Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on May 17, 2018 16:36:09 GMT -5
Most likely because it has all of the major characters in one cover (which none of the covers during these issues had) and it is some gorgeous Tom Palmer work! ^^ This would absolutely be my guess too.
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on May 17, 2018 19:22:43 GMT -5
Most likely because it has all of the major characters in one cover (which none of the covers during these issues had) and it is some gorgeous Tom Palmer work! ...and aside from the cover of Star Wars #1 (which Chaykin based on his own 1976 promotional poster), it comes as close to the design tendencies of some of the Star Wars movie posters, which--more often than not--feature all of the main players.
|
|
|
Post by chaykinstevens on May 21, 2018 12:18:54 GMT -5
Star Wars #82 Cover dated: April 1984 Issue title: DiplomacyScript: Mary Jo Duffy Artwork: Ronald Frenz (breakdowns)/M. Hands (inks) – ["many hands"/uncredited inkers] Colours: Ken Feduniewicz (uncredited) Letters: Joe Rosen Cover art: Ronald Frenz (pencils)/Tom Palmer (inks) Overall rating: 5 out of 10 I finally got around to looking at Star Wars #82's many hands inking job. I think Tom Palmer may have had a hand in some or all of the first four pages, either in a rush or with input from assistants. I'm pretty sure the splash page is all Palmer. Pages 5 to 8 look like Bob McLeod to me. Pages 9 to 11 could be Tom Mandrake. The shading on pages 18 and 22 made me think of Kim DeMulder, perhaps best known for inking Don Perlin on Defenders and Beauty and the Beast in a Palmer-influenced style. No idea who inked the remainder, some of which looks as rough as a badger's arse.
|
|
|
Post by virltommy on May 21, 2018 13:56:23 GMT -5
In my eyes the early Marvel Star Wars issues up till ''The Empire Strikes Back'' are the best Star Wars material short of the original 1977 Star Wars film. While I can enjoy the other Star Wars sequels for what they are and have a good time at the cinema, imo there was never a need for more SW films after the groundbreaking and almost mythical 77 original. It was a perfect stand alone film and story with characters thad made sense and one that is endlessly rewatchable. It doesn't make sense that Vader is Luke's father, that the sequels retroactively made Obi-Wan out to be a lying ass and don't get me started on Leia being Luke's sister for no reason whatsoever. The ongoing love triangle in the early Marvel issues DOES make sense and makes for some fun scenes and the flirty love/kisses between Luke and Leia feels genuine. And Confessor, you raise a lot of good points, but Howard Chaykin and Carmine Infantino's work on Star Wars is some of my favorite comicbook art ever. It's definitely not perfect, but the art is just so much fun, vivid and lively, exciting and full of wonder. I also love the sense of discovery and freedom in those early post SW movie issues. Just my two cents!
|
|
|
Post by rberman on May 21, 2018 20:44:24 GMT -5
Going back a ways to stories I read back in the day... Star Wars #51Cover dated: September 1981 Issue title: Resurrection of EvilPlot summary: The Rebel Alliance learns from its spies that the Empire is constructing a new superweapon, with the equivalent firepower of the Death Star, known as The Tarkin. Realising the danger that this poses to the Rebellion, General Rieekan recalls Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, Chewbacca, and the droids C-3PO and R2-D2 from their current missions. Since they all survived being on board the original Death Star, Rieekan rationalises that their experience makes them perfect candidates for a mission to destroy the new battle station. The heroes are sent to the planet Hockaleg in the Patriim system, in order to infiltrate the construction crew that the Empire have working on the Tarkin. After obtaining some construction worker's overalls, the Rebels make their way to a shuttle and board the battle station. However, Darth Vader is also on board the Tarkin and he senses Luke's presence through the Force. Vader sets into motion a scheme to capture young Skywalker, little realising that a group of Imperial officers are secretly plotting to kill him in retaliation for the vicious and lethal treatment they are routinely subjected to by the Dark Lord. Comments: Michelinie's original idea for this story was to have the Empire actually build a second Death Star, pre-empting the events of Return of the Jedi by around two years. Tarkin was a weighty and perfect name for the station. Not only did he anticipate the "second Death Star" part of ROTJ, but also the "undercover raid team including Luke, Leia, Chewie, R2, and C3PO" part. And, unlike ROTJ, there's a good in-story rationale for this particular squad, being the only rebels (plus Han) who were on the original Death Star. In contrast, ROTJ gave no good reason for Princess Leia, R2D2, or C3PO to go on the mission to the forest moon of Endor. Leia was too valuable to use just as a commando soldier (and surely less competent too), while the droids were a real impediment in the undergrowth-strewn forest. Rogue One also had an undercover raid component. This made tons of sense to me as a kid. Vader's punitive tactics would have cause the Empire to go through officers like butter, making all career military men dread the prospect of getting re-assigned within Vader's orbit. A conspiracy to hook Vader up with an "accident" was the only smart play.
