Martinex1: You know the drill, it is Tuesday and therefore it is Follow The Leader time!
We will take any topic suggested and throw it out to the masses for consideration and conversation. The challenge is to keep the conversation rolling and going, so keep in mind that sidebars, tangents, and non sequiturs are welcome!
We will take any topic suggested and throw it out to the masses for consideration and conversation. The challenge is to keep the conversation rolling and going, so keep in mind that sidebars, tangents, and non sequiturs are welcome!
Here are the general rules:
1) Whoever gets here first (or even second) post a topic starter in the comments that others can jump on and discuss for the day; supply as little or as much detail as necessary to get the ball rolling.
3) The range of possible subjects is broad - comics, movies, music, television, fiction, hobbies, queries, etc. Try to have the topic touch some aspect of Bronze Age nostalgia if possible.
4) Keep it clean and family friendly.
5) All others...follow the Leader! Your job is to keep the conversation rolling. (As I said - follow the topic wherever it takes you; a conversation started about comics may lead to comments on jazz for all we know)!
Note: There is one caveat... if Redartz or I notice that the suggested topic is something we already have in the pipeline, we will let you know and inform you of the projected date for that subject for discussion. That is just so we don't double up. Hey - great minds think alike, right?
We will be back later with our own comments on the topic!
So get started, play nice, and keep the conversation going. Cheers!
31 comments:
I can't believe I'm first?! First, thank you to all from yesterday's blog advising how to get my mitts (economically!) on JB's FF run! You dudes rock! Second if we need an idea for today, my question could be "If you could have altered a comic universe or comic company back then (any universe, any company ) assuming you have advanced knowledge so you stopped something before it started, what would you have done?" For my part I would never have let Conway kill Gwen Stacey nor hired Conway if I was Marvel. Thanks again gents for the advice!!!
From an emotional standpoint, Charlie-- and especially remembering how I felt at the time-- I get why you feel that way about that particular event. . . but, I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on it. It was tough, it was sort-of unprecedented (I'm trying to remember if Iris West/Allan had died before this), but it was a level of story-telling with consequence that we had seen very little of, and it added a level of depth and emotionality to the book, and by extension into comics, that we hadn't come across before. Prof X's death a few years before had some similar feeling-- but nobody at all was reading the book at that point, and I swear it just went by unnoticed until he was resurrected. I think more of the problem with Gwen's death was that the aftermath wasn't handled well by management, what with Stan insisting she somehow be brought back and all that. And THAT set just an awful precedent that snowballed as the years rolled by, where "Death Sells", and it doesn't matter anyhow, because no death is irreversible, so. . . life in comics became faaaaar too cheap. But that event itself? Tough--- but ultimately great, IMHO.
And with that very idea in mind, my own personal go-back would then be to go back and stop Shooter & Marvel from resurrecting Jean Grey in order to cash in on the on-going X-Men juggernaut (ha!), and launch X-FACTOR with the entire "original" team of X-sters. That was a very early tipping-point for me, even though I remained an avidly-buying fan for decades afterward. But that was the moment when CLEARLY whatever had happened before simply didn't matter if there was a dollar to be made. Cultivating a deep-seated sense of cynicism in your fan-base is a sure-fire way to insure that that fan-base will not be around for the long, long haul. . .
HB
I agree with HB on Gwen. both on the initial decision and on the resulting retcons and rebirths.
My own change to a Marvel storyline in the late Bronze Age would be to not have Hank Pym hit Jan. I really liked the Pym character but I find that particular act irredeemable. Oh, they've tried over the years but I don't think any of it has stuck. Now, don't get me wrong I was fine with Hank becoming a villain and I think it would have been great if they pushed him to the max limit and created a nemesis as big as Doom or the Green Gonlin. But they just went half way and he seemed like a low level incompetent thug who was a misogynist wife-beater on top of it. Now I don't think he is a hero at all and hasn't been written well since. Looking back I think I would have made him a super-scientific villain with inside knowledge of the Avengers and the ability to spy on them continuously with his shrinking powers. He could have been a great leader of a Masters of Evil team. Make his YJ costume entirely black and have him carry out strategic and aggressive missions in small form. Couple that with his duality of insecurity and strange confidence that he is the smartest in the room. I think Marvel played the middle ground with YJ too much - hero or villain? But either way the slap was too much.
