|
|
Post by Red Oak Kid on Oct 27, 2016 16:57:08 GMT -5
This may be a half-baked question and perhaps I have not thought it thru.
It seemed to me, during the 70s that Marvel cornered the comic book market with Sword and Sorcery titles like Conan/Kull and martial arts titles like Master of Kung Fu.
I remember DC trying to compete with titles like Claw and a martial arts book by Denny O'Neil called Richard something.
I think DC's Warlord would be the closest they came to competing with Conan. And that's a stretch.
Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think DC ever competed in these two markets. Come to think of it they never had an answer for Marvel's Tomb of Dracula.
My question is; what was the reason for this? Was there a huge difference in creators between DC and Marvel. Were the writers and editors at DC just totally clueless when it came to creating stuff like Marvel?
Or was it something in the water coolers at DC?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 17:11:48 GMT -5
This may be a half-baked question and perhaps I have not thought it thru. It seemed to me, during the 70s that Marvel cornered the comic book market with Sword and Sorcery titles like Conan/Kull and martial arts titles like Master of Kung Fu. I remember DC trying to compete with titles like Claw and a martial arts book by Denny O'Neil called Richard something. I think DC's Warlord would be the closest they came to competing with Conan. And that's a stretch. Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think DC ever competed in these two markets. Come to think of it they never had an answer for Marvel's Tomb of Dracula. My question is; what was the reason for this? Was there a huge difference in creators between DC and Marvel. Were the writers and editors at DC just totally clueless when it came to creating stuff like Marvel? Or was it something in the water coolers at DC? DC title - Richard Dragon.
Marvel had Conan. Other than Red Sonja I don't remember any other sword & sorcery titles being that great. During the 70's DC had Tarzan & related titles instead. DC also dominated the War Comics genre. I felt they did them better than Marvel IMO.
DC had House of Mystery & House of Secrets. Definitely not as good as Dracula.
I think DC tapped into their Golden Age better than Marvel with All Star Squadron & the JSA titles. Marvel had the Invaders.
The two companies were different at that time. They were successful in different genres. After Crisis in 1985 I felt they became more alike.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Oct 27, 2016 17:22:20 GMT -5
Besides the war books, DC was also successful in moving westerns into the new age. Jonah Hex went 13 years between Weird Western and his own book.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Oct 27, 2016 17:24:10 GMT -5
md62 supplied a great response. In addition, Marvel had no answer in the Western genre versus DC's Jonah Hex
Slam just beat me to it. Great minds think alike
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 17:29:25 GMT -5
md62 supplied a great response. In addition, Marvel had no answer in the Western genre versus DC's Jonah Hex Slam just beat me to it. Great minds think alike Thanks! Maybe it should be strange minds think alike!  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 17:42:42 GMT -5
Besides the war books, DC was also successful in moving westerns into the new age. Jonah Hex went 13 years between Weird Western and his own book. And stuff like Kirby's Kamandi... |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Oct 27, 2016 17:45:43 GMT -5
DC was hesitant to try anything new before the 70's and that's why Marvel blew past them in sales. Dc had western comics but that wasn't new. They already had that since the 50's. I don't think DC had any answer for Marvel until the mid 80's.
|
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Oct 27, 2016 17:46:00 GMT -5
When the Comics Code Authority loosened up somewhat in the early 70's Marvel went whole hog with the monsters/horror : Frankenstein, It the Living Colossus, Werewolf By Night, Satana, Tomb of Dracula, The Zombie, Morbius the Living Vampire, the Atlas reprints of Kirby and Ditko, Man-Wolf, Godzilla, the Living Mummy, Son of Satan
DC was the grand old lion, and they were more traditional, with titles more like the EC's, with House of Mystery, House of Secrets, Dark Mansion of Forbidden Desire; less character-centric.
Marvel had the young turks and were smart enough instead of a generic genre story were developing characters not unlike their stable of super-heroes.
The closest thing DC had was Swamp Thing, but Marvel had Man-Thing of course.
With editors like Schwartz and Infantino, I just don't see them as comfortable with this stuff. I would guess they mostly felt it was beneath them i.e. Son of Satan, Werewolf By Night, etc.
BTW, even though Marvel had Conan and Red Sonja, they also dabbled in other similar characters like Kull or Solomon Kane (fantasy, sword & sorcery).
