shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 21,807
|
Post by shaxper on Aug 22, 2023 9:01:56 GMT -5
I hadn't heard that but it certainly fits his businessmen side, my feeling on his passion for the project stems from talking to him once at a con right before the Dark Horse launch and he said it was like getting the band back together again and reuniting with old friends. He was really animated about the whole project and it was cool to see. It could certainly be both things, a mercenary business move but one that grew into actually caring about the properties afterwards. That's an awesome way to put it. I've no doubt Shooter had an attachment to these characters and properties once he'd built an empire with them. And it's also totally possible he enjoyed them in his youth, though his interviews suggest that he lost interest in everything but Marvel in his adolescence. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 21,807
|
Post by shaxper on Aug 22, 2023 9:02:58 GMT -5
And it's downloadable too! "Get your hands off my comic books!" love that line. Oh my god! My wife and I randomly walk into rooms shouting that line now. That song is infectious! |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 22, 2023 9:11:59 GMT -5
And it's downloadable too! "Get your hands off my comic books!" love that line. Oh my god! My wife and I randomly walk into rooms shouting that line now. That song is infectious! It really is, it's going to be something I'm humming for sure. Another thing that's stuck in my head though is your theory on the big bang with every hero getting a bold new start...I'm going to be honest, I'd have actually read that and probably enjoyed it. And what's interesting is that DC very nearly did the same thing just a few years ago with Dan Diddio's proposed 5G event where the universe would have aged up as if it had been operating in real time and included new heroes taking up the old mantles but it was jettisoned when he was ousted. A lot of feathers were ruffled by it but it sounded fun to me, especially as Icctrombone said about the Marvel proposal, you just knew that kind of stunt wouldn't have lasted long term, so it's not as if Bruce Wayne wouldn't have been back to being Batman eventually. So if for instance you didn't like Jace Fox as Batman, no worries he'll give the cowl back sooner rather than latter and until then it's a fun ride. It's fun how these kinds of ideas continue to come up. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 21,807
|
Post by shaxper on Aug 22, 2023 9:23:39 GMT -5
as Icctrombone said about the Marvel proposal, you just knew that kind of stunt wouldn't have lasted long term, so it's not as if Bruce Wayne wouldn't have been back to being Batman eventually. Yeah, I still struggle with the idea that Jean Grey came back to life under Shooter's watch. One thing I give credit to late Valiant for is that they felt strongly about making changes last. They scattered the original Harbinger team at their height and refused to bring them back, kept the original Rai dead, and even blew up Magnus Robot Fighter's Earth. Shooter was so invested in creating change as a way to garner interest, but that's a cheap thing to do if that change is never going to last. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 22, 2023 9:40:08 GMT -5
as Icctrombone said about the Marvel proposal, you just knew that kind of stunt wouldn't have lasted long term, so it's not as if Bruce Wayne wouldn't have been back to being Batman eventually. Yeah, I still struggle with the idea that Jean Grey came back to life under Shooter's watch. One thing I give credit to late Valiant for is that they felt strongly about making changes last. They scattered the original Harbinger team at their height and refused to bring them back, kept the original Rai dead, and even blew up Magnus Robot Fighter's Earth. Shooter was so invested in creating change as a way to garner interest, but that's a cheap thing to do if that change is never going to last. For me it really comes down to execution, I don't mind that there's an impermanence to death or a cycle of death and rebirth in my comics so long as it's done well.If you have an interesting story to tell where Bruce Wayne dies, I say,"Bring it on!" but it better be damn good and likewise when you bring him back it better be more than just a fun story. I've never really understood the complaint that those kinds of actions undermine the stakes of the story...mostly because the stakes have never really felt real to me. It doesn't matter how big the Joker's scheme is, or how big an injury get's inflicted on Batman because in the end Batman is always going to win. It's like the old saying, "It's not the destination that's important, it's the journey that matters." so if the build up to the Joker's latest plot is interesting, if the character moments and dialogue hit and the art is good then it doesn't matter that the end was a foregone conclusion and it's the same with the various deaths. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 21,807
|
Post by shaxper on Aug 22, 2023 10:04:26 GMT -5
For me it really comes down to execution, I don't mind that there's an impermanence to death or a cycle of death and rebirth in my comics so long as it's done well.If you have an interesting story to tell where Bruce Wayne dies, I say,"Bring it on!" but it better be damn good and likewise when you bring him back it better be more than just a fun story. Have you ever read Neil Gaiman's "Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader"? Wow. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 22, 2023 10:15:10 GMT -5
For me it really comes down to execution, I don't mind that there's an impermanence to death or a cycle of death and rebirth in my comics so long as it's done well.If you have an interesting story to tell where Bruce Wayne dies, I say,"Bring it on!" but it better be damn good and likewise when you bring him back it better be more than just a fun story. Have you ever read Neil Gaiman's "Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader"? Wow. Definitely one of my favorites, as was "Where Were You on the Night Batman Was Killed?" from Batman #291–294. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 23, 2023 8:14:45 GMT -5
Yeah, I really enjoyed listening to the conversation. My one criticism would probably be the inclusion of that quote from Rick Marschall at the end, simply because I think it says more about him and the type of person he is than about Shooter. This is from Shooters blog: Meanwhile….
