JIM SHOOTER IS AN IDIOT!!(or just made poor choices)

[xodacia81]

Jack Kirby is Marvel. Always will be. Jim Shooter is VALIANT. Always will be.

*fixed*

Wonderful fix.

[superggraphics]

Without Martin Goodman putting up the publishing money, there would not have been a 1960's Marvel Comics Group, period. The tired, age old argument about who made the Marvel Comics Group a success should be retired, once and for all. Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Sol Brodsky, Flo Steinberg, Steve Ditko, Artie Simek, and Sam Rosen were amongst the many main players who made the 1960's Marvel Comics Group the success it became, but without Martin's money backing the entire creative force, and his relentless drive to rail against DC's distribution company, which distributed his comics, this would not even be a topic for discussion. I met Stan Lee at a retailers convention in 1993 and asked him whom he felt was responsible for the success of the Marvel Comics Group in the 1960's. He told me, creatively, everyone who worked there at the time was, but without his Uncle Martin's money and backing, it never would have happened.

G

[etos45]

Without Martin Goodman putting up the publishing money, there would not have been a 1960's Marvel Comics Group, period. The tired, age old argument about who made the Marvel Comics Group a success should be retired, once and for all. Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Sol Brodsky, Flo Steinberg, Steve Ditko, Artie Simek, and Sam Rosen were amongst the many main players who made the 1960's Marvel Comics Group the success it became, but without Martin's money backing the entire creative force, and his relentless drive to rail against DC's distribution company, which distributed his comics, this would not even be a topic for discussion. I met Stan Lee at a retailers convention in 1993 and asked him whom he felt was responsible for the success of the Marvel Comics Group in the 1960's. He told me, creatively, everyone who worked there at the time was, but without his Uncle Martin's money and backing, it never would have happened.

G

Just to play devil's advocate...

That might be true, but all the money in the world would not have mattered without the creations that the writers and artists made. If "Uncle Martin" had dumped all his money into this and I was the one running it... there would be no Marvel.

[X-O HoboJoe]

Without Martin Goodman putting up the publishing money, there would not have been a 1960's Marvel Comics Group, period. The tired, age old argument about who made the Marvel Comics Group a success should be retired, once and for all. Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Sol Brodsky, Flo Steinberg, Steve Ditko, Artie Simek, and Sam Rosen were amongst the many main players who made the 1960's Marvel Comics Group the success it became, but without Martin's money backing the entire creative force, and his relentless drive to rail against DC's distribution company, which distributed his comics, this would not even be a topic for discussion. I met Stan Lee at a retailers convention in 1993 and asked him whom he felt was responsible for the success of the Marvel Comics Group in the 1960's. He told me, creatively, everyone who worked there at the time was, but without his Uncle Martin's money and backing, it never would have happened.

G

Just to play devil's advocate...

That might be true, but all the money in the world would not have mattered without the creations that the writers and artists made. If "Uncle Martin" had dumped all his money into this and I was the one running it... there would be no Marvel.

Team effort that went far beyond what the individuals alone could have accomplished.

[superggraphics]

Thanks Stu. That was exactly my point.

G

[OmenSpirits.com]

Without the talent, Timely would have STAYED under & Marvel would have never existed.

Throw money at it all you like, (and Stan wasn't that effective a writer, even compared to his peers & Sol was a miser as a businessman & I'm not talking out my *SQUEE*, it's historically verified by JR. Sr. and those who were there), because money did not fuel & recreate a whole industry.

Jack. Did.

What was the art before Jack? Good, but no energy. Ditko, sure, but without Jack, no anything.

You can throw anyone who did the business end into this all you wish.

No Jack, no industry. Go to any Con, ask those that came up through that time, and they will tell you. He had that impact.

[etos45]

Without Martin Goodman putting up the publishing money, there would not have been a 1960's Marvel Comics Group, period. The tired, age old argument about who made the Marvel Comics Group a success should be retired, once and for all. Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Sol Brodsky, Flo Steinberg, Steve Ditko, Artie Simek, and Sam Rosen were amongst the many main players who made the 1960's Marvel Comics Group the success it became, but without Martin's money backing the entire creative force, and his relentless drive to rail against DC's distribution company, which distributed his comics, this would not even be a topic for discussion. I met Stan Lee at a retailers convention in 1993 and asked him whom he felt was responsible for the success of the Marvel Comics Group in the 1960's. He told me, creatively, everyone who worked there at the time was, but without his Uncle Martin's money and backing, it never would have happened.

G

Just to play devil's advocate...

That might be true, but all the money in the world would not have mattered without the creations that the writers and artists made. If "Uncle Martin" had dumped all his money into this and I was the one running it... there would be no Marvel.

Team effort that went far beyond what the individuals alone could have accomplished.

Yessir... exactly my point. It wasn't Stan or Jack or Uncle Martin... it was everything falling into place.

[superggraphics]

Omen,

No one is questioning Kirby's contribution to Marvel. I love Jack Kirby and had to walk into comic shops back in the 1980's and listen to Byrne/Claremont X-Men fans ridicule his artwork as being no better than that of a 5 year old. My point and Stan Lee's when I spoke with him was simply that no matter the talent involved, if it wasn't for his Uncle's finances THE COMICS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED!!! IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT! THERE IS NO I IN TEAM!