DC had Warlord, which wasn't an exact head-to-head match, but, it sold. At its peak it was DC's top selling title.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Oct 27, 2016 18:00:40 GMT -5
When the Comics Code Authority loosened up somewhat in the early 70's Marvel went whole hog with the monsters/horror : Frankenstein, It the Living Colossus, Werewolf By Night, Satana, Tomb of Dracula, The Zombie, Morbius the Living Vampire, the Atlas reprints of Kirby and Ditko, Man-Wolf, Godzilla, the Living Mummy, Son of Satan DC was the grand old lion, and they were more traditional, with titles more like the EC's, with House of Mystery, House of Secrets, Dark Mansion of Forbidden Desire; less character-centric. Marvel had the young turks and were smart enough instead of a generic genre story were developing characters not unlike their stable of super-heroes. The closest thing DC had was Swamp Thing, but Marvel had Man-Thing of course. With editors like Schwartz and Infantino, I just don't see them as comfortable with this stuff. I would guess they mostly felt it was beneath them i.e. Son of Satan, Werewolf By Night, etc. BTW, even though Marvel had Conan and Red Sonja, they also dabbled in other similar characters like Kull or Solomon Kane (fantasy, sword & sorcery). DC had Warlord, which wasn't an exact head-to-head match, but, it sold. At its peak it was DC's top selling title.
I remember talking to Jim Shooter in the 80's at a Con, and he told me that only New Teen Titans and Warlord were making money . And those two books were only selling what Marvels lower tier books were selling. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Oct 27, 2016 18:08:53 GMT -5
When the Comics Code Authority loosened up somewhat in the early 70's Marvel went whole hog with the monsters/horror : Frankenstein, It the Living Colossus, Werewolf By Night, Satana, Tomb of Dracula, The Zombie, Morbius the Living Vampire, the Atlas reprints of Kirby and Ditko, Man-Wolf, Godzilla, the Living Mummy, Son of Satan DC was the grand old lion, and they were more traditional, with titles more like the EC's, with House of Mystery, House of Secrets, Dark Mansion of Forbidden Desire; less character-centric. Marvel had the young turks and were smart enough instead of a generic genre story were developing characters not unlike their stable of super-heroes. The closest thing DC had was Swamp Thing, but Marvel had Man-Thing of course. With editors like Schwartz and Infantino, I just don't see them as comfortable with this stuff. I would guess they mostly felt it was beneath them i.e. Son of Satan, Werewolf By Night, etc. BTW, even though Marvel had Conan and Red Sonja, they also dabbled in other similar characters like Kull or Solomon Kane (fantasy, sword & sorcery). DC had Warlord, which wasn't an exact head-to-head match, but, it sold. At its peak it was DC's top selling title.
I remember talking to Jim Shooter in the 80's at a Con, and he told me that only New Teen Titans and Warlord were making money . And those two books were only selling what Marvels lower tier books were selling. Because Shooter would have had no reason whatsoever to fudge the numbers at Marvel or DC. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 18:43:41 GMT -5
DC had many attempts at sword and sorcery in the 70s.
Sword of Sorcery featuring Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd & Gray Mouser and gfeaturing early work by Simonson and Chaykin. Lasted 5 issues.
Claw the Unconquered lasted 12 issues and Michelinie tried to channel the Moorcock tinged ideas of Law vs. Chaos and an Eternal warrior, but it didn't sell despite a haitus and revival.
Warlord by Grell, even though this ran for 130 or so issues it too almost failed and was put on hiatus for nearly a year early on until sales numbers came back higher than anticipated.
Stalker by Paul Levitz, Steve Ditko and Wally Wood. Lasted 4 issues.
Starfire-female led sword and science book, again by Michelinie channeling the Moorcock Eternal Champion vibe. Lasted 8 issues.
Kong the Untamed...
Hercules Unchained...
Marvel had Conan and a bunch of other series that either failed to launch or didn't sell...Gullivar of Mars, Thongor, Kull (kept going on hiatus and being revived but never really thrived) Sonja too was really a short lived series, various Solomon Kane attempts in other books, etc. etc.
For the most part, aside from the Conan brand itself, sword and sorcery didn't do well in comics in the 70s. Warlord eventually clicked with DC too. But nothing else in the genre really sold well enough to sustain itself for either publisher, despite repeated attempts to cash in on the popularity of the genre in the book trade.
It wasn't that Marvel had a successful formula and DC didn't, it was that Marvel landed the recognizable brand in sword and sorcery and parlayed it into success, but even Conan started slow-it was bi-monthly at first and there was some question early on whether it would catch on and almost got cancelled before sales numbers came in better than expected (much like happened with Warlord).
