|
Post by driver1980 on Nov 5, 2023 5:51:42 GMT -5
Makes me think of the unrealistic promotion times in the Police Academy films. The cadets graduate from the police academy in 1984, yet most of them return as sergeants within two years to help the 1986 class train. Lt. Mauser (Art Metrano) is promoted to captain in the second film - which takes place in 1985 - yet in the very next film, which is set a year later, he’s the commandant of a police academy. There sure were some fast promotions in those films! Cause I always go to the Police Academy films for their gritty realism. Well, to be honest, I thought that they were based on true events, much like Return of the Living Dead was…
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Nov 5, 2023 7:28:03 GMT -5
Cause I always go to the Police Academy films for their gritty realism. Well, to be honest, I thought that they were based on true events, much like Return of the Living Dead was… Yeah, but that's only true for the first Police Academy film - in fact, initially Al Pacino (based on his Serpico and Dog Day Afternoon rep) was going to be cast as Mahoney, but had to back away from the project due to a scheduling conflict.
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Nov 6, 2023 20:45:04 GMT -5
From The Amazing Spider-Man #27, published in 1965: Okay, Jameson is wondering whether the photos in the Daily Globe were taken by Peter Parker. But does he need to speculate? Wouldn’t credits for each photo taken have been a thing back then? Aren’t all photos credited in any publication?
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 6, 2023 21:23:57 GMT -5
From The Amazing Spider-Man #27, published in 1965: Okay, Jameson is wondering whether the photos in the Daily Globe were taken by Peter Parker. But does he need to speculate? Wouldn’t credits for each photo taken have been a thing back then? Aren’t all photos credited in any publication? No, they weren't, always. They might be credited to the AP or UPI, but not necessarily the individual photographer. Something like Life Magazine, yeah; but, not always in newspapers.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 16, 2023 14:00:35 GMT -5
Does anyone know what really happened with Rich Buckler? The story was he was fired and more or less black balled for drawing a space ship that was a copy from another comic. But come on, that doesn't pass the smell test. Comics have been appropriating images since before Action #1. No way a space ship in one book would end a career. I always liked his work. He captured the Kirby/Buscema dynamic in his work, though he wasn't as good as either. His books were fun reads. I also thought Deathlok was cool. I met him once when he was showing his surrealist/fantasy paintings. He was a nice guy.
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Nov 16, 2023 16:22:01 GMT -5
Does anyone know what really happened with Rich Buckler? The story was he was fired and more or less black balled for drawing a space ship that was a copy from another comic. But come on, that doesn't pass the smell test. Comics have been appropriating images since before Action #1. No way a space ship in one book would end a career. I always liked his work. He captured the Kirby/Buscema dynamic in his work, though he wasn't as good as either. His books were fun reads. I also thought Deathlok was cool. I met him once when he was showing his surrealist/fantasy paintings. He was a nice guy. The way the story is told here, Buckler swiped a spaceship design and the disillusioned writer left a series: Buckler, as far as I know, was never blackballed or reprimanded, though he has been called out on swiping, though not appreciably more than others. But I did get a chuckle out of this when I first saw it:
I never spotted specific swipes, but when I saw him listed in the credits, the question was, "Is it the Kirby Buckler, the Adams Buckler, or the Buscema Buckler?"