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on May 22, 2018 7:55:03 GMT -5
See, the Imperial Vader Assasination Plot is the perfect thing for a monthly comic where the characters are much more fleshed out, but in the films I think it would have undermined Vader if anybody who served in the Empire even dared consider such a thing.
And also, it would make the Empire less symbolically effective if some of them started rebelling in any way.
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on May 22, 2018 8:21:36 GMT -5
In my eyes the early Marvel Star Wars issues up till ''The Empire Strikes Back'' are the best Star Wars material short of the original 1977 Star Wars film. While I can enjoy the other Star Wars sequels for what they are and have a good time at the cinema, imo there was never a need for more SW films after the groundbreaking and almost mythical 77 original. It was a perfect stand alone film and story with characters thad made sense and one that is endlessly rewatchable. It doesn't make sense that Vader is Luke's father, that the sequels retroactively made Obi-Wan out to be a lying ass and don't get me started on Leia being Luke's sister for no reason whatsoever. The ongoing love triangle in the early Marvel issues DOES make sense and makes for some fun scenes and the flirty love/kisses between Luke and Leia feels genuine. And Confessor, you raise a lot of good points, but Howard Chaykin and Carmine Infantino's work on Star Wars is some of my favorite comicbook art ever. It's definitely not perfect, but the art is just so much fun, vivid and lively, exciting and full of wonder. I also love the sense of discovery and freedom in those early post SW movie issues. Just my two cents! I certainly know what you mean - I've recently watched all the films and been reading the Marvel Years Epic Collections, and those early comics really do capture the same feel of straight-up adventure the original film has. The Empire Strikes Back is thematically heavier, more character-driven and adds shades of grey to the whole thing... However, Vader being Luke's dad makes an awful lot of sense, in terms of the Joseph Campbell mythology stuff. A dark father figure who must be overcome is a very common staple of the Hero's Journey. You've got Voldermort in Harry Potter, Obadiah Stane in Iron Man, almost every villain in the Spider-Man movies, the Other-Mother in Coraline, General Zod in Man of Steel....
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on May 22, 2018 9:19:52 GMT -5
And Confessor, you raise a lot of good points, but Howard Chaykin and Carmine Infantino's work on Star Wars is some of my favorite comicbook art ever. It's definitely not perfect, but the art is just so much fun, vivid and lively, exciting and full of wonder. I also love the sense of discovery and freedom in those early post SW movie issues. The thing about Chaykin's art on Star Wars #1 is that, by his own admission, he totally dialed it in. He's gone on record as saying that, had he know how popular the movie adaption was gonna become or how many times it would get reprinted, he would've put much more effort into it. The art in that first issue isn't anywhere near his best. The fact that he only did rough pencils for issues #2-8 speaks volumes about his commitment to the series, especially when compared to Roy Thomas's enthusiasm. Still, as I think I said in one of my early reviews, Chaykin's art in those early issues is dynamic as hell. His panel-to-panel pacing is expertly done and so is his staging, it's just that a lot of it looks pretty scratchy and rushed. As for Carmine Infantino, that's a bit more of a complex and subjective thing. There's kind of a running joke in this thread that I'm an "Infantino hater", but actually, I regard him as one of the all-time greats: his storytelling instincts with sequential art were absolutely flawless and it's always crystal clear exactly what is going on in an Infantino panel. It's just that his idiosyncratic and angular artwork is a really bad fit for Star Wars IMO. In addition, it's clear that, despite having access to lots of reference photographs from Lucasfilm, Infantino clearly had no interest in drawing Star Wars tech, spaceships or weapons faithfully -- instead preferring his own stylized take on things. That always bugged me as a kid and it still annoys me now. There was a lot of criticism of Infantino's art in the letters pages of those pre- Empire issues, which resulted in editor Louise Jones bringing in other inkers like Tom Palmer towards the end of his run to doctor his art to make it look more like the movies. Still, Infantino's stylized take on SW is so closely associated with my early comic reading memories that it elicits nostalgia nowadays, as much as annoyance. For better or worse, Infantino's artwork was Star Wars between 1978 and 1980.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on May 22, 2018 9:41:49 GMT -5
