Gene Colan on Jim Shooter.

“Jim Shooter was the worst,” Gene deviates, bringing up Marvel’s former Editor-in-Chief. "I knew the trouble was heading my way with Shooter.”

“He overcorrected every single line I drew on every single panel,” Gene elaborates. “It was not uncommon for him to return every story submitted with corrections on each panel. What made it worse, his comments and critiques were incomprehensible. My last job for him before I quit was 32 pages long. He sent back the entire job corrections on every page. I sent back the work exactly as is with no corrections, only told him ‘I've done all the corrections Jim! The work is in the mail’. When he got the package, he told me ‘That's More Like it’. That's when I proved to myself he was about tyranny just for the sake of it. He destroyed a lot of lives of talented up and coming artists at the time. But not me!”

Then, Gene pauses and asks how Shooter’s doing. When Shooter’s latest project, the new Gold Key line of superheroes for Dark Horse, comes up, Gene graciously adds:

“I’m glad to hear that he at least has work. It’s a terrible thing not to have when you’re trying to make a living.”

www.nycgraphicnovelists.com/2010/05/gene-colan-on-vampires-shadows-and.html

It's a given that there were people that dislikes him. How about most of the fans? Most of the fans liked him and he has been nothing but polite to them. For every Meonch and David there are Sterns and Laphams that found him loyal.

As I said earlier, anecdotal evidence from third parties none of us are personally that well acquainted with. I prefer to judge based on firsthand knowledge, and my only firsthand knowledge of Shooter is that he was EIC when a lot of material I liked was being created.

For those who haven't read the old thread about this same topic, it's helpful to have the link on hand to see those opinions, as well as the embedded videos.

I'll just say this: even if Jim Shooter was the nicest guy in the world and everybody said so, I still wouldn't think much of his writing. His first stint on the Avengers is OK but far from spectacular, to my taste. I quit reading the series after the Korvac saga so I wasn't around for his second Avengers run, but everything I've heard about it since plus the 2 or 3 stories I've read as back issues has left me with the impression that it is pretty bad. In hindsight, even the first run was memorable mostly for George Perez's art.

I think he was a by the numbers guy in everything, which is what made him a decent administrator as far as getting the books out on time, but also made him a pedestrian writer and an editor who was unable to appreciate someone like Gene Colan, whose style sometimes broke the rules. I used to say he would have been better off staying at DC, but can you imagine him working with Alan Moore in the 80s? I can see him now, sending back the latest Watchmen script marked over with "corrections" on every page. "Just follow my directions, Moore, you'll get the hang of it eventually!"

Was it Jim Shooter that wrote the famous story in a Rampaging Hulk magazine of Bruce Banner getting nearly raped by men in a YMCA?

geeksout.org/blogs/atabak426/not-so-great-moments-queer-related-comics-bruce-banner-visits-ymca
 
Was it Jim Shooter that rewrote David Michelenie's story for Avenger's #200 so that Ms Marvel was raped and then gives birth to the rapist. And the Avengers witness the whole thing and have no problems with it


www.geekinsider.com/on-the-rape-of-ms-marvel/

I'm not sure if Shooter is the author behind the Legion story titled The Super-Moby Dick From Space

Nope, badwolf, I hate the Korvac Saga too (though I liked much of what led up to it and most of Shooter's second run).

Cei-U!
Of course, I hate cosmic storylines in general!