|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 16:59:24 GMT -5
Team books should only feature characters who arent in their own book. As much as I love the Avengers books, once you realize that Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc also have individual stories, it makes you wonder when those stories are taking place in relation to the story going on in the team book. That thought has occurred to me, but at the same time, from a business and marketing perspective, I guess it’s easier for the likes of Marvel to utilise the likes of Captain America, Thor and Iron Man than just a totally new team. I guess if there are 31 days in most months, and you pick up both The Mighty Thor and The Avengers, you could argue that Thor’s solo adventure took place on, say, January 1st, while his adventure alongside the Avengers took place on January 31st. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 17:33:27 GMT -5
Team books should only feature characters who arent in their own book. As much as I love the Avengers books, once you realize that Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc also have individual stories, it makes you wonder when those stories are taking place in relation to the story going on in the team book. I can see the recruiting meetings or emergency calls now-we've got an emergency we need a bunch of heroes to team up and save lives-nope, sorry not you, you could save a bunch of people, but you have your own book, so you can't be a part of this... -M |
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Apr 29, 2023 17:35:39 GMT -5
Team books should only feature characters who arent in their own book. As much as I love the Avengers books, once you realize that Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc also have individual stories, it makes you wonder when those stories are taking place in relation to the story going on in the team book. Back when Lee was helming the Marvel Universe full time, I think he made more of a conscious effort to have events take place in tandem with one another. Like if Iron Man was off fighting somewhere, he'd be absent in the latest issue of Avengers |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 29, 2023 18:12:46 GMT -5
Team books should only feature characters who arent in their own book. As much as I love the Avengers books, once you realize that Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc also have individual stories, it makes you wonder when those stories are taking place in relation to the story going on in the team book. I can see the recruiting meetings or emergency calls now-we've got an emergency we need a bunch of heroes to team up and save lives-nope, sorry not you, you could sve a bunch of people, but you have your own book, so you can't be a part of this... -M The JSA operated under that very rule for its first four years. That's why Superman and Batman were "honorary members" right from the start, and why Flash and GL were "promoted" to honoraries when they got their solo titles. (Wonder Woman got to stay on as "recording secretary" but didn't actively participate in missions.) This only changed when Max Gaines cut ties to DC in '44.
Cei-U! I summon the history lesson!
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 29, 2023 18:19:01 GMT -5
Team books should only feature characters who arent in their own book. As much as I love the Avengers books, once you realize that Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc also have individual stories, it makes you wonder when those stories are taking place in relation to the story going on in the team book. Back when Lee was helming the Marvel Universe full time, I think he made more of a conscious effort to have events take place in tandem with one another. Like if Iron Man was off fighting somewhere, he'd be absent in the latest issue of Avengers But Stan eventually got tired of trying to juggle multiple continuities, which he explicitly said was why he wrote Iron Man, Thor, Giant-Man and Wasp out of the Avengers (and why he chose to cancel the Torch/Thing strip in Strange Tales). Once he'd swapped GM&W out for Sub-Mariner in Tales to Astonish, he brought them back to the team. Thor and Iron Man didn't return to the Avengers full-time until several years into Roy Thomas' run... and he had to fight Stan to do it.
Cei-U! I summon the editorial reluctance!
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 29, 2023 18:19:28 GMT -5
Team books should only feature characters who arent in their own book. As much as I love the Avengers books, once you realize that Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc also have individual stories, it makes you wonder when those stories are taking place in relation to the story going on in the team book. Back when Lee was helming the Marvel Universe full time, I think he made more of a conscious effort to have events take place in tandem with one another. Like if Iron Man was off fighting somewhere, he'd be absent in the latest issue of Avengers This kind of coordination became a problem when Wolverine was appearing in 10 books a month for a while there. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 18:27:34 GMT -5
I can see the recruiting meetings or emergency calls now-we've got an emergency we need a bunch of heroes to team up and save lives-nope, sorry not you, you could sve a bunch of people, but you have your own book, so you can't be a part of this... -M The JSA operated under that very rule for its first four years. That's why Superman and Batman were "honorary members" right from the start, and why Flash and GL were "promoted" to honoraries when they got their solo titles. (Wonder Woman got to stay on as "recording secretary" but didn't actively participate in missions.) This only changed when Max Gaines cut ties to DC in '44. Cei-U! I summon the history lesson!
Oh I know, but that kind of rule just destroys any kind of verisimilitude for any kind of shared universe a publisher wants me to invest in. It feels like the heroes of the world are run by a PR department and bean counters, and aren't characters that actually care about doing good. I get that it's more interesting to read about characters who only appear in the team book, but that rule makes for a heroic universe that is illogical and that I have no interest in reading about at all. At best, it feels like a bunch of divas complaining about who gets how much screen time in a Hollywood farce or satire of itself. And that JSA feature was a bit hypocritical, those that could appear in All Star didn't have solo titles, but they had solo features, which meant they would have the same issues coordinating their adventures with what happens in the team book, which I believe is what is at the heart of the argument not to have heroes with solo features/books in team books. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 18:39:01 GMT -5
Back when Lee was helming the Marvel Universe full time, I think he made more of a conscious effort to have events take place in tandem with one another. Like if Iron Man was off fighting somewhere, he'd be absent in the latest issue of Avengers This kind of coordination became a problem when Wolverine was appearing in 10 books a month for a while there. I felt the same about the Punisher. |
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Apr 29, 2023 18:43:11 GMT -5
Back when Lee was helming the Marvel Universe full time, I think he made more of a conscious effort to have events take place in tandem with one another. Like if Iron Man was off fighting somewhere, he'd be absent in the latest issue of Avengers But Stan eventually got tired of trying to juggle multiple continuities, which he explicitly said was why he wrote Iron Man, Thor, Giant-Man and Wasp out of the Avengers (and why he chose to cancel the Torch/Thing strip in Strange Tales). Once he'd swapped GM&W out for Sub-Mariner in Tales to Astonish, he brought them back to the team. Thor and Iron Man didn't return to the Avengers full-time until several years into Roy Thomas' run... and he had to fight Stan to do it.