And, unlike ROTJ, there's a good in-story rationale for this particular squad, being the only rebels (plus Han) who were on the original Death Star. In contrast, ROTJ gave no good reason for Princess Leia, R2D2, or C3PO to go on the mission to the forest moon of Endor. Leia was too valuable to use just as a commando soldier (and surely less competent too), while the droids were a real impediment in the undergrowth-strewn forest. But...there is a perfectly plausible explanation for the make up of the bunker assault team in ROTJ: Only Han -- a Rebel General -- was selected by the Rebel leaders to lead the strike team. Chewbacca, Luke and Leia all volunteered of their own volition...they were not picked by the Alliance high command. Leia was a valuable Rebel figurehead, yes, but she was also a brave terrorist operative and had been since before A New Hope (terrorist in the eyes of the Empire, I mean). Whether she was attempting to smuggle the Death Star plans to the Alliance or battling stormtroopers on the Death Star and Cloud City, or killing the notorious gangster Jabba the Hutt, this was no inexperienced damsel in distress. She was a respected Rebel warrior in her own right, who inspired the men and women who served under her (see the briefing she gives the T-47 pilots in ESB for evidence of that respect). And that's without even mentioning the countless missions she undertook in the comics and novels like Splinter of the Minds Eye. Leia always led by example. As for the droids, yeah OK, maybe you have a point with C-3PO, but R2-D2 was there to open the bunker doors (although, of course, he was shot and Han had to resort to tricks to get the Imperials out of their bunker in the end). So, I don't see any problem with the in-universe rational for Luke, Leia and the droids being part of the Endor strike team. This made tons of sense to me as a kid. Vader's punitive tactics would have cause the Empire to go through officers like butter, making all career military men dread the prospect of getting re-assigned within Vader's orbit. A conspiracy to hook Vader up with an "accident" was the only smart play. Agreed. It was a fantastic sub-plot of David Michelinie's.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on May 22, 2018 9:48:29 GMT -5
However, Vader being Luke's dad makes an awful lot of sense, in terms of the Joseph Campbell mythology stuff. A dark father figure who must be overcome is a very common staple of the Hero's Journey. You've got Voldermort in Harry Potter, Obadiah Stane in Iron Man, almost every villain in the Spider-Man movies, the Other-Mother in Coraline, General Zod in Man of Steel.... 100% agreed. Vader being revealed as the hero's father was right out of the "Hero's Journey" playbook and made total sense in such a mythology inspired story as Star Wars. Leia being Luke's sister, on the other hand...not so much. I also really liked the reveal that Obi-Wan was a manipulative liar, even if his untruths had been told with the nobelist of intentions. War makes even good men do extreme, out of character things, if the cause demands it.
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on May 23, 2018 7:20:20 GMT -5
I also really liked the reveal that Obi-Wan was a manipulative liar, even if his untruths had been told with the nobelist of intentions. War makes even good men do extreme, out of character things, if the cause demands it. I love that bit too, because it suddenly became a situation where Luke couldn't really trust any of the adults around him anymore - Yoda concealed the truth about Luke's heritage, Obi-Wan wanted him to kill Vader, and Vader wanted him to join the Dark Side - and Luke had to make his own decision, which turned out to be redeeming Vader. It went past the simple good vs evil aspects of the original movie and showed that when you reach adulthood, you realise things are more complicated and have to make your own choices.