I also agree with HB, on both points; the first time I read the Death of Gwen story was in the reprints in Marvel Tales, and even though I didn't have the attachment to the character that older fans may have had, the story still had resonance for me.
And I definitely with the idea of turning back the decision to bring back Jean Grey - such a bad, bad idea. In fact, another thing I would also change in the X-men is Scott's marriage to Jean-clone Madelyne Pryor. That story-line in which she is introduced isn't bad, but I would fix it by having her similarity to Jean be due solely to Mastermind's psychic illusion (which was sort of suggested in the comics at the time anyway, as it seemed like Scott, and Lilandra for some reason, were the only ones who thought she looked like Jean). Then, once the spell was broken, Scott and Madelyne would realize that they weren't really in love but rather had been telepathically manipulated by Mastermind, and agree to part ways amicably. And then Scott would, quite sensibly, go to Florida and settle down with that fishing boat skipper who was totally into him anyway...
As for X-factor, well, Claremont claimed that at the time he suggested they use Jean's sister Sarah instead - she could have had some latent mutant power that only emerged later in life.
Martinex, interesting idea about Pym going complete villain - don't know if I would have been too fond of that, though, as I really kind of like the character. So yeah, I'd prefer turning back the infamous slap, and Hank remaining a good guy...
I would go back and stop them from marrying Peter Parker and Mary Jane. That was a monumental mistake IMO, and it was one that they couldn't undo once they left it for too long. I think it fundamentally changed the entire dynamic of the Peter/Spider-Man character and the book was just never the same (or as much fun to read) after that. There is not one single issue of any Spider-Man book that I would put in my personal Top 100 that was published after he was married.
I think Peter worked best as a loner who was a bit of an outsider, but who still always did the right thing for the greater good. A lot of the fun of Spider-Man was watching him struggle to make decisions about what he should do in any given situation. "Should he miss his final exam to go after the Hobgoblin?" "Should he tell Aunt May that he's Spider-Man?" "Should he sell that photo to the Bugle, even though it makes Spider-Man look bad?", etc.
It was Peter's isolation caused by having a secret identity that he couldn't reveal to anyone that drove a lot of the drama and added a layer of tension to the book. Once MJ revealed that she had "always known he was Spider-Man" (another mistake I would absolutely undo) it took away a lot of that tension and lifted a lot of burden from Peter Parker's mind. And it was even worse once they were married and he had someone he could share the burden with. Some people might say that was a good thing, but you have to realize that a lot of what made Peter/Spider-Man such an interesting and enduring character was his constant struggle with his inner demons of doubt and feelings of insecurity.
I've heard people argue that Peter need to grow and change and the marriage was a natural progression of that. But there is an inherent flaw in that logic. If Peter is supposed to "change and grow" over time, what do you do once he's been married for 25 years in the comics? Doesn't that become just as stagnating as keeping him forever 21 and single? (Keeping him forever 25 and married?) It doesn't make any sense. Marvel definitely was not thinking in the long term when they made that fateful decision. It not only fundamentally changed their best and most iconic character for the worse, it also left him stuck in a permanent state of married limbo.
And once it was left that way for more than 20 years and became the status quo it was too late to try to change it back. When they finally did it, we all know how well that went over with fans. So it would have been much better if the marriage had never happened in the first place. At least that the way I see it.
