|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 31, 2017 12:51:12 GMT -5
It's not in great condition, but I can't say I really care. It's my only silver age book, I'd love to grab more. Any idea how long his run was? Hi Snikts and Stones , seeing your subsequent posts, it occurs to me I may have misunderstood your original question. I took " his run" here to mean John Buscema's run on the book, but perhaps your "his" referred to Namor himself? If so, as I mentioned, Buscema did the first 8 issues, but the series itself lasted a lot longer (as Hoosier X noted)-- 72 issues. Sorry for the confusion. The post-John issues include art by Colan, Marie Severin, Sal and others, including --as Hoosier also mentioned--Subby's creator, the great Bill Everett. Yep I was referring to Buscema's run, but the others you mentioned Colan especially are on my wish list! Thank you for your help. I hope I haven't derailed the thread too badly...
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 31, 2017 0:54:24 GMT -5
Then I have my mission! He (Namor) has always been a favorite of mine since I was a little kid, the ankle wings, flight, Hulk level strength, etc. When I finish the Avengers #98 to #120 run (which I'm reading online) I'll be looking at another Silver Age and/or Bronze Age Marvel run that I've never read. I was considering Iron Man (from #1 to #60) and Thor (#141 to #150, and then from around #180 to #240), but I'm starting to favor Sub-Mariner. I've read scattered issues of his 1960s and 1970s adventures but I don't think there are very many places where I have read more than three or four consecutive issues. I'd be starting with Tales to Astonish #70, reading the one story in Iron Man and Sub-Mariner #1 and then going through Namor's own series to #72. (And I'd include the first few issues of Super-Villain Team-Up because I didn't start reading it regularly until #5.) The Bill Everett art in the early 1970s is amazing! Outstanding! I'm learning that his initial appearances post '62 revival are scattered as I believe there were publication issues that were in tact unti '68. The super villain team ups sound great. Let me know what you end up getting, IMPERIOUS REX!
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 30, 2017 22:20:43 GMT -5
It's not in great condition, but I can't say I really care. It's my only silver age book, I'd love to grab more. Any idea how long his run was? Buscema penciled the first several issues of Subby's 1968 comic, specifically #1 through #8. The Tiger Shark issue you have is certainly a great issue with a fantastic cover, one of my all-time favorite covers. In addition to the #5 already mentioned, I'll add #8 to the list: Namor vs. the Thing (plus a surprise from Namor's past). But really, the art in any and all of these issues is superlative. Then I have my mission! He (Namor) has always been a favorite of mine since I was a little kid, the ankle wings, flight, Hulk level strength, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 30, 2017 21:49:44 GMT -5
I recently picked up Sub-Mariner #5, Tiger Shark's debut. It's my oldest comic to date, and I loved just holding it. John Buscema drew a fantastic Prince Namor didn't he? I'll say! IMO that series contains some of Buscema's best art. Giacoia's and Adkins's inks are a great complement. It's not in great condition, but I can't say I really care. It's my only silver age book, I'd love to grab more. Any idea how long his run was?
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 29, 2017 20:01:42 GMT -5
I recently picked up Sub-Mariner #5, Tiger Shark's debut. It's my oldest comic to date, and I loved just holding it. John Buscema drew a fantastic Prince Namor didn't he? Agree! I do not own a single Sub-Mariner issue from that series ( I don't think anyways...wait...maybe one of the issues where Spidey makes an appearance) but have always loved that cover. If I were to grab one, #5 would be the one, followed by its sequel
That's a beautiful cover. I'm trying to map out an attack to get as many Sub-Mariners as possible without breaking the bank. I don't give a fig about condition really.
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 27, 2017 18:24:06 GMT -5
I recently picked up Sub-Mariner #5, Tiger Shark's debut. It's my oldest comic to date, and I loved just holding it. John Buscema drew a fantastic Prince Namor didn't he?
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 24, 2017 0:38:03 GMT -5
Done and done...
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 20, 2017 11:41:46 GMT -5
I think that was one of the reasons that I preferred Who's Who to the Marvel Handbook. On the surface it seemed a bit more fluffy. But it didn't have the eye-rolling comic book "science" that was essentially magic anyway. A lot of which was later ignored, anyway. Supposedly, Wolverine had some kind of sterile mesh which covered the holes in his hands when his claws weren't extended...until a later writer just said "nope, the holes just instantly heal over until he opens them up again". yep, there was also blood when he popped (shlikted) the bone claws for a while too. Could've been a side effect of his taxed to the limit healing factor...
