|
Post by starfoxxx on Oct 10, 2009 18:39:09 GMT -5
I thought Assembled 2 was a fun read. However, it did not live up to its predecessor. I wish some of the writers would have told/explained WHEN each of the Marvel writer's stories took place in Marvel chronology. (Issue numbers, and more bookmarks so the reader can get a sense of what issue/issues they are discussing. The section about Civil War seemed to have little to do with the AVENGERS, per se, and was a weak entry because of that. Just do a whole book about "why Civil War sucked and ruined the Marvel Universe" and include the appropriate articles from A2. Also, I agree with the idea that Millar writes the ULTIMATE Cap and Iron Man characters in 616-Universe content. And that it is a bad idea. Another complaint is the writer who wrote about a subject occuring {"around the 140s"}. Do a little research, it's a book, not a post. Not to sound nitpicky, but the reader is PAYING for the book, after all. Branca's "BIG 3" article was thumbs up. (the addition of issue #s makes a big difference, thanks.) I really like Sharon Karibian's CAP article, what great examples of history, well done! Karen Walker's THOR article was among the best. It was AVENGERS-centric, as all the articles should have been. Less interesting were the articles that dealt with Cap/Iron Man and what happened in Tales of Suspense/Tales to Astonish, and their own titles. VERY little to do with the Avengers. And Harris' Thor article had NO mention of the Avengers at all, WTF? I liked Trace Shelton's THOR article, esp when he/she notes that Thor's Shakespearean language makes him unique......a current problem I've been having with writers' recent handling of Hercules' dialogue. Plus, Shelton includes a nice example of Avengers stories. The Jarvis section -cool- and I really liked the "best issues' list. I wish the book included more fun, Avenger-centric stuff like this. The Ultron/Kang articles were OK, and include issue #'s nicely. I only wish Van Plexico's nicely written article could have had more notes of what issue each event in the Kang War took place. (Again, nitpicky, i know). Okay, the DISASSEMBLED section---WTF? NO articles delve into Disassembled. The earlier articles deal MORE with Disassembled than these. A disappointment, and this whole section proves to be a waste, and seems a bit thrown together, IMHO. The Iron Man cartoon article is useless, WTF?, and the Young Avengers entry is weak. The Iron Man movie review is OK, but the "rocks/sucks" section is just dumb. The Avengers Forever article is good, but maybe more suited for a later edition. Hey at least is was about the AVENGERS. And the Avengers Bookstore article was OK, but who cares about the Spider-Man and X-men books? And how about actually SHOWING some of those great covers discussed, this shouldn't be hard for someone who has strong connections to the source material, as the editor. I guess obtaining rights for art/images is difficult/expensive, because the Assembled books are sorely lacking these. All in all, I wish Assembled 2 had more Avengers stuff in it, like the original, but a few of the articles were very well done.
|
|
|
Post by scottharris on Oct 10, 2009 22:21:03 GMT -5
Sorry you didn't enjoy it more. I haven't actually had a chance to buy this yet, but I'm wondering what Thor stuff I wrote appears in this volume; it's been so long since I wrote anything I don't remember. Is it an overview of the Gerry Conway era of Thor and/or the Roy Thomas Ragnarok story?
If so, those don't deal with the Avengers because they weren't originally intended for an Avengers book at all, but rather were just comments about Thor's series that I had posted on a different forum. They were added to AA2! to flesh out the Thor section of the book once the Big Three theme was decided on, as there weren't a lot of people banging down the door with Thor articles.
|
|
|
Post by Van Plexico on Oct 16, 2009 10:42:58 GMT -5
Thanks very much for getting the book, Starfoxxx, and for taking the time to review it. Love or hate a book, believe me when I say that the creators are just happy to have someone interested enough in it to go to this trouble. I appreciate it.
Please allow me to address a few of your points:
I think that's valid and I'll address it with A3 next year.
I think your points of this type really just represent a different vision of what the book was supposed to be about. You wanted/expected them all to directly involve the Avengers as a team, or the AVENGERS comic book series. But that was never the approach I took with putting the book together.
My view was that this book was about "The Big Three," both in the Avengers and on their own. My view was that the Big Three are still "Avengers" even when appearing solo in their own books or elsewhere. I felt readers would be just as interested (or almost as interested) in reading about the characters and their actions in those other books. *shrug*
I'm not saying your point is not valid, I'm simply saying it comes from a different expectation of what this book would be about, or how it would be structured.
Thanks for the kind words there. Glad you liked it overall. I had those issues open in front of me, so it was purely my oversight for not listing them all through it.
This is another case of what I intended as editor not coming across clearly to you the reader. This section was never intended to be about the "Avengers Disassembled" event. I was using that term for the section's title simply as a metaphor for the section's contents. Sorry for the confusion on that point.
