|
Post by chaykinstevens on Apr 20, 2021 13:33:03 GMT -5
Gil Kane returns to pencil the last two issues. I think Mark Farmer said Kane only provided thumbnail breakdowns for the last issue, which he fleshed out by referencing a lot of old comics by Kane.
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Apr 20, 2021 14:16:49 GMT -5
Gil Kane returns to pencil the last two issues. I think Mark Farmer said Kane only provided thumbnail breakdowns for the last issue, which he fleshed out by referencing a lot of old comics by Kane. Interesting. Kane is credited as artist in #223, while #224 credits Kane for pencils and Farmer for inks. The art in the latter issue definitely doesn't look as tight as one would expect from Kane and sometime not so distinctively Kane-y, but I didn't imagine his contribution was that little. It's also an giant-size issue.
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Apr 20, 2021 15:07:52 GMT -5
Those later GLC issues were such a total disaster on every possible level. First, you had MILLENNIUM-- arguably the single worst, most misbegotten and badly-done company wide crossover DC ever did. On top of how bad that was conceptually, it pulled the successful team of Englehart & Staton off of GLC, and the guy who drew GLC in the meantime JUST WASN'T cutting it. Then, you had the editorial decision to do ACTION COMICS WEEKLY as an experiment, and when several other options fell thru, they decided that GREEN LANTERN would be the "anchor" for it, meaning, they'd cancel GLC to do this. Englehart, who had made GLC more successful than GL had been in decades, didn't wanna do 8 pages a week, so, HE WALKED. And then came the decision (perhaps from character-destructive Denny O'Neil?) to DESTROY the GLC before starting the GL run in ACW. You know, it's a toss-up which series has had more uncalled-for ups and DOWN DOWN DOWNS at DC-- GL, Aquaman or Hawkman. Everytime someone "fixes" one of them, the next guy decides to do total demolition, forcing whoever comes after them to "fix" things all over again. I might hold editor O'Neil in contempt for what he did on ACW... except, what he did on IRON MAN, DAREDEVIL and BATMAN was far, far worse. By the time he was done, Andy Helfer, who "fixed" GL with Steve Englehart, wound up coming back to spend several YEARS salvaging GL all over again with Gerard Jones... until he left, and his replacement, Kevin Dooley, decided to GO POSTAL even worse than O'Neil did. OY.
Anyone besides me REALLY GLAD Dooley left the comic biz A LONG TIME ago now?
I don't think writers would do this if they OWNED the characters they worked on.
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Apr 20, 2021 15:51:17 GMT -5
Those later GLC issues were such a total disaster on every possible level. First, you had MILLENNIUM-- arguably the single worst, most misbegotten and badly-done company wide crossover DC ever did. On top of how bad that was conceptually, it pulled the successful team of Englehart & Staton off of GLC, and the guy who drew GLC in the meantime JUST WASN'T cutting it. Then, you had the editorial decision to do ACTION COMICS WEEKLY as an experiment, and when several other options fell thru, they decided that GREEN LANTERN would be the "anchor" for it, meaning, they'd cancel GLC to do this. Englehart, who had made GLC more successful than GL had been in decades, didn't wanna do 8 pages a week, so, HE WALKED. And then came the decision (perhaps from character-destructive Denny O'Neil?) to DESTROY the GLC before starting the GL run in ACW. You know, it's a toss-up which series has had more uncalled-for ups and DOWN DOWN DOWNS at DC-- GL, Aquaman or Hawkman. Everytime someone "fixes" one of them, the next guy decides to do total demolition, forcing whoever comes after them to "fix" things all over again. I might hold editor O'Neil in contempt for what he did on ACW... except, what he did on IRON MAN, DAREDEVIL and BATMAN was far, far worse. By the time he was done, Andy Helfer, who "fixed" GL with Steve Englehart, wound up coming back to spend several YEARS salvaging GL all over again with Gerard Jones... until he left, and his replacement, Kevin Dooley, decided to GO POSTAL even worse than O'Neil did. OY.
Anyone besides me REALLY GLAD Dooley left the comic biz A LONG TIME ago now?