How anyone can keep anything straight in continuity for as long as Stan did honestly deserves a medal. I know Shooter tried to bring that back in the 80's (possibly for the 20 year anniversary of the company) but you can only do that sort of thing for so long before you need a reboot
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Apr 29, 2023 20:25:50 GMT -5
I have not read Sgt. Rock or Fury stories in some time, so I wonder how many of their individual "missions" extended across several issues, or were said to have lasted for several days or weeks? If they were not having new adventures in every issue, it could address the time issue compressed within WW2's actual length. Few continued stories in the Rock series, and with Kanigher at the helm, continuity wasn't exactly a priority. Rock and Easy fought in Africa, Italy and France from issue to issue, and I'm sure in other locations as well. Rock himself even went to the Pacific for the one real continued story I recall. Fury also fought wherever the writers wanted him to be; hell, he even went to Berlin to capture or kill Hitler, IIRC. Rock was at least somewhat realistic at times; Fury and the Howlers were essentially super-heroes in military uniforms for most of their run. Which is why Kirby hated the book. He had been in combat and suffered nightmares, Stan hadn't. Kirby felt it was too unrealistic. Compare the stories he had to do there with his own stories, from the Losers and you will see the difference. he gets a little fanciful in a couple, but even those are grounded by a more realistic take on things and way more peril. The scenes of the team fighting house-to-house, floor-to-floor, in Our Fighting Forces #152 is way grittier than anything Fury and the Howlers did.     |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 29, 2023 20:41:53 GMT -5
Team books should only feature characters who arent in their own book. As much as I love the Avengers books, once you realize that Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, etc also have individual stories, it makes you wonder when those stories are taking place in relation to the story going on in the team book. Hence the team shake-up of the so-called "kooky quartet" of Captain America (the only character with his own feature in Tales of Suspense), Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. It would not be long before the Wasp and Pym would return (the latter as Goliath), and by then, they lost their co-feature in Tales to Astonish (ending with #69 in July of '65).
It made perfect sense to limit the appearance of characters with their own titles, as the universe-building was already straining believability when a character is having adventures so often, he would need to be triplets to explain occupying more time that a day (or even hour) offered. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2023 6:00:56 GMT -5
I really do enjoy Todd McFarlane’s pencils on Peter David-written Hulk issues, like this one:  It seems that McFarlane can be a “punching bag” online (I am not referring to here, but certain cesspits on social media). We all have our favourites. That’s fine. I did quite enjoy McFarlane’s “barbed wire” webbing on Spider-Man, but I realise it has its detractors. It’s just that as I re-read Peter’s Hulk run, I am once again appreciating McFarlane’s pencils.(and inks). If I was compiling a top 5 list of my favourite modern Hulk pencillers/inkers, McFarlane would be on the list. Incidentally, regarding the aforementioned issue, was that the first encounter between Hulk and Man-Bull? |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Apr 30, 2023 7:47:34 GMT -5
I really do enjoy Todd McFarlane’s pencils on Peter David-written Hulk issues, like this one: It seems that McFarlane can be a “punching bag” online (I am not referring to here, but certain cesspits on social media). We all have our favourites. That’s fine. I did quite enjoy McFarlane’s “barbed wire” webbing on Spider-Man, but I realise it has its detractors. It’s just that as I re-read Peter’s Hulk run, I am once again appreciating McFarlane’s pencils.(and inks). If I was compiling a top 5 list of my favourite modern Hulk pencillers/inkers, McFarlane would be on the list. Incidentally, regarding the aforementioned issue, was that the first encounter between Hulk and Man-Bull? I always found his artwork to be more on the ugly side. I only ever bought Spawn but sold them all years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 30, 2023 8:26:48 GMT -5
I really do enjoy Todd McFarlane’s pencils on Peter David-written Hulk issues, like this one: It seems that McFarlane can be a “punching bag” online (I am not referring to here, but certain cesspits on social media). We all have our favourites. That’s fine. I did quite enjoy McFarlane’s “barbed wire” webbing on Spider-Man, but I realise it has its detractors. It’s just that as I re-read Peter’s Hulk run, I am once again appreciating McFarlane’s pencils.(and inks). If I was compiling a top 5 list of my favourite modern Hulk pencillers/inkers, McFarlane would be on the list. Incidentally, regarding the aforementioned issue, was that the first encounter between Hulk and Man-Bull? I always found his artwork to be more on the ugly side. I only ever bought Spawn but sold them all years ago. Definitely ugly. He's responsible for the most grotesque "art" ever dumped on The Amazing Spider-Man book. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Apr 30, 2023 8:58:12 GMT -5
Count me as one who liked McFarlane's Spider-Man. I thought it was the first really new take since Romita. A bit of trivia, he got the idea for the look of the webbing from a portfolio by Michael Golden in which he had what they call spaghetti webbing.
|
|
