|
|
Post by profh0011 on Feb 19, 2021 21:35:50 GMT -5
August 1971THANKS!! I was looking over my index, but had trouble spotting it.
That was the month they switched their entire line to longer 25 cent comics... before cutting the page counts back the following month and going to 15 cents. That caused some confusion in the stories in some books, with some short chapters getting bumped into the following issues.  Apart from compiling an index, the toughest part was digging out all the REPRINTS, since I have more of those back then than I do originals. My own indexes, I include a right-hand column listing reprints, which makes it easy to know WHERE stories appeared (this was long before I discovered the GCD).
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,143 
|
Post by Confessor on Feb 20, 2021 5:16:13 GMT -5
If you ever wanna get amitious, try re-reading ALL your 60s Marvelsd in the order they came out, one month at a time. it's amazing how much SUBTLE inter-book continuity reveals itself that way. But there's a glitch. 4 books, the cover dates were one month off. (Or maybe just a week or two.) If you read those 4 LAST each month, even more subtle continuity becomes evident, MORE times than you'd think. This is hard to explain unless you've actually done it. I have! THOR, THE AVENGERS, DAREDEVIL and X-MEN. For example, if you have all the issues with " OCT" cover dates, read those 4 books LAST, before moving on to " NOV". Somewhere in 1972 (I think), they skip a month, and those 4 books all fit normally into the schedule from then on. Yes, back in the 1960s the Avengers, DD, Thor and X-Men (and Sgt. Fury) were cover dated 2 months in advance of the release date; other Marvels cover dated 3 months ahead. So in May for example, on the stands there would be some Marvels--the 5 titles mentioned above--cover-dated July, with Spidey, the FF and the others cover-dated August. I thought this was well known among Marvel history aficionados--one only needs to look at a few months' worth of Silver Age Marvels bullpen bulletin checklists and/or house ads to see/deduce this!--but apparently it's not. I still come across blogs/posts breathlessly announcing this, as if it's some great puzzle they've uncovered/solved....not to mention there was a book about Stan's Soapboxes published a few years ago and the author/compiler completely missed this when talking about which comics the 1960s Soapboxes appeared in (I emailed him to let him know that there were two sets of cover dates in any given month; he said he hadn't known that and thanked me). Now of course we have Mike's Newsstand and other great online resources. Anyway, Marvel synched it up in August 1971 (for most of its monthly books). I remember I was on vacation with my family, so far from my usual neighborhood candy stores and I was worried I'd miss my finding monthly comics. But luckily there was a small stationery/souvenir store and I came across Avengers #93 and Fantastic Four #116. The problem was, both were cover-dated November, and I knew that couldn't be right, since the Avengers should have been cover-dated October. I remember being very worried that somehow I'd missed an Avengers issue! It didn't help my frame of mind that the Marvel comics were now giant-sized (for this month only, as it turned out) and cost more money, 25 cents instead of the usual 15 cents (this was Martin Goodman's famous one month tactic that ended up shafting DC). When we returned home from our vacation and I could check my comics, I saw I hadn't missed an Avengers issue; it was just the month had been moved up. So there's no October 1971-cover dated issue for the Avengers, DD or Thor (the X-Men had been canceled the previous year and was now a bi-monthly reprint mag; Sgt. Fury had become a "3 monther" in 1970 also). Fascinating, Farrar. I must admit, I had no idea about these titles being out of synth cover date-wise during the '60s. You really should show off your knowledge of vintage comics more regularly in the forum; I feel sometimes that you hold back and it's so interesting to hear what you have to say. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Feb 20, 2021 12:48:16 GMT -5
Reading some Silver Age JLA today from the omnibus.. #16 is awesome! I loved the tribute to fandom.. such a fun, sixties thing to do! I wonder how that would go if they did it today...