It defintely was not "thrown together" and I'm sorry it came across that way.
Some readers enjoy those sections the most. *shrug*
In my view as editor, every article in the book, to one extent or another, was about the Avengers. It just depends on how you look at it. Not sure why the "Forever" article would be better suited for a later edition, though. I felt it should have been in the first volume, actually, but it was left out by an oversight.
It's called "not wanting to go to jail." We are not Marvel and we don't own the rights to reproduce those images. I sneak in what few images I have managed to include in these books with great nervousness and trepidation, hoping the Marvel lawyers won't come knocking.
Again, thanks for the review. I agree that the book could have been better-- so could the first one. I hope the third (and final) one next year can improve in some of the areas you mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by thewrecker on Oct 16, 2009 12:02:12 GMT -5
Thanks for the kudos on my piece! I wanted to keep it short, sweet and fun, in the spirit of the Bronze Age Avengers stories that I love.
I haven't finished reading A2 yet, but what I have read, I've really enjoyed. I wish some of the essays had been a bit more concise and punchy, but obviously that's a matter of preference.
One of my favorite pieces so far is Van's essay on Mantlo's IRON MAN run. I've never read it, but this makes me want to go out and buy it. I also enjoyed Scott Harris's THOR essays quite a lot. I have a huge stack of THOR comics I've never read, and these will help me to know which ones to read and which ones to leave alone.
Trace
|
|
|
Post by Keith R.A. DeCandido on Oct 16, 2009 14:14:38 GMT -5
And the Avengers Bookstore article was OK, but who cares about the Spider-Man and X-men books? And how about actually SHOWING some of those great covers discussed, this shouldn't be hard for someone who has strong connections to the source material, as the editor. I guess obtaining rights for art/images is difficult/expensive, because the Assembled books are sorely lacking these. Thanks for the in-depth review! Van addressed the latter issue, which is that this is an unofficial book and reproducing covers is expensive and would've made this book impossible to produce. Heck, I was surprised to see the one cover that was reproduced.... As to the former issue, the Spider-Man and X-Men books were listed for the same reason that the Iron Man, Captain America, and Hulk books were -- and the Fantastic Four ones, for that matter. Spider-Man is an Avenger, and every single X-Men book featured an Avenger as well, since every one featured either the Beast or Wolverine (or both), and they're both Avengers too.
|
|
|
Post by squidboy on Oct 18, 2009 13:51:00 GMT -5
I enjoyed Assembled 2 more than starfoxxx did but I do agree that including the issue #s for reference would be a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Oct 24, 2009 16:03:24 GMT -5
Branca's "BIG 3" article was thumbs up. (the addition of issue #s makes a big difference, thanks.) Thank you, glad you liked it
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 14, 2011 13:40:05 GMT -5
Assembled 2 arrived today and, even though I'm not far into the Shellhead chapter, I just wanted to comment.
The article by Mark Beaulieu in chapter 8 called "Tony Stark: Villain" was excellent. By "excellent", I of course mean that I agreed with everything he said! (I was nodding away like a Bobblehead as I was reading.) Mark is spot on to say that Tony/ Iron Man is not the same as the hero I grew up with. It was odd after Civil War to squeal with girlish delight when Thor and Red Hulk smashed him about the head. Hang on, he's a hero whose adventures I've been reading for 30+ years, I have a stack of Iron Man comicbooks, statues, a full-size bust and a helmet and I now want him to get battered?? What happened? Something has gone wrong somewhere. Mark outlined the "somewhere" very well.
I also appreciated the chapter on Bill Mantlo. He is such a good writer and somehow is hardly mentioned. I've never understood that and hopefully articles like the one by Van Allen Plexico will help address it. The dialogueMantlo gave Ben in the old Marvel Two-In-One was often priceless. Remember what he said to Alicia after wrecking an undergound train platform? Ben just lied that nothing happened and that it was people being overly loud and ill-mannered for no reason! Brilliant stuff.
The only criticism so far is Sharon Karibian's thingy-eyed and selective chapter on Cap. She is far more interested in sifting for negative incidents (or just interpreting negatively). For instance, when Cap makes a prefectly fair and accurate statement about Hawkeye and Quicksilver being young, hot-headed and ambitious it is interpreted as moaning and she responds with ridicule. I don't mind constructive criticism but it just read as mean-spiritied. So far, it's the only chapter I didn't enjoy (or found myself frowning as I read).
Anyway, looking forward to reading some more later. Time for a cuppa...