William I may even take it one step further and say that maybe Marvel should have gone in the other direction and had MJ fall out of love with Peter. I agree that once a super model with a heart of gold could share her life with Peter it took away much of the pathos of the character. And there was always something intrinsically fun about the worried, put-upon, young man who was really quite a bit more free and joyful and relaxed when he put on that mask and fought villains. Once they were married it relieved all of the stress on the one side of the coin. I think I would rather have seen that their relationship ran its course; MJ still cared about Peter but needed more and moved on - once again having the responsibility of Spider-Man get in the way of Parker's happiness. His first love killed - his second love of his life just gone. Maybe even more tragic.
Regarding Jean Grey's return - yes, horrible. I believe the original intention of X-Factor was going to have Jean Grey's sister join the team. I think I would have liked that - to have a new and different character to bounce relationships off of. The team could expect her to act like Jean but a different personality would add different dimensions Plus to undo the death of Phoenix truly undid one of the great comic book tragedies - I still look at her return almost like a What If. And on top of it, the return was handled so nonchalantly and without much complexity.
Just a quick chime-in..,
1) The Death of Gwen proved critical on many fronts, because it signified that a death in a comic could resonate, it could change the course of comic drama as we knew it, back in a time where it was still considered 'funny books'. As mentioned, nowadays a death doesn't have meaning (perhaps Jason Todd or MarVell came closest..), with the Clone Saga, the 'death of superman', Jean Grey, you name it.
It's become a cheap sales gimmick, but I'm unsure whether the cheapness is driven by it's excessive use to sell comics or us as a society of comic readers.. I suspect the real answer is far more than I can surmise here. Suffice to say (as I've mentioned many times..) the Clone Saga was my death knell for collecting. I understand that Gwen #1 was dead and stayed dead, but the entire idea was patronizing and unnecessary to the devoted readership who felt pain at Peter's loss.
2) I don't believe the wedding was a mistake for Peter and MJ.., they easily could have had problems and divorced, continuing to contribute to Peter's loneliness, angst, etc..
3) As for YJ, who was one of my Silver/Bronze Age favorites, it was meant to be stirring and unnerving. He was seen slapping her in previous issues, but seeing the black eye was indeed a stark game-changer. As with Spidey's Clone Saga, how it was all handled afterwards was the most disappointing, both in writing and terrible art even going into Pym's suicide attempt in WCA.
And 4), my personal choice for 'what-I'd-like-undone' was the Vish/Wanda marriage. It essentially dulled both character's growth potential for several years. I missed the brooding Barry Smith-Vision from the early issues. My runner-up is the senseless shooting of Babs in 'Killing Joke'. Great drama for the story, but did her spinal column really have to be severed..?
Great question.
Not sure by what mechanism, but if I had the opportunity I would have prevented Ronald Perelman from purchasing Marvel Comics in 1989.
Not only did this moment very nearly mark the beginning of the end for the entire comic industry, it also started an era wholly devoid of creativity at Marvel.
DC comics from this 7-8 year span hold up pretty well, but Marvel comics? *shudder*
I could go either way on the Peter/MJ marriage thing (I didn't think it was a bad idea at the time), but I don't like the idea of them not being a couple or at least almost a couple. Maybe it just reflects when I came into comics reading, but to me MJ was always the Lois to Peter's Clark/Superman. The thing I would change, because I'm not really sure when it happened (as by the early '80s I kind of became and on-and-off reader of Spidey comis), is MJ suddenly being a super-model and apparently successful actress, landing roles in Broadway shows and whatnot. My impression was that she was always a struggling actress and model (i.e. taking roles in TV commercials and off-broadway productions and modelling for department store catalogues to make ends meet). If a characterization like that had been maintained, it would have dovetailed much more nicely with Peter's constant existential woes, and served as grist for better stories I think.
Agree with David about Wanda and Vizh as well, for the exact same reason: both characters really became less interesting as a result. Not having it happen would then prevent Byrne's heavy-handed, way-over-the-top "solution" to the problem.
Great point, Colin. I wasn't aware of the business end of things at that juncture (was serving in Germany on active duty at the time..), but other than trying out some FF for a dozen or so issues, I wholly stayed away from Marvel.
To be fair, DC didn't get much attention either.