|
|
|
|
Post by Farrar on Feb 20, 2021 15:57:17 GMT -5
Thank you Confessor ; I appreciate the kind words  And just to apologize & clarify--since I see I didn't state it at all clearly in my earlier post--I wasn't referring to anyone here at CCF regarding "how could they not know this!" I was referring to the many blogs/blog posts I've read over the years that very specifically focus on things like Marvel reading order/publication order in the 1960s, but which didn't do the due diligence to check things first. I know it's tricky if one doesn't have the actual issues at hand (as I see profh noted above) and is instead reading from a reprint collection that lacks house ads, Bullpen Bulletins, etc., but as mentioned there are many excellent resources available now to compensate for that. |
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Feb 20, 2021 21:28:41 GMT -5
I would like, one of these days, to get back on my chronological re-reading project. But first, I'm gonna have to do some serious re-filing, since a pile of stuff that got pulled out years ago, somehow never got filed back where they belong.
The crazy thing is... I stopped... THE MONTH... before John Romita MUREDERED Gwen Stacy. (It was all his idea.)
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,143
|
Post by Confessor on Feb 21, 2021 7:30:19 GMT -5
before John Romita MUREDERED Gwen Stacy. (It was all his idea.) It definitely wasn't all his idea. From what I've read, it was Roy Thomas who first suggested killing off a member of Spidey's supporting cast and between him and Gerry Conway they came up with Aunt May as a suitable candidate (although Conway has on occasion atributed this to John Romita). But after discussing it, both Conway and Romita thought it was a bad idea to kill Aunt May because it took away the element of May always babying Peter Parker, which they felt was a core part of the book. At Romita's suggestion, Mary Jane Watson and Gwen Stacy were selected as more suitable candidates, with Romita favouring Stacy. Ultimately, Conway and Thomas agreed, and then Conway, with help from Romita and Gil Kane, came up with the story in which she would be killed (repordedly with Stan Lee's blessing, at least initially). So, while it was Romita who suggested that Stacy should die, it's not correct to say that "it was all his idea." |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Feb 21, 2021 13:22:39 GMT -5
This reminds me of something I used to wonder about since, though I read the death of Gwen Stacy issues when I was a kid, I don't remembe reading the immediately following issues: how did Mary Jane react to Gwen's death, or was that given any time at all?
|
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Feb 21, 2021 23:40:44 GMT -5
This morning, I re-read the first 2 PENGUIN stories, and the first 2 TWO-FACE stories. What WEIRD fun.
What surprised me was how certain elements from these actually turned up on both the Adam West TV show, AND, the 1st Tim Burton BATMAN movie. Like, in his very 1st appearance, Penguin accusing Batman & Robin of being criminals, and Gordon being shocked that there's now an all-points arrest bulletin out for them! Or a character in the Two-Face story named "Ekhart". Or the scene where Harvey's bandages are removed, and he sees his face in a hand-held mirror (which was NEVER part of The Joker's origin... until it was grafted onto Jack Nicholson's version).
Reading these "ancient" stories now, it strikes me how difficult it might be to adapt them without making massive changes nowadays. But on the other hand, it might be a real challenge. How is it, with COUNTLESS versions on TV and such, they nobody has ever even attempted to adapt these old stories AS THEY WERE, but just "improved", not completely changed and with details jumbled around at random?