I don't think writers would do this if they OWNED the characters they worked on. I definitely agree that the set-up for ACW was really harmful for GLC. Steve Englehart confirms on his website that he and Staton didn't think the page count for the ACW feature wasn't sufficient for what he wanted to do. He doesn't describe the destruction of the Corps as something imposed on him from outside, but that makes sense. When the Green Lantern comic became Green Lantern Corps, the letter pages mentioned that this was the secret plan that Englehart and Andy Helfer had been working toward since Englehart first became writer. Given that, it doesn't make sense that Englehart would blow up something he was proud of after just 2 years. I believe I read somewhere that Englehart had intended the cast members would change over time, with some GLs leaving the Earth-based Corps and other joining. So Ch'p and Salaak getting written out, while Olapet, Flodo Span, and Driq debuting may have been part of a long-term plan. In fact, I think there may have been a comment in a letter column that implied the three new GLs would be in the series for a while. If indeed the destruction of the Corps in the transition from GLC to ACW wasn't part of Englehart's plans, I wonder when the decision came down. I would suspect it was in the midst of that space story, because the three Klyminade GLs decided not to join the Earth GLC. I wish there Staton was able to do more issues of GLC. Gibson was not as good, but I do think Willingham did a solid job. One irony of Millennium is that while it seemed to be Englehart's idea, apparently he only stuck around for one issue of New Guardians before Cary Bates took over. I wonder what happened.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Apr 20, 2021 16:06:03 GMT -5
The very 1st DAREDEVIL issue I bought new at the drug store was #108-- in which Steve Gerber pulled a "back to basics" move, years before most others. He had Matt move back to NYC, have a reunion with Foggy, and this eventually led to them setting up a new law firm together. Along the way, he began the slow, protracted break-up with the Black Widow... and along the way, was the ONLY writer outside of Jim Starlin who I feel EVER wrote Moondragon sympathetically. Having PAUL GULACY ink Bob Brown that one-and-only time didn't hurt, either. The only time I saw Brown get better inks than this while at Marvel was the AVENGERS issue he did inked by Dave Cockrum. I couldn't get over that Gerber & Englehart BOTH had villains invade The White House trying to stage an insurrection less than a month apart from each other (the other being in CAPTAIN AMERICA). I'm a huge Gerber fan but have read only a few issues here and there of his Daredevil, some back in the day and some as back-issues. As in a lot of Marvel comics in the early 70s, I think the artwork, though usually at least competent and acceptable, was less than exceptional - and for me Daredevil was a character that up to then had been notable for great artwork, first with Wally Wood, then the long Gene Colan run. So that was a disappointment, one that continued until the Frank Miller era.
Moondragon is a funny character: started as a villain, then used by Starlin in his Captain Marvel run as an ally in the struggle against Thanos, then made an Avenger by Englehart. Looking at Mike's Newsstand, it looks like Gerber's Moondragon story in his DD run came in the middle of Starlin's Captain Marvel epic, so I imagiine Gerber was still writing from that original appearance - I suppose possibly with some influence from Starlin, depending on how much if any of it he had seen. Regardless, yes, he made her interesting.
But for me, the most interesting version of the character was written in Englehart's Avengers - and the best visual rendition was by George Perez in the same run. It's too bad later writers haven't been up to snuff with this character, from what I've seen, Jim Shooter probably being mostly responsible with his Avengersstory in which he had her revert to villainy.
Englehart's version readsd even better now than it did at the time, nsome ways: for example, the scene in which Moondragon repulses Tony Stark's advances with a memorable put-down of his attitude towards women in general: some readers back then - perhaps even the majority - saw that as evidence of arrogance and coldness on Moondragon's part, never dreaming that the arrogance was all on Stark's side, which I think would be more apparent today.
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Apr 20, 2021 16:06:38 GMT -5
spoon, you mean Englehart in that last paragraph, right? I really liked Englehart and Staton on GL/GLC, but I thought Millennium was a mis-step from the get-go.
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on Apr 20, 2021 16:32:24 GMT -5
One irony of Millennium is that while it seemed to be Staton's idea, apparently he only stuck around for one issue of New Guardians before Cary Bates took over. I wonder what happened. Englehart said Dick Giordano had promised him he could write about sex, drugs and politics. When Andy Helfer objected to Englehart's script, Giordano sided with Helfer, causing Englehart to walk away.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 20, 2021 16:56:17 GMT -5
but they're high art compared to O'Neil's dismal tenure which finally drove me off the book.
Denny was like, "Oh you want a drunk Iron Man? I'm gonna give you a DRUNK Iron Man!"
He really put Tony through the ringer...