Oh man Colin-- you totally pre-empted my very next comment--
Oh, that curse'd SOB Perelman. I was gonna bring that up, but then thought, nah, that may be driving the convo a little too deeply into the corporate realm of things. . .
HB
To continue with the story side of things, The Vision taking over the world's computer systems (Avengers #254) was not only ahead of it's time as a concept, but also the end of The Vision as my favorite character.
He became more android-like from that moment on, and however much I tried, it just wasn't possible to see him as the tragi-hero any more.
david_b and HB - yes, to be honest I was pretty much out of the game by 1989 too. It was only later, when rediscovering comics, that I went back to see what I missed in the 90s, and had that 'wha-the?!?' moment.
Hmm-- from a more macro perspective, though ('cause this bunch could happily and entertainingly go on for days about specific shark-jumps for so many titles- Ha! Guilty!). . . what if someone had managed to talk Jim Shooter out of expending so much time, energy, effort, talent, and resources on his ill-fated NEW UNIVERSE-? That stable of titles was just so terribly uneven from Day One, and smacked of being forced down fans' throats-- intent on convincing them (us) that bad, rushed, poorly-conceived material was actually GOOD material. I was such an utter zuvembie that I kept buying up nearly every title every month, until I realized that I wasn't even getting around to reading several of them at all (Merc, Nightmask, Kickers Inc. . . ). I can't imagine any analysis of that venture that paints it as having been a benefit to Marvel in any way. Even at the time it seemed like a rather naked grab for sales by offering a product that there wasn't a particular demand for. . .
HB
Man... this is some deep thinking going on! I I think I would have kept the target audience at 10-12 year olds and this Gwen's death, Yellow Jacket wife beater, FF divorce papers, etc. might have been off limits (not sure about alcoholic Iron man). I like Colin's thoughts on Perlman! Thinking along the corporate changes, I have to ask myself why Marvel entrusted the family jewels to a 20-year-old Conway??? A 14 year old Shooter at DC with tight editorial controls worked but free reign with comics' most iconic characters? Where was the oversight? That being said, what would Shooter have done at 14 with no oversight??? Sorry if I pound on Conway but he drove me away from comics at the age of 12-13 all by himself.
HB were you one of the millions who would also buy multiple copies and covers as investments? I actually dig that from s macro perspective because it brought out new companies and offerings. Secretly since 1970s Atlas, I was longing for D.C. and Marvel to be seriously challenged though I don't know if that pressure yielded anything "great " in the last 25 years.
I'm in agreement with Colin Bray, though I'd take it even further and stop all the big corporate takeovers/mergers/whatever in the late 80s-early 90s. Those led to the comics being driven by "let's make as much money as we can in the short term and to hell with the consequences" thinking, which led to idiotic storylines (Clone Saga), the rise of questionable talent (Liefeld and his ilk), and the proliferation of all the gimmicky covers and such. Ultimately, all that led to the crash of the industry in the mid-90s and the deaths of many local comics stores.
So yeah, if all the corporate shenanigans hadn't happened, things might've turned out a lot differently, in my opinion.
Great discussion today!
Charlie- I honor your thoughts, but will amicably disagree on Conway and Marvel's target audience. The Gwen death and FF marriage trouble hit me deeply as a young reader. But I'd seen such drama before, with the death of Captain Stacy. It gave Marvel and it's characters a much greater depth and impact than anything I had read from DC. DC definitely aimed at younger readers, but it seemed Marvel ( even in the Silver Age) aimed higher; even at college age. This was one big reason I preferred Marvel to DC. This was a strength Marvel lost later, when the above mentioned retcons and rebirths robbed the books of their dramatic weight.
On Peter and MJ, I liked the marriage, despised the offhand dismissal by Quesasa and all. A better way to separate them could have been done. I thought Mary Jane as a character really took off with Gerry Conway's writing after Gwen's death.
