Men/Teen Titans crossover, particularly for the Colossus/Deathstroke 'fight'.  |
|
|
|
Post by dbutler69 on Jan 28, 2019 13:34:38 GMT -5
Both are good, but I have to vote for Superman & Spider-Man (1981). The bottom line is, the writing is just better. Better characterization, better dialogue. Plus, we get the bonus of Superman vs. the Hulk and Spider-Man vs. Wonder Woman.
If we’re talking about all Bronze Age Marvel-DC crossovers, then I’d vote for X-Men/Teen Titans.
|
|