G

[leonmallett]

Omen,

No one is questioning Kirby's contribution to Marvel. I love Jack Kirby and had to walk into comic shops back in the 1980's and listen to Byrne/Claremont X-Men fans ridicule his artwork as being no better than that of a 5 year old. My point and Stan Lee's when I spoke with him was simply that no matter the talent involved, if it wasn't for his Uncle's finances THE COMICS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED!!! IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT! THERE IS NO I IN TEAM!

G

But there is an I in meat pie; no wait, that was something else...

[kevinbastos]

Omen,

No one is questioning Kirby's contribution to Marvel. I love Jack Kirby and had to walk into comic shops back in the 1980's and listen to Byrne/Claremont X-Men fans ridicule his artwork as being no better than that of a 5 year old. My point and Stan Lee's when I spoke with him was simply that no matter the talent involved, if it wasn't for his Uncle's finances THE COMICS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED!!! IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT! THERE IS NO I IN TEAM!

G

But there is an I in meat pie; no wait, that was something else...

Okay... Dang funny.

I think I'm in the team effort.

While I worship Kirby - his efforts made the Sixties what they were - I think the rest of the group needs to be commended and congratulated, too. I look at the Sixties in comics like Star Wars. Or Pac-Man. If you look at them under today's standards, the stories are pedantic. Painful, at times. Still suffering under the shadow of sci-fi and horror comics. The concepts, though, shine. Took characters and development to levels still unmatched. I'm reading the origins of Marvel Comics now. X-Men, Avengers, Spider-Man. What sets them apart isn't their stories, initially. It's the characters... And art, too.

[xodacia81]

Without Martin Goodman putting up the publishing money, there would not have been a 1960's Marvel Comics Group, period. The tired, age old argument about who made the Marvel Comics Group a success should be retired, once and for all. Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, Sol Brodsky, Flo Steinberg, Steve Ditko, Artie Simek, and Sam Rosen were amongst the many main players who made the 1960's Marvel Comics Group the success it became, but without Martin's money backing the entire creative force, and his relentless drive to rail against DC's distribution company, which distributed his comics, this would not even be a topic for discussion. I met Stan Lee at a retailers convention in 1993 and asked him whom he felt was responsible for the success of the Marvel Comics Group in the 1960's. He told me, creatively, everyone who worked there at the time was, but without his Uncle Martin's money and backing, it never would have happened.

G

Humility? From Stan Lee? (goes to window. Sees no pigs flying) Wow.

[dave]

Omen,

No one is questioning Kirby's contribution to Marvel. I love Jack Kirby and had to walk into comic shops back in the 1980's and listen to Byrne/Claremont X-Men fans ridicule his artwork as being no better than that of a 5 year old. My point and Stan Lee's when I spoke with him was simply that no matter the talent involved, if it wasn't for his Uncle's finances THE COMICS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED!!! IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT! THERE IS NO I IN TEAM!

G

But there is an I in meat pie; no wait, that was something else...

That might be the funniest thing I've ever seen you post!

[Paradigm38]

Nope. Just a hard luck time for Jimbo. played the odds and lost. That said the DK Solar was an awful book that was heading in a better direction, enjoyed the DK Turok... for what it was, Mighty Sampson was good and Magnus I thought was great. He has a habit of reappearing as a writer... let's hope (in vain probably).

[valiantdude]

sorry..for all the people that felt offended by what i meant as an over the top general assesment of jim shooters recent decisions in in the past couple of years..please have a sense of humour..
i often find that when i insult peoples guru even half-jokingly they get extremely offended(ie my phish freinds if i talk smack about trey).. so i apologize..
im sure he's not an idiot 100% all the time..

[etos45]

sorry..for all the people that felt offended by what i meant as an over the top general assesment of jim shooters recent decisions in in the past couple of years..please have a sense of humour..
i often find that when i insult peoples guru even half-jokingly they get extremely offended(ie my phish freinds if i talk smack about trey).. so i apologize..
im sure he's not an idiot 100% all the time..

No offense here and I can appreciate somewhat where your post came from. The title was unfortunate (and intriguing ). Anyways, just look at it this way... if nothing else, you got people talking.

[leonmallett]

Omen,

No one is questioning Kirby's contribution to Marvel. I love Jack Kirby and had to walk into comic shops back in the 1980's and listen to Byrne/Claremont X-Men fans ridicule his artwork as being no better than that of a 5 year old. My point and Stan Lee's when I spoke with him was simply that no matter the talent involved, if it wasn't for his Uncle's finances THE COMICS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED!!! IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT! THERE IS NO I IN TEAM!

G

But there is an I in meat pie; no wait, that was something else...

That might be the funniest thing I've ever seen you post!

Thank Ricky Gervais...

[StarBrand]

sorry..for all the people that felt offended by what i meant as an over the top general assesment of jim shooters recent decisions in in the past couple of years..please have a sense of humour..
i often find that when i insult peoples guru even half-jokingly they get extremely offended(ie my phish freinds if i talk smack about trey).. so i apologize..
im sure he's not an idiot 100% all the time..

The title can always be edited if you're sorry you offended people with it.

[dave]

You can back off your statement all you want, but I believe most people view 'name calling' as personal. Your title could have been 'Jim Shooter makes poor choices' and then it would not have come across as a personal attack. Most people that I consider idiots I know personally.

I'm not trying to stir the pot here, I'm just trying to help you understand why some were offended. I don't think it's because we consider him a guru who is above reproach.