Sorry Kurt, I really enjoyed the O'neil Iron Man run. I've re-read that run more than any other Iron man series , even the Michelinie/Romita Jr/ Layton run.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 20, 2021 17:08:13 GMT -5
Some of my favorite unpopular runs:
1. The second alcohol Iron man story by Denny Oneil
2. The fall of Hank Pym in Avengers 211-230
3. Captain America Fighting Chance from 425-443 ( the infamous Cap Armor)
4. The Death Of Superman
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Apr 20, 2021 17:19:22 GMT -5
spoon , you mean Englehart in that last paragraph, right? I really liked Englehart and Staton on GL/GLC, but I thought Millennium was a mis-step from the get-go. Yes, I meant Englehart, not Staton. I'm gonna go back and edit that to correct it.
|
|
|
Post by earl on Apr 20, 2021 20:35:03 GMT -5
I liked Angar the Screamer's later bands like Monster Magnet. I love that he looks like he should have been a member of Grand Funk Railroad.
You know if Grant Morrison ever did a Daredevil run, he would use those psychedelic villains like Angar and the Dark Messiah. That said, Angar isn't really bad as much as played as a confused anti-hero though.
|
|
|
Post by earl on Apr 20, 2021 20:37:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by commond on Apr 22, 2021 8:53:50 GMT -5
I finished James Robinson's Starman today. I started off unsure whether I liked the main character and Robinson's dialogue and wound up heavily invested in the relationships between Jack, his father and brother, and the rest of the supporting cast. It was definitely a comic book for folks who grew up reading comic books, but it had plenty of heart. I was really impressed by the overall structure of the series and how all of the pieces fit. Robinson wasn't the first British writer to take DC property and reinvent it, but the way he built a mythos behind Starman was impressive. I'd definitely rank the series alongside any other series of its ilk, and I'll probably check out the spinoff titles at some point, but for now, I want to reflect on the journey. Starman is one of those books where there's a lot of foreshadowing and it's clear that things have been carefully planned in advance, but it's the emotional core of the book that truly matters. I feel like that was something that grew as the series developed. It went from being a book about collectibles, pop culture references, and comic book history callbacks, to a series about friendship, and family, and relationships, and children, and the sacrifices that heroes and their loved ones make, and mortality and death, and legacies and memories, and so many grand concepts. It was a heck of a book and a testament to Robinson's imagination.
|
|
|
Post by tartanphantom on Apr 22, 2021 8:58:58 GMT -5
I finished James Robinson's Starman today. I started off unsure whether I liked the main character and Robinson's dialogue and wound up heavily invested in the relationship between Jack, his father and brother, and the rest of the supporting cast. It was definitely a comic book for folks who grew up reading comic books, but it had plenty of heart. I was really impressed by the overall structure of the series and how all of the pieces fit. Robinson wasn't the first British writer to take DC property and reinvent it, but the way he built a mythos behind Starman was impressive. I'd definitely rank the series alongside any other series of its ilk, and I'll probably check out the spinoff titles at some point, but for now, I want to reflect on the journey. Starman is one of those books where there's a lot of foreshadowing and it's clear that things have been carefully planned in advance, but it's the emotional core of the book that truly matters. I feel like that was something that grew as the series developed. It went from being a book about collectibles, pop culture references, and comic book history callbacks, to a series about friendship, and family, and relationships, and children, and the sacrifices that heroes and their loved ones make, and mortality and death, and legacies and memories, and so many grand concepts. It was a heck of a book and a testament to Robinson's imagination.
I keep telling people that this series was one of the finest to ever come out of the '90's era. Glad you enjoyed it, and I'm glad you saw how the book transitioned. The fact that Robninson birthed it, reared it, and put it to rest from beginning to end shows how much he was invested in the storyline. As you say, there is plenty of foreshadowing throughout, but there are also some very unexpected plot twists as well.
Also, it's a good example of how collectors and speculators don't put value on the quality of the story, but instead place higher value on more superficial things like "first appearances", "cover art" and "media appearances". From a storytelling aspect, Starman is worth its weight in gold, yet the entire run (83 issues + 2 annuals) can be purchased for less than $100.
While not everyone here agrees on everything, I think you'll find several members who share your sentiment. I know that Crimebuster does, as well as myself and a few others.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Apr 23, 2021 23:48:29 GMT -5
|
|