My go-back: eliminate the changeover from newsprint to slick paper and computer printing. There are still a few books today on lighter stock, and it looks fine. It would have helped keep the price down for comics, and perhaps kept them more available in varied retail locations. (Yes, I know this isn't a story issue; all my choices have been taken)...
HB, I pretty much agree with you about the New Universe; at the time it was launched I had gotten back into comics after a break, and started reading DP7, which was actually pretty good (the first 10 or so issues at least). I also got the first 2-3 issues of Star Brand but didn't stick with it. I think the problem there wasn't so much that it was a bad idea, but that - as far as I recall - pretty much all of the titles were launched simultaneously. They should have started small with one or two titles and then built it up (also, I think another problem was the behind the scenes stuff going on at Marvel, including budget cuts, etc.).
Yes, yes, yes to your statement on the loss of newsprint Redartz!
It was the beginning of the end for high sales, low margin comics. And with that, the end of whole generations growing up with the medium together.
Red, Colin, I agree about the shiny pages or more broadly the cost of buying a comic. The CPI suggests something costing $.20 in 1974 should cost about a $1.25 today. I don't mind $2.00 but $3.99 to $4.99? The cost of admission is too high for a kid!
I will say this about that:
Death in comics were part of the foundation of many of our characters. Batman's parents, Superman's planet and Spider-Man's Uncle Ben. It was Ben's death that gave us the whole "With great power comes great responsibility". That was Spider-Man's whole raison d'etre. As Redartz said, the next big death for Spider-Man was Capt Stacy's. Not only did we learn that he had known that Peter was Spider-Man was his death led directly to the police wanting to question him. That led to the police's constant hounding of Spider-Man. Eventually turning into a "shoot on sight" policy. With Conway, we got the flip side of Peter's life. Spider-Man became a threat to all those around him. And going back to the original issue, there's a definite SNAP when Peter snags her!!! I don't know if it's the Marvel Tales reprint or other collections, but it's there.
Then came the horrible follow ups to try and "fix" that issue, ultimately leading to the 90s where Mary Jane grew up next to the Parkers, she was his high school girlfriend and she knew all along that Peter was Spider-Man.
Now, Hank hitting Jan. Yeah, that was weak. Not out of the ordinary for Marvel. Patsy Walker's husband hit her. And let's not forget, in the whole lead up to the Kree-Skrull War, Hank slugged Jan, knocking her out and sending her back on the big dragon fly to keep her "safe". The latest contemporary incident I can think of is "Streets Of Fire" where dupes Ellen Aim onto the subway, tricking her into thinking they're running away and the knocking her out so she won't follow him when he goes back to fight the bad guy.
(She doesn't like the tough guys.
They think that they can do anything they please.
But they're gonna get a surprise,
When she brings them to their knees.
'Cus she doesn't like the rough guys.
They act like they can have any girl they choose.
They've got tricks, but my baby got wise,
So in case you haven't heard the news,
She doesn't like the tough guys.
She doesn't like the rough guys.
So find some one you own size,
'Cus she's not afraid of you).
PS: PONG, the first robot Olympics.....
Short and sweet for me. One massive retcon, Franklin Richards returns to 616 and erases all the garbage that happened after 1983. Blank slate to start again!
Hmm interesting topic today...
OK here's my 2 cents (TT money!) - I would have kept the death of Gwen Stacy storyline, because to this day it remains one of the best, truly original, most poignant and seminal moments in the life of our favourite wallcrawler.
What I would have changed would be any and all storylines which include clones of one type or the other, e.g. Jean Grey, Gwen Stacy, Ben Reilly. To me the clone formula is overused and a cheap, lazy way of plotting any type of book. I usually shy away from buying any comic which includes a clone storyline.
Oh yeah, Secret Wars would have been scrapped under my tenure too!
- Mike 'attack of the clones' from Trinidad & Tobago.
Good call on Secret Wars, Mike T-n-T.
Same with Timeslide/Crosstime-something/which led smack into HEROES REBORN-- although H.Rbrn was really it's whole own disastrous corporate hail mary-- unrelated to content or continuity, really.