(I never saw those paintings--pretty cool)
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 17, 2023 0:45:26 GMT -5
Buckler was neither fired nor blackballed. He worked at DC until 1981/82 and then was hired to edit the Red Circle line, for Archie, which brought back the Mighty Crusaders and related MLJ heroes. He didn't last long in the job, about a year, with his main artistic work on the Mighty Crusaders book. (EDIT...I would need to do a lot of research to confirm; but, I believe he started out editing the whole line, except the THUNDER Agents stuff, under the JCP banner, for Joe Carbonaro, the owner of the rights; and, then ended up editing Mighty Crusaders and a couple of others). Around the same time, The Comics Journal ran a piece, accusing him of plagiarism, for various swipes. He filed a lawsuit, for libel, but ended up withdrawing it. In TCJ #83, Ted White lloks at The Mighty Crusaders and the new Fly series and focuses on Buckler signing his name and giving himself story credit for what are reprints of early Simon & Kirby Double Life of Pvt Strong, where Buckler was using swipes of panels and chaarcters, while rearranging them slightly, but it was all a copy of Kirby's art and not original art done in the style of Kirby. They present examples of the original Simon & Kirby work and Buckler's copies... TCJ was already at odds with Archie, over bad reviews for Mighty Crusaders #1 and they had stopped sending press releases & art to them and Amazing Heoroes, though they sent their release material. Issue 85 has a piece about them dropping the Red Circle name and Direct Market exclusive and rebranding as Archie Adventure, with newsstand and Direct Market. Buckler responded to the bad review of Mighty Crusaders #1, in TCJ #86, then filed his lawsuit, after #83, with the Journal reporting it in issue 88. The two main points in the suit were Robert Greenberger's review of Mighty Crusaders #1, where he labeled a line of dialogue as racist, and the plagiarism claim by White in #83. At the time, the Journal was being sued by Michael Fleisher, after an interview with Harlan Ellison, where he called Fleisher "bugf@#$," in relation to some of his more gonzo stories. Fleisher lost that suit, which ended up putting co-defendents Groth and Ellison at odds. Buckler withdrew his suit less than a year after filing it. According to an interview with Cary Burkett, Buckler was gone from Archie by the time they switched branding, but his name apepared for a few comics, because they had already been in the works. Buckler returned to Marvel, in 1985, working with Peter David on "The Death of Jean DeWolff," in PP The Spectacular Spider-Man #107-110. he was also freelancing for DC, with credits for Tales of the Teen Titans, Warlord and V (from the tv series). He did some work for David Singer's Deluxe/Lodestone lines, both for Wally Wood's THUNDER Agents and Codename: Danger. In 1986, he became editor of Gary Brodsky's Solson line, and wrote and drew (or wrote and edited and did covers) for several titles, including Reagan's Raiders, a bonkers comic with the president and members of his cabinet as super-soldiers, in a mix of Captain America and Rambo (they were pretty bad, but fun, in a trainwreck fashion, and included an unauthorized appearance by Daethlok). He also did some work for Silverline, which was hardly top tier, suggesting he wasn't making that much from Brodsky. Solson was dead and buried by 1987. That was where he did his How to Draw stuff, including a paperback instruction guide that was of middling value (I picked up a copy from a remainder bookstore, for less than a buck). He continued freelancing for Marvel through 1994 and also did some work for Continuity and Malibu. He then did some work for Topps and Tekno. There are some sporadic Marvel pieces, through 2000, then just reprints. He died in 2017, from cancer and it sounded like he fought it for quite a while. So, hardly blacklisted, as he worked for DC and Marvel into the New Millennium and some indie work, here and there, plus his paintings and he was also involved in some stage productions and amateur filmmaking. Buckler was known to swipe figure poses and panels, though he was hardly alone in that. He also morphed his style to approximations of Kirby and Adams and Buscema. Deathlok was probably the closest he came to his own style, in comics, and even that has Buscema leanings. I think he was just one of those guys who needed a crutch, for telling some stories. I loved Deathlok and his work on Black Panther, as well as the Superman stuff, at DC. He drew some of DC's better covers of that era and was a great choice to launch All-Star Squadron, since he could do Golden Age characters well, though he was so-so on period authenticity (that series struggled with that a lot). Personally, I thought he got way more grief than he deserved, about swipes, especially compared to Rob Liefeld and some others. Even Kirby lifted some from Hal Foster and Wally Wood had his share of swipes.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,041
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 17, 2023 5:47:48 GMT -5
Personally, I thought he got way more grief than he deserved, about swipes, especially compared to Rob Liefeld and some others. Even Kirby lifted some from Hal Foster and Wally Wood had his share of swipes. I dunno...that is pretty bad though. The appropriation of Kirby's work in the examples above goes way beyond just swiping in my eyes. That's full on plagiarism.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 17, 2023 8:18:03 GMT -5
Some classic pages are swiped often. Spider-man’s origin sequence , Caps rescue from the icy waters among the rest.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 17, 2023 9:08:12 GMT -5
Thanks cody, again a wealth of knowledge. I had half remembered something, and see that it is both more nuanced and broader.
