|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jul 13, 2024 7:11:20 GMT -5
Since there's no proof of any script, I believe Mark Evanier summed it up best: "As for who plotted the monster stories scripted by Larry Lieber, that’s one of those cases where Stan says one thing and Jack said another. Apparently, Jack would give Stan a lot of plot ideas and then Stan would select what he liked from the verbal pile. Based on talking with Stan, Jack, Larry, Don Heck, Sol Brodsky and Don Rico, I would say that Jack plotted some, Stan plotted some and a lot were Stan polishing a Jack idea. Then the whole thing was handed to Larry, who would write a script. And then Jack would fiddle a lot with the scripts.” I really like this Evanier quote. It supports the idea (that I agree with) that there were a lot of ways to get these stories. And that one person’s memory about one particular way of doing it isn’t some kind of monolithic statement about how it was done the same way every single time. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jul 13, 2024 7:30:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jul 13, 2024 7:42:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Jul 13, 2024 8:04:31 GMT -5
It's a pic from Facebook, so don't know if it will show. Kirby's pencils lettering under the word balloons. From Amazing Adventures.  Thank you for sharing the image. That's a little hard for me to read, but it doesn't appeared that the lettered dialogue matches the penciled dialogue. I'm only speculating here, but since Kirby was known to pencil in the word balloons while drawing the panels could it be suggest dialogue or a lose version of what was in the script? It was suggested dialog by Kirby. Kirby would not have penciled in the words from an already written script. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Jul 13, 2024 8:16:11 GMT -5
Thanks, there is some very interesting info there. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Jul 13, 2024 8:24:07 GMT -5
I am looking for the articles I have seen about Stan using Ghost writers in the 50s. Might be where that "pile of scripts" Leiber talked about came from.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Jul 13, 2024 8:26:59 GMT -5
The "Marvel Method" dates at least to the early '40s. When Toni Blum was working for the Eisner-Iger shop producing comics for Fiction House, Quality, and Fox, she wrote detailed plot outlines that the assigned artist then broke down into pages and panels. The pencilled pages were then returned to Blum, who added captions and dialogue. When Abner Sundell took over the editor's chair at Fox in mid-'41, he had all the books done that way (much to the dissatisfaction of Bob Kanigher, who was still bitching about it forty years later). So Stan Lee did not invent the Marvel Method. He just found it useful.
Cei-U!
I summon the inconvenient facts!
|
|
|
|
Post by commond on Jul 13, 2024 8:41:19 GMT -5
Thank you for sharing the image. That's a little hard for me to read, but it doesn't appeared that the lettered dialogue matches the penciled dialogue. I'm only speculating here, but since Kirby was known to pencil in the word balloons while drawing the panels could it be suggest dialogue or a lose version of what was in the script? It was suggested dialog by Kirby. Kirby would not have penciled in the words from an already written script. Okay, but if Kirby's suggested dialogue wasn't used then that means it was scripted by someone else, so we're back to square one. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jul 13, 2024 8:50:07 GMT -5
It was suggested dialog by Kirby. Kirby would not have penciled in the words from an already written script. Okay, but if Kirby's suggested dialogue wasn't used then that means it was scripted by someone else, so we're back to square one. Not really. It’s pretty good evidence that Kirby wasn’t working from a script. |
|
|
|
Post by commond on Jul 13, 2024 8:56:37 GMT -5
Okay, but if Kirby's suggested dialogue wasn't used then that means it was scripted by someone else, so we're back to square one. Not really. It’s pretty good evidence that Kirby wasn’t working from a script. Case closed then. Jack Kirby never worked from a script. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 13, 2024 9:13:09 GMT -5
It's a pic from Facebook, so don't know if it will show. Kirby's pencils lettering under the word balloons. From Amazing Adventures. Thank you for sharing the image. That's a little hard for me to read, but it doesn't appeared that the lettered dialogue matches the penciled dialogue. I'm only speculating here, but since Kirby was known to pencil in the word balloons while drawing the panels could it be suggest dialogue or a lose version of what was in the script? Yeah, I don't see anything in the penciled dialogue (though it's very hard to read it clearly) that corresponds with what was eventually written in the comic. Good job too, because Kirby's dialogue without the likes of Stan Lee was dire.   (I'm just trolling...) |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Jul 13, 2024 9:15:25 GMT -5
It was suggested dialog by Kirby. Kirby would not have penciled in the words from an already written script. Okay, but if Kirby's suggested dialogue wasn't used then that means it was scripted by someone else, so we're back to square one. I thought the question is, "was Kirby working from an already finished script, which means all the story and dialog is written before the artists gets them. Like a movie script. Or did Kirby do the story and then someone wrote the dialog afterwards. This panel suggests that Kirby was doing the story, with dialog suggestions, and the final words were written by someone else later.
It's not about whose the final word balloons were. But here we are talking about these early monster books, and whether their were completed scripts given to Kirby. I am sure there were at times, but I am equally sure many of the stories were done by him and given in to be worded. And we are just talking about the pre FF work, if I am not mistaken.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 13, 2024 9:22:36 GMT -5
Funny how it is assumed there are no facts (nevermind the numerous quotes posted) or someone is not telling the truth (again, nevermind the numerous quotes posted) if the information does not end with "Kirby and/or Ditko is God". Absolutely. I've said it before in this thread, I know, but given the discussions filling the last 3 or 4 pages, I think it really does bear repeating: If your default position is to treat everything Stan Lee said as a suspect or an outright lie and everything the artists said as truth, then that's not a neutral position from which to posit an alternate, revisionist theory from. It's just classic confirmation bias. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jul 13, 2024 9:28:14 GMT -5
Funny how it is assumed there are no facts (nevermind the numerous quotes posted) or someone is not telling the truth (again, nevermind the numerous quotes posted) if the information does not end with "Kirby and/or Ditko is God". Absolutely. I've said it before in this thread, I know, but given the discussions filling the last 3 or 4 pages, I think it really does bear repeating: If your default position is to treat everything Stan Lee said as a suspect or an outright lie and everything the artists said as truth, then that's not a neutral position from which to posit an alternate, revisionist theory from. It's just classic confirmation bias.And the opposite is true also. If you accept everything that Stan Lee said and reject anything that contradicts that, then you are also experiencing confirmation bias. Thank you. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Jul 13, 2024 9:28:23 GMT -5
So your position is that we need to treat what Stan wrote in Origins of Marvel Comics as true unless we can prove otherwise? Because it seems when we do, we are "Stan bashing".
How much of Stan's untruths are we allowed to talk about?
|
|
(I'm just trolling...)