I always loved having Spidey & MJ get married (I'm on-record with a printed letter to that effect, in fact!), but there was just never a way it was going to please the entire readership. Possibly not even half. I wouldn't undo it-- but I would probably have handed Spidey over to a more experienced writer afterward who was enthusiastic and had an honest long-game vision about what kind of stories would work under that new status quo. Would NOT have retconned Mary Jane into having ALWAYS known Pete's secret. That simply didn't work, and was unnecessary. It wasn't giving the character of MJ itself (herself) enough credit. And Aunt May really should have stayed in her final reward. And then of COURSE no BRAND NEW DAY. God. . .
HB
And do I even have to say-- NO Disassembled,NO Civil War, NO decompressed story-telling, NO Secret Invasion, etc, etc.
Hmmm-- and, was the apparent segregation of the X-verse from Greater Marvel done on purpose during the X-glut? Bad idea. . .
HB
Somewhere along the line I would have adopted a Gyrich approach to team construction and not allowed more than 8 characters on a team and tried to limit redundant team books. I know sales come into play but I think X-Men book number 32 ultimately limits creativity and if everybody is an Avenger -what's the point? I would still encourage the Marvel cinematic universe which I think is great but I would try to slow it down a bit. Doing all big "event" movies ultimately will run out of steam and feel bloated like Secret Wars did in comics. I'd try to intersperse smaller (but well written) stories in between. They could do a lot of great films before they need to leap to Infinity War. Bigger is not always better.
I should be clear that I'm talking about Avengers movies. I understand that the Ant-Man, Dr. Strange movies etc are smaller in scope. But I feel the Avengers films are starting to be too grandiose and losing some of the fun of the team living together in the mansion, the bickering, friendships, etc. I'd love to see the Beast and Wonder Man on screen sometime and bring that relationship into film as an example.
Likewise I hope the Spider-Man movie reboot slows it down a little. The last iteration jumped to Gwen Stacy's death way too fast (and if that doesn't bring us full circle today...)
Ended my day with some BitBA -- you have been busy! I love days like this when a post takes off. Maybe I'll start a blog someday...
Anyway, many have said what would have been going through my noggin had I arrived this morning. As far as the marriages go, I'd have paired Crystal with Johnny, and I'd never have done the Johnny/Alicia-Skrull plotline. Poor Ben... Speaking of Ben, his mutation after ish #300 was dumb.
So to the point about Vision and Wanda... what if Mantis and the Swordsman had stuck around, and Hawkeye and Wanda hooked up. Then what?
Doug
I would have Marvel make a conscious choice to let time move forward (at a slowed, but steady pace) and aged characters and introduced legacy characters. I'd have let Peter and MJ get married, but I like the idea of his training his daughter to be Spider-Girl/Woman. I like the idea of Franklin aging, older characters dying off, etc. . . Some characters would remain eternally young and immortal (Hercules, Thor, Silver Surfer), but most wouldn't.
As many here, I would not have brought back Jean Grey, but have Rachel Summers (Jean and Scott's daughter from the dark future) join X-Factor in her place. I like the idea of the Phoenix always returns, but its host may (and often will) die. Also, I like the switch from her being used to hunt mutants in the future to kill them off, while in the present she is hunting them to help them out and prevent her future. This also ties into my legacy desire above.
What I like about young and old characters is the possibility for different books being aimed at different ages. Imagine a version of Power Pack that goes from earnest kids, to angsty-teens to adult heroes. That sounds great to me! But also have some all-ages books.
For DC, no trying to "fix" the multiverse. Just use the conceit you already have to create new worlds to focus on as tastes change - some of which would have no contact with previous worlds, but also allowing for crossovers.
Osvaldo, your vision of the Marvel Universe is the one I want to experience. I love it-- I truly do. It's Prince Valiant, in a way. Or Gasoline Alley.
MUCH more in common with the iteration of the JSA that I refer to frequently.
HB
Post a Comment