Other sword & sorcery books weren't so lucky, even those that had top tier talent on them, for whatever reason. Both publishers went to the well and tried to find sales successes there, but outside of the Conan brand and the Warlord title, nothing else caught on with the comic consumers of the 70s.
On the kung fu front, Marvel also got a popular license (the Sax Rohmer Fu Manchu brand) to back their initial attempt with Shang Chi, while DC tried with a new creation (Richard Dragon and Bronze Tiger his sidekick in the book who went on to more popularity later as part of Suicide Squad under Ostrander) and the Legion brand with Karate Kid, but neither really caught on. Marvel had a minor hit with Iron Fist too, but he couldn't sustain his own title long term and had to be mashed up with Luke Cage to survive as a B list title. Their other martial art attempts never caught on either.
So I don't think either genre (martial arts and sword & sorcery) was setting the sales world on fire in comics in the Bronze Age, but a couple of licenses served as a foundation for the launch of a couple of titles within the genre that proved the exception (success) to the rule (of failure for the genre) in the decade.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Oak Kid on Oct 27, 2016 19:01:08 GMT -5
With all due respect, Marvel had Paul Gulacy on Master of Kung Fu and Wolfman, Colan and Palmer on TOD.
DC countered with bringing back Joe Simon on Prez.
While the DC Mystery titles had occasional stories and covers by Wrightson and Kaluta, the stories and art in these comics were pretty lame, when compared to Tomb of Dracula.
And why didn't DC ever compete with Marvel in the b&w magazine business? I remember two DC titles, In the Days of the Mob and another called Spirit World or something. Never saw them on the stands. I got mine by ordering them from ads in DC oomics.
I thought DC dominated distribution back then. Were they afraid of Jim Warren?
|
|
|
|
Post by Warmonger on Oct 27, 2016 20:58:25 GMT -5
Not a Marvel or DC fanboy...but Marvel was routinely smacking the piss out of DC in the 70's aka my personal golden age.
During the decade, the only DC comics I would follow on a regular basis were Batman, Swamp Thing and Jonah Hex.
With Marvel?
Amazing Spider-Man, Master of Kung Fu, Avengers, Defenders, X-Men, Captain America, Conan the Barbarian, Savage Sword of Conan, Daredevil, Black Panther, Doctor Strange, Man-Thing, Tomb of Dracula, Werewolf by Night, Howard the Duck, Omega, Son of Satan...the list goes on and on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 21:11:47 GMT -5
With all due respect, Marvel had Paul Gulacy on Master of Kung Fu and Wolfman, Colan and Palmer on TOD. DC countered with bringing back Joe Simon on Prez. While the DC Mystery titles had occasional stories and covers by Wrightson and Kaluta, the stories and art in these comics were pretty lame, when compared to Tomb of Dracula. And why didn't DC ever compete with Marvel in the b&w magazine business? I remember two DC titles, In the Days of the Mob and another called Spirit World or something. Never saw them on the stands. I got mine by ordering them from ads in DC oomics. I thought DC dominated distribution back then. Were they afraid of Jim Warren? Marvel was courting an older audience, college age young adults and such from the late 60s onwards, while DC under Infantino and others before Jeanette Khan took over was aiming their fare towards what they considered the staple audience-kids. The b&w magazine format escaped code restrictions and could present material for older audiences, and Marvel embraced that on a lot of levels, DC didn't, so aside from Kirby's experimentation with Spirit World and Mob, Dc didn't pursue the magazine market or format. Instead, they did things like digests a format geared towards younger consumers, and a format Marvel avoided. In the 70s, moreso than any other decade, Marvel and DC were focused on different core audiences for their super-hero fare. DC courted a somewhat older audience with their western, war and mystery lines to an extent, but really kids were still their core demographic. When Khan took over, she started implementing changes to broaden the core demographic which further took root when she hired Dick Giordano and culminated with the DC Renaissance of the early-mid 80s which saw books like Dark Knight and Watchmen start to break down some of the stereotypes about comic audiences, but in the 70s, that was not the case. DC and Marvel were trying to sell to different demographics and it showed in SOME of the content, not all. I don't think Warren impacted DC in the slightest except when he tried to poach talent from their mystery lines for his books. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Oct 27, 2016 21:26:22 GMT -5
Marvel's black & white magazines can hardly be called a sales success. Savage Sword of Conan was the only one that ran for a long time. Of the rest, Deadly Hands of Kung Fu went 33 issues and Rampaging Hulk went 27. Hardly stellar numbers.
|
|
