|
Post by tingramretro on Mar 26, 2017 8:45:58 GMT -5
The quality of the Marvel books dropped off considerably after Jim Shooter left Marvel. I'd agree with that. It's where it all started to go wrong, and the line has never fully recovered.
|
|
Polar Bear
Full Member
Married, father of six
Posts: 107
|
Post by Polar Bear on Mar 26, 2017 8:46:31 GMT -5
Really? An issue with four co-plotters credited and yet Shooter deserves all the blame? He deserves the ultimate blame. It was he who rejected the original resolution of the plot and other alternatives. And he with Michelenie came up with the worst possible choice. Layton and Perez only contributed incidental story elements, not the main ending. So Shooter was the cause of changing the original ending and aided and finally approved the travesty it became. If you're going to be a heavy-handed EIC then you take the criticisms as well as the accolades No disagreement. But if four male co-workers couldn't see it, is it really that unreasonable to suggest that neither Thor (a conservative to begin with) nor Hawkeye (often boorish) could see it, either? Isn't that a reasonable "in-universe" explanation? Tony had doubts, but accepted the mansplanations of his peer group?
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Mar 26, 2017 9:21:47 GMT -5
Even Back Issue, from Twomorrows, has a transcript of a convention panel, where Sal Buscema unloads on Shooter, face to face. If ever there was a company man, it was Sal and even he was unhappy. From Sal's interview.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,220
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 26, 2017 10:45:03 GMT -5
So, yeah, Marvel's basically had four great EICs: Stan Lee, Roy Thomas, Jim Shooter, & Joe Quesada. That's it. Surprised to see Quesada's name amongst that lot. I tend to think of him as the man who destroyed Spider-Man, but I guess he was also responsible for pulling Marvel back from the brink in the late '90s and early 2000s. Personally, I've always thought Quesada's artwork was painfully ugly and he has an unfortunate and rather vain tendency to draw himself into the comics he works on. Just curious, but why do you rate him so highly?
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 26, 2017 20:09:26 GMT -5
Even Back Issue, from Twomorrows, has a transcript of a convention panel, where Sal Buscema unloads on Shooter, face to face. If ever there was a company man, it was Sal and even he was unhappy. From Sal's interview. I see, I see. So Sal Buscema was another one of those notoriously headstrong people that no one in the world would have been able to work with. Yes, it's all becoming clear to me now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2017 18:27:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 5, 2017 18:49:18 GMT -5
I'd love to read it but 40 bucks is steep...
|
|
|
Post by sabongero on Jun 5, 2017 20:36:01 GMT -5
This is the Marvel Bulletin in the comic books dated July 1987.
|
|
|
Post by sabongero on Jun 5, 2017 20:36:37 GMT -5
This is the Marvel Bulletin in the comic books dated August 1987.
|
|
|
Post by sabongero on Jun 5, 2017 20:37:15 GMT -5
And this is the one from November 1987... the separation:
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 6, 2017 4:49:17 GMT -5
And this is the one from November 1987... the separation: They were pretty fair about listing his accomplishments.
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Aug 27, 2018 19:02:38 GMT -5
This is the Marvel Bulletin in the comic books dated August 1987. This may refer not just to how tall Jim Shooter is, but specifically to a portrait that Bill Sienkiewicz did and then gave to him:
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Aug 30, 2018 13:20:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Aug 30, 2018 13:34:33 GMT -5
I'm fairly sure the "born again" writer is Tony Isabella. He used to talk about the Ghost Rider/Jesus incident in his column.
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Aug 30, 2018 14:21:46 GMT -5
I'm fairly sure the "born again" writer is Tony Isabella. He used to talk about the Ghost Rider/Jesus incident in his column. Yes; I edited my post to comment on that bit. Shooter elaborates on some of this:
|
|