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 19, 2017 9:59:54 GMT -5
The attempts at scientific explanations for super powers used to crack me up. As I recall, the Hulk supposedly drew mass from another dimension. Um, okay. Other dimensions seemed to be the catch-all when they couldn't come up with some other jibberish. They should have just put, "'Cause, comics!" Cyclops' eyes were actually extra dimensional portals or something like that for a while too I believe?
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 18, 2017 19:39:36 GMT -5
It was (is) such a great resource, even with all the changes that have happened, the Marvel depicted in those volumes were MY Marvel! I agree completely! I LOVED the OHbOTMU, and "my" Marvel largely ceased to exist no too terribly long after these came out, so they do capture "my" Marvel pretty well. And yes, I enjoyed DC's Who's Who a lot too, but I was a sucker for the strength levels depicted in Marvel's version, even if it hamstrung the creators a bit and probably got contradicted in the actual comics now and then. I loved the strength levels as well. The series 3 trading did a good job of that too I thought, "enhanced" strength being in in the 2 ton range (non furry beast, and sabretooth I believe fell into this) Thinderbird 2/Warpath was much weaker but it makes sense he'd get stronger as he got older.
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 17, 2017 18:56:45 GMT -5
I bought the originals back in the day...both Marvel Handbook and Who's Who. But I was also the kid who would read the encyclopedia. Now with the interweb they are pretty much obsolete. Like encyclopedias. Hahaha, I was in the same boat. Any reference material I inhaled.
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 17, 2017 16:05:58 GMT -5
I had the complete set and I've foolishly sold them to guy who wanted it so badly and I wished I hadn't done it. It was an invaluable information of all Marvel Characters at that point of time. It was (is) such a great resource, even with all the changes that have happened, the Marvel depicted in those volumes were MY Marvel!
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 17, 2017 12:57:46 GMT -5
I'm currently (re)collecting the OHBotMU in TPB form and had a question. I was under the impression that the trades were in fact collected reprints of the original from '82-'83? I see that Angel, Jean and Cyke are in their X-Factor togs, Hank isn't furry, etc. so I think I'm missing something. Is volume 1 collected? What's the deluxe edition? I'm guessing the "update" edition was for characters that changed, John Walker becoming USAgent etc. I'm asking here because I don't trust Wiki's and would rather confer with the experts. If you are talking the multi-volume color tpb reprint, then, yes, that was taken from the update, not the original series. There is an Essential Official handbook of the Marvel Universe, from the black & white Essential line. That reprints the original entries, in black & white. It was then followed by the same, with the updated version. Quite frankly, I always preferred the original. The bulk of the artwork was done on a larger scale and it felt a bit livelier. It left a ton of stuff out, though. I still prefer the original Who's Who of the DC Universe to OHotMU. It was more engaging and wider reaching. Also, when both started a loose-leaf format, the Marvel one was dull as dishwater, with the same standard figure poses, like a book of police mugshots, while DC used it to create full pin-ups, with the info on the back. Fairly reflective of the state of the two companies, editorially, at the time. That's what I thought, I have the 10 volume color, but looks like different art. it's not a big deal I was curious. I agree completely with your opinion of the loose leaf edition from I think the early 90's? Thanks for the input!
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 17, 2017 12:17:13 GMT -5
That was such a great series. For me, it was the best thing coming out of Marvel in the 1980s by far (even more than the first Hobgoblin arc in Amazing Spider-Man). As the company's character roster and stories grew to crazy levels, such a resource was just what was needed by fans. I devoured my friends copies, and loved seeing the characters as they were depicted just a handful of years before I met them, a jug eared, skinny Sam Guthrie, Hobgoblin Identity: unknown, etc. I really think one of Shooters better ideas (if it was indeed his) was to sic Gruenwald on this. I noticed that the pinup was in a lot of cases drawn by their current or better known artist.
|
|
|
Post by Snikts and Stones on May 17, 2017 11:03:11 GMT -5
I confess that anything I like from the 80's wasn't read in "real time" as I came on board in the early 90's. But through collections and back issue bin diving Stern on ASM, The Hobgoblin saga was a clinic on the slow burn, and UXM mutant massacre onward hold a place for me as it was a a major turning point for the team, the status quo being shaken up for years afterwards.
|
|