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on May 23, 2018 7:51:06 GMT -5
And Confessor, you raise a lot of good points, but Howard Chaykin and Carmine Infantino's work on Star Wars is some of my favorite comicbook art ever. It's definitely not perfect, but the art is just so much fun, vivid and lively, exciting and full of wonder. I also love the sense of discovery and freedom in those early post SW movie issues. The thing about Chaykin's art on Star Wars #1 is that, by his own admission, he totally dialed it in. He's gone on record as saying that, had he know how popular the movie adaption was gonna become or how many times it would get reprinted, he would've put much more effort into it. The art in that first issue isn't anywhere near his best. The fact that he only did rough pencils for issues #2-8 speaks volumes about his commitment to the series, especially when compared to Roy Thomas's enthusiasm. Still, as I think I said in one of my early reviews, Chaykin's art in those early issues is dynamic as hell. His panel-to-panel pacing is expertly done and so is his staging, it's just that a lot of it looks pretty scratchy and rushed. As for Carmine Infantino, that's a bit more of a complex and subjective thing. There's kind of a running joke in this thread that I'm an "Infantino hater", but actually, I regard him as one of the all-time greats: his storytelling instincts with sequential art were absolutely flawless and it's always crystal clear exactly what is going on in an Infantino panel. It's just that his idiosyncratic and angular artwork is a really bad fit for Star Wars IMO. In addition, it's clear that, despite having access to lots of reference photographs from Lucasfilm, Infantino clearly had no interest in drawing Star Wars tech, spaceships or weapons faithfully -- instead preferring his own stylized take on things. That always bugged me as a kid and it still annoys me now. There was a lot of criticism of Infantino's art in the letters pages of those pre- Empire issues, which resulted in editor Louise Jones bringing in other inkers like Tom Palmer towards the end of his run to doctor his art to make it look more like the movies. Still, Infantino's stylized take on SW is so closely associated with my early comic reading memories that it elicits nostalgia nowadays, as much as annoyance. For better or worse, Infantino's artwork was Star Wars between 1978 and 1980. It's a personal thing, but I like that Infantino drew the Star Wars universe his own way, full of chunky spaceships and angular characters. I like his huge version of Vader, his stern-looking Leia and his wolfman-like Chewbacca. The only thing I don't really like is the bizarre way he draws lightsabers in some issues... ...it's just downright ugly looking. It makes the blade look mechanical, like a chainsaw.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on May 23, 2018 8:01:54 GMT -5
The only thing I don't really like is the bizarre way he draws lightsabers in some issues... ...it's just downright ugly looking. It makes the blade look mechanical, like a chainsaw. Ah, Infantino's Zip-a-Tone lightsabers! We had a brief discussion about this and other lightsaber designs used in the Marvel series a few pages back (it starts here).
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on May 23, 2018 8:26:51 GMT -5
Personally, I believed that during the Infantino period, the effect of the lightsaber (left) gave the impression of active energy--power. The blade seemed dangerous and from a visual standpoint, gave the comic version the closest suggestion that it was as threatening as its movie counterpart, as opposed to the jagged, scalloped-edged version seen during Infantino's brief return to the series (middle) or another, "soft flashlight beam" version during his original run (right). Very interesting. None of them are particularly effective IMO, although obviously they were difficult to depict in comics until things like Photoshop came along. The actual lightsaber duels that Infantino draws are great, just the weapons themselves don't work for me. My favourite comic version of lightsabers is in Splinter of the Mind's Eye...they look big and heavy, and make the motion blur you see onscreen in the movies. I also love the more stylised 'candle-like' lightsabers from Dark Empire. They really give the impression of a burst of fizzing energy. Additonal: I've just realised that this picture seems to confirm that Palpatine doesn't have any genitalia. Not sure I wanted to know that, but it explains an awful lot when you think about it.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on May 23, 2018 9:00:43 GMT -5
Very interesting. None of them are particularly effective IMO, although obviously they were difficult to depict in comics until things like Photoshop came along. The actual lightsaber duels that Infantino draws are great, just the weapons themselves don't work for me. My favourite comic version of lightsabers is in Splinter of the Mind's Eye...they look big and heavy, and make the motion blur you see onscreen in the movies. I've said this before, but that's why I like Al Williamson's use of parallel lines behind the blade, as it slices through the air. It produces much the same effect as the motion blur seen above, but in a way that doesn't require computer manipulation of the art, obviously. The lines give the lightsaber a flowing, slicing sense of movement, as well as a cool tracer bullet-like effect... I also love the more stylised 'candle-like' lightsabers from Dark Empire. They really give the impression of a burst of fizzing energy. Urrrrghh...that Cam Kennedy artwork. Dark Empire is a great mini-series, but I never liked Kennedy's art, even when he was drawing strips for 2000 AD back in the '80s. He's an even worse fit for SW than Infantino!
|
|