As an editor, Marschall was marginal at best. He made a lot of mistakes. The worst was failing to get licensor approval on a movie adaptation—Planet of the Apes, I think, prior to going to press. The licensor rejected the book. We had to scrap 600,000 copies. (for more info, see comment)
A couple of days after that went down, Marschall asked me if he could have the next several days off because relatives of his from Germany were visiting. I turned his request down. One of his books, an important one, another movie adaptation, I think, had to get into and out of the house in the next few days and his presence was required—especially after the last debacle.
So, he called in sick.
Meanwhile, it had come to the attention of President Jim Galton that we’d had to scrap a print run. He ordered me to fire Marschall. I called Marschall and left a message saying he must come in the next day, a Friday. He didn’t. So, I called again, got him and fired him over the phone.
He later got a friend at the New York Times to write a major article for the business section all about how I was driving talent like him away from Marvel. Whatever. Good riddance.
I hired Lynn Graeme to replace him as editor of the magazines. New to comics, but a very smart woman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 23, 2023 12:48:58 GMT -5
Icctrombone and shaxper, I am amazed at the power of recall you guys have when it comes to the ins and outs of the backroom politics involved in the Shooter saga. Not to mention the knowledge you both have of all of these series. Thanks for doing this. Very entertaining and informative. And it's great to hear people disagree and still laugh and remain friends. My best memories of Shooter are his breakthrough as a writer for Weisinger and how exciting the Legion became when 13-year-old Shooter came on board, so your back and forth on his tenure at Marvel was fascinating. Not sure if I come down hard on either side, which is a tribute to your ability to sustain a rational discourse. Keep up the good work, guys. PS: A suggestion for the next installment... Tomahawk: Woke history or Euro-patriarchal propaganda?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Aug 23, 2023 15:26:15 GMT -5
Nice job on your first effort, guys! I think you did a great job of presenting a balanced view of one of comics' most controversial figures. There were a handful of factual errors (for example, I'm pretty sure the DC Implosion happened before Shooter went to Marvel) and a few assertions were made I hadn't heard before (as far as I know, Mantlo was the only writer complaining about Colan ignoring the plot, though I remember Shooter saying he felt Gene was getting sloppy in his figure work, citing "orangutan hands and banana feet") but overall it was a fun, informative and thought-provoking maiden voyage. Here's to many more!
Cei-U!
I summon the thumbs up!
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Aug 23, 2023 15:49:34 GMT -5
This doesn't have anything directly to do with Shooter, but when talking about this period in comics (the "bronze age"), I'm struck by a couple of contradictions.
1) While there was an exponential growth in both new talent who wanted to produce (I almost said "create" but that's a different discussion) "better" and "more mature" stories, and an active, growing market base that wouldn't rotate out in 5-7 years, the businesses themselves were barely hanging on financially.
2) Despite owning "IP" (as we call it today) that was known to a huge percentage of the US population, these companies were often run like mom and pop operations and had no clue how to grow their businesses.
To bring it back to Shooter, he probably recognized this, and this might have led to a lot of his actions. On the other hand, DC, under Kahn and Giordano, gained a lot of fan and creator goodwill--if not sales--by almost explicitly being the "anti-Shooter."
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 23, 2023 16:03:23 GMT -5
According to my notes and research, Shooters first day as EIC was January 1978. The implosion that cancelled 40% of DC’s line happened in June 1978. It was important because the new copyright law started on 1-1-78 , although Marvel had knowledge of it in 1976.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 23, 2023 16:09:41 GMT -5
Cei-U!, Icctrombone, and MDG, you amaze me. I can't remember where I was sitting ten minutes ago. By the way, who are you guys?
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Aug 23, 2023 16:12:44 GMT -5
Icctrombone and shaxper , I am amazed at the power of recall you guys have when it comes to the ins and outs of the backroom politics involved in the Shooter saga. Not to mention the knowledge you both have of all of these series. Thanks for doing this. Very entertaining and informative. And it's great to hear people disagree and still laugh and remain friends. My best memories of Shooter are his breakthrough as a writer for Weisinger and how exciting the Legion became when 13-year-old Shooter came on board, so your back and forth on his tenure at Marvel was fascinating. Not sure if I come down hard on either side, which is a tribute to your ability to sustain a rational discourse. Keep up the good work, guys. PS: A suggestion for the next installment... Tomahawk: Woke history or Euro-patriarchal propaganda? I was pretty amazed by the detailed recall too, especially when I saw the bare bones notes that Icctrombone and shaxper were working off of to structure the podcast(which is another fun patreon perk!). Other than those notes what was the process of planning this? I always love the inside baseball of how these kinds of things come to be. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Aug 23, 2023 16:22:04 GMT -5
According to my notes and research, Shooters first day as EIC was January 1978. The implosion that cancelled 40% of DC’s line happened in June 1978. It was important because the new copyright law started on 1-1-78 , although Marvel had knowledge of it in1976. I stand/sit corrected.
Cei-U! Never adverse to admitting it when I'm wrong!
|
|