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,143
|
Post by Confessor on Feb 22, 2021 4:44:36 GMT -5
Reading these "ancient" stories now, it strikes me how difficult it might be to adapt them without making massive changes nowadays. But on the other hand, it might be a real challenge. How is it, with COUNTLESS versions on TV and such, they nobody has ever even attempted to adapt these old stories AS THEY WERE, but just "improved", not completely changed and with details jumbled around at random? I've long said that I'd LOVE to see a TV series that faithfully adapted the early Lee/Ditko issues of Amazing Spider-Man in an early 60s setting, with all the attention to detail and authentic mid-century modern trappings of a series like Mad Men. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,143
|
Post by Confessor on Feb 22, 2021 5:25:17 GMT -5
This reminds me of something I used to wonder about since, though I read the death of Gwen Stacy issues when I was a kid, I don't remembe reading the immediately following issues: how did Mary Jane react to Gwen's death, or was that given any time at all? Well, Mary Jane was shown as visibly upset and grieving...you know, during sequences like Gwen's funeral etc, but her feelings and precise thoughts on the matter were never really examined in any deeper way. That was something that was left for later writers to flesh out. However, the issues immediately following Gwen's death issues did reveal a new side to Mary Jane: suddenly the 24-hour party person pretence was allowed to drop and it was during this time that we first saw a deeper, more sensitive side of the character. This deepening of MJ's character was perhaps most clearly illustrated early on in Amazing Spider-Man #122, in which a badly grieving Peter Parker lashes out at MJ in anger and is, frankly, a bit of a dick to her (understandable under the circumstances: he had just watched his first true love die, possibly by his own hand, after all). Whereas previously, "party girl" MJ would've likely made some blithe and snappy reply and split that scene, maaaaaan...she instead decides to put her own hurt pride to one side and stay with her grieving friend to comfort him. For me, it's an extremely powerful scene and a pivotal one in MJ's character development. It also foreshadows Peter and MJ's own blossoming romance a couple of years later...  |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 22, 2021 6:11:33 GMT -5
This reminds me of something I used to wonder about since, though I read the death of Gwen Stacy issues when I was a kid, I don't remembe reading the immediately following issues: how did Mary Jane react to Gwen's death, or was that given any time at all? Well, Mary Jane was shown as visibly upset and grieving...you know, during sequences like Gwen's funeral etc, but her feelings and precise thoughts on the matter were never really examined in any deeper way. That was something that was left for later writers to flesh out. However, the issues immediately following Gwen's death issues did reveal a new side to Mary Jane: suddenly the 24-hour party person pretence was allowed to drop and it was during this time that we first saw a deeper, more sensitive side of the character. This deepening of MJ's character was perhaps most clearly illustrated early on in Amazing Spider-Man #122, in which a badly grieving Peter Parker lashes out at MJ in anger and is, frankly, a bit of a dick to her (understandable under the circumstances: he had just watched his first true love die, possibly by his own hand, after all). Whereas previously, "party girl" MJ would've likely made some blithe and snappy reply and split that scene, maaaaaan...she instead decides to put her own hurt pride to one side and stay with her grieving friend to comfort him. For me, it's an extremely powerful scene and a pivotal one in MJ's character development. It also foreshadows Peter and MJ's own blossoming romance a couple of years later... That was really a powerful scene. Pete's comments indicates that he has no respect for Mary at this point in their relationship. That mother crack was rough. |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Feb 22, 2021 9:35:40 GMT -5
Were the books still being done "marvel style" at this point? Kane and Romita are really doing a lot of the heavy lifting here.
|
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Feb 22, 2021 11:54:17 GMT -5
That run is a confusing mish-mash because of the number of people involved and how, little of which is indicated in the credits.
One has to first understand that John Romita was the writer on the book from the moment he took over from Steve Ditko, who was the writer on the first 41 episodes.
Romita talked in several interviews about how he (and others) at Marvel in the early 70s were "de facto editors" as whoever was listed as "editor" at any given time was too busy with too many books (being more "traffic director" than anything else) to actually read or direct the books... UNLESS something disastrous happened, likie a blown deadline, or something offensive accidentally making its way into print (as happened on Gerber's short run of "GUARDIANS").
On ASM, Romita was the "de facto editor", even when someone else was doing the pencilling!! (Don Heck, John Buscema, Jim Mooney, Gil Kane, Jim Starlin.)
In the case of the 2-parter where Gwen & Norman both got killed, Roy Thomas, who'd recently taken over as editor, suggested that the book was getting "stale", and perhaps needed to be shaken up. He tossed out the idea of KILLING off one of the main cast.