That appropriation of the Simon/Kirby stories is strange. There is no way he didn't know that people would see it. I wonder if he ever explained this plagiarism.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 17, 2023 11:25:47 GMT -5
Well, he is recounting the origin story of the Lancelot Strong SHIELD, from The Double Life of Pvt Strong #1; so, there is a certain logic in making it look like Kirby and Kirby's panels. That said, I think he went beyond making it look like Kirby's story to pretty much tracing and pasting it. Maybe he was pressed for time and it was a faster method. Signing his name to Kirby's work is the bigger sin. By the same token, when Lee & Kirby retold some of the original Captain America stories, in Tales of Suspense, Stan was signing his name to a story he didn't write and really didn't change from the original and there was no acknowledgement to Joe Simon. Stan gets a pass for it.
Buckler didn't do things to that level as a regular thing, yet he gets this reputation that he did. I think his ego didn't help matters; but, he has plenty of company there and I think ego factors into some of the criticisms from colleagues, who probably wouldn't admit to their own swipes or "inspirations." The writers were routinely cribbing from novels, movies and tv shows; but, their scripts aren't being laid side by side with Richard Matheson or someone else. I just think it gets blown out of proportion over time, especially in Buckler's case. Working for Archie and, especially, Solson, didn't help his reputation, since the quality was low and the output (at Solson) consisted mainly of rip-offs of other material or themes (lot of TMNT style books, ninjas, and then The THUNDER Agents licensed book). Those people tend to forget he did The Death of Jean DeWolff, which garnered high praise.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Nov 17, 2023 12:07:36 GMT -5
Well, he is recounting the origin story of the Lancelot Strong SHIELD, from The Double Life of Pvt Strong #1; so, there is a certain logic in making it look like Kirby and Kirby's panels. That said, I think he went beyond making it look like Kirby's story to pretty much tracing and pasting it. Maybe he was pressed for time and it was a faster method. Signing his name to Kirby's work is the bigger sin. By the same token, when Lee & Kirby retold some of the original Captain America stories, in Tales of Suspense, Stan was signing his name to a story he didn't write and really didn't change from the original and there was no acknowledgement to Joe Simon. Stan gets a pass for it. Stan is not getting a pass. While plenty still idolize Stan and give him credit for many of the things he claimed, which he didn't do. There is a growing cadre of people and comic historians trying to lay bare the truth of what Stan did and who he was, beyond the Funky Flashman persona.
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on Nov 17, 2023 16:31:21 GMT -5
For all the discussion of Buckler relying on swipes, I've never had any trouble immediately spotting Buckler work (at least in the 70's), so he was unquestionably bringing something unique to his pages, even if poses and panel staging were swiped. I can't say that about the Kirby swipes shown above, but his Bronze Age Marvel stuff was distinctive. Not that I ever particularly liked it, but it was easily identifiable even when I was ignorant of the swipes.
|
|
Roquefort Raider
CCF Mod Squad
Modus omnibus in rebus
Posts: 17,083
Member is Online
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 17, 2023 20:28:14 GMT -5
I liked Buckler's work. To me, he was the typical competent but nondescript penciller; not as easily recognizable as Byrne, Perez, Adams, Kirby or Buscema, but not as bad as many others I won't mention. For some reason, I always put him in the same category as Keith Pollard: not an artist whose work I would hunt down, but not one that would turn me off. And I loved his Black Panther.
I never associated him with swiping, although those strips above should definitely have been signed "after Kirby". So many artists did far worse in tha5 regard... (whatever happened to the Swipe File? That was quite an eye-opener).
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 17, 2023 21:36:25 GMT -5
Buckler was a great cover artist and he did a few favorites that belied crappy interiors, like this Freedom Fighters cover.... I also loved this one. from the second issue of Mighty Crusaders..... Even at Solson, he had a couple of good ones..... ,,,,though he was swiping from Rambo and other movies, for Reagan's Raiders.....
|
|