John Romita suggested Gwen. He said it would be a tribute to his hero, Milton Caniff, who, when he killed off STEVE CANYON's girlfriend in the newspapers, fans were talking about it for weeks after. Deep down, I suspect he wanted Gwen gone. His editor had been pushing Gwen on him for years by that point, like a back-seat driver. "Make Gwen nicer." "Make Gwen prettier." "Have Pete & Gwen get serious." And, when fans still wanted MJ instead... "Make MJ ugly." (One issue she turned up dressed as a HOOKER... and she was STILL more attractive than Gwen.)
So Romita had the "story idea", and GIL KANE wrote the story based on that. Kane did layouts and full pencils on separate sheets, BUT, for several issues running, Romita was ignoring the full pencils, and doing his own full pencils based on Kane's layouts. (I've seen samples.)
Then Gerry Conway, who for a year by then had ONLY been writing dialogue (just as his predecessor had been doing from the beginning of the series), did the dialogue. As NASTY and VIOLENT as Gil Kane comics tend to be, Gerry Conway's dialogue had a way of being JUST as nasty and mean-spirited.
He could also be incompetent. I still can't get over how, while searching for Gwen, Peter finds her & Norman, atop the Brooklyn Bridge, no doubt a tribute to the 1st Mysterio story. EXCEPT... Conway MIS-identifies it as the GEORGE WASHINGTON Bridge. How could anyone do that? They're two of the most distinct suspension bridges in the entire world, and look nothing alike. Especially, considering Conway lived in NYC at the time. (I've suggested that the FLU really did a number on Peter... but that's just trying to "explain" an in-print screw-up.)
Interestingly, at the time, many fans were OUTRAGED at Gwen's murder, and blamed the credited writer-- GERRY CONWAY. At the time, he TOTALLY DENIED any responsiblility for it, saying it was "a group of editors" who forced it on him. Turns out, that was the truth. And yet... decades later, when it was reprinted in a MASTERWORKS volume, Conway tried to take full CREDIT for it. Even though previously, Romita had ALREADY taken credit for it in 3 separate interviews in the 90s.
A sad thing about ongoing, never-ending corporate-owned series is that over time, so many different people work on them, it's nearly-impossible for them to maintain consistency. I still think of MJ when Romita first introduced her. She & Peter hit it off IMMEDIATELY, and should have become a couple right then. Gwen was always a self-centered, stuck up girl. Her & Harry would have made a better couple. Yet editorial interference saw Pete get serious with Gwen, while MJ started dating Harry, though the whole time, she was still IN LOVE with Peter.
It was once pointed out to me that MJ showed a really careless, nasty side to herself... and it turned out, those were in comics that I had NEVER read at that time... which GIL KANE worked on. 2 years later, Kane was briefly on the book again, and things got nasty AGAIN. He seemed to be the "go-to" guy if you wanted to run a series into VIOLENT CHAOS. As happened when Jim Shooter did his short run on DAREDEVIL.
I don't think Pete meant what he said to MJ. He was just hurting right then. The sad thing is, to ME... Gwen was never the right girl for him in the first place.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,143
|
Post by Confessor on Feb 22, 2021 13:12:16 GMT -5
Were the books still being done "marvel style" at this point? Kane and Romita are really doing a lot of the heavy lifting here. I'm not wholly sure...probably someone much more knowledgable than me in the forum could tell you definitively. But I'd hazard to say that it was only "kinda" Marvel style. From what I've read in books and online, Conway seems to have come up with plot ideas that were then usually robustly discussed with the artists and Roy Thomas. But reading between the lines of interviews, Conway's story ideas seem to have been quite detailed from the outset and I get the impression that he may've even worked up fairly full scripts before handing the story over to the artists. That's just the impression I get from the way he talks about scripting ASM. But regardless, I'm pretty sure it wasn't just a case of Conway giving the artists a rough story outline and then letting them get on with telling the story with the art, and him just slapping on a few word balloons afterwards. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 22, 2021 15:50:35 GMT -5
I guess Stan Lee never wrote a Marvel story.
|
|