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 14, 2011 13:43:38 GMT -5
Oh, I wanted to say something about issue numbers. I've been reading Avengers titles for 35 years now - I've read every issue of the Avengers, West Coast Avengers, etc. - so I don't feel any need for issue numbers. I don't recall exact issue numbers or dates but I do have a pretty good idea when and where things took place. Issue references would just get in the way for me. (A selfish viewpoint, perhaps, but then I can only talk for myself.)
|
|
|
Post by owene on May 14, 2011 15:06:51 GMT -5
I also appreciated the chapter on Bill Mantlo. He is such a good writer and somehow is hardly mentioned. I've never understood that and hopefully articles like the one by Van Allen Plexico will help address it. The dialogueMantlo gave Ben in the old Marvel Two-In-One was often priceless. Remember what he said to Alicia after wrecking an undergound train platform? Ben just lied that nothing happened and that it was people being overly loud and ill-mannered for no reason! Brilliant stuff. . I've been thinking about starting a thread about Mantlo for a while. I doubt if anyone would call him their favourite writer but I'm really warming to his stuff. He seems like a writer who had loads of ideas and was always ready to use them liberally. In a period when people were starting to get sniffy about giving the big companies characters they created he was ready to come up with new ones all the time, Ok so none of them exactly became legendary characters but I think in part that was down to him always being ready to come up with a few more in the next issue rather than treating each of his babies like they were the second coming. He seemed to have the same attitude about books, it didn't matter if a title wasn't that prestigious he would still write the hell out of it. None of his books are exactly landmarks and his work has of course dated but I've been doing a lot of read throughs of Essentials over the last year or two and I've learnt to be quite pleased when i see a Mantlo credit.
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on May 14, 2011 15:22:23 GMT -5
The only criticism so far is Sharon Karibian's thingy-eyed and selective chapter on Cap. She is far more interested in sifting for negative incidents (or just interpreting negatively). For instance, when Cap makes a prefectly fair and accurate statement about Hawkeye and Quicksilver being young, hot-headed and ambitious it is interpreted as moaning and she responds with ridicule. I don't mind constructive criticism but it just read as mean-spiritied. So far, it's the only chapter I didn't enjoy (or found myself frowning as I read). I'm pretty sure her criticism is meant to be tongue-in-cheek rather than mean. Sharon is our Sharkar here and she is a great lover of Cap, the Avengers and all things Kirby.
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 14, 2011 18:51:52 GMT -5
The only criticism so far is Sharon Karibian's thingy-eyed and selective chapter on Cap. She is far more interested in sifting for negative incidents (or just interpreting negatively). For instance, when Cap makes a prefectly fair and accurate statement about Hawkeye and Quicksilver being young, hot-headed and ambitious it is interpreted as moaning and she responds with ridicule. I don't mind constructive criticism but it just read as mean-spiritied. So far, it's the only chapter I didn't enjoy (or found myself frowning as I read). I'm pretty sure her criticism is meant to be tongue-in-cheek rather than mean. Sharon is our Sharkar here and she is a great lover of Cap, the Avengers and all things Kirby. Yep, I'll also speak up for Shar--- she's about as unmean-spirited as they come-! Also deeply knowledgable, awfully smart, perceptive, and has a finely, finely honed critical eye. Perhaps look at the chapter again with the point of view that the person writing it LOVES the material, and is comfortable enough with it to poke a bit of fun at it. 'Course, now I'm gonna have to get ol' Van's book myself and read it. . . HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 14, 2011 19:00:06 GMT -5
Oh, I wanted to say something about issue numbers. I've been reading Avengers titles for 35 years now - I've read every issue of the Avengers, West Coast Avengers, etc. - so I don't feel any need for issue numbers. I don't recall exact issue numbers or dates but I do have a pretty good idea when and where things took place. Issue references would just get in the way for me. (A selfish viewpoint, perhaps, but then I can only talk for myself.) Nothing wrong with that at all, Robert. Boy, though, it's certainly a wide variation from what's often a basic, normative trait of (I daresay) most of us comic-book focused folks: we tend to be a BUNCH of incessant cataloguers! The numbers, the volumes, the dates-- it's the essence of existence within our hobby for so many--! (C'mon folks-- how many of you start to twitch at even the THOUGHT of an unsorted long-box of silverage comics, hmmm?) HB
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 14, 2011 23:00:49 GMT -5
Oh, I'm not so unusual, Humanbelly. Everything is ordered and catalogued so I can find it. Modesty aside, the reason I don't need issue numbers is I know the stories the books are talking about very well. Sometimes I even remember where I was when I first read it, especially if it's someone scarey like Ultron. The old brainbox is not much use for real life but it has stored away a lot of Marvel continuity.
Owene, I agree wholeheartedly with your very perceptive comments on Bill Mantlo. A badly, badly under-rated writer.
As for the book, I just finished reading it. It was very enjoyable. Mark Beaulieu's later chapter on the Frontline reporters was very interesting. I hadn't really thought about Sally and Ben like that (even though I did buy those comics!).
I was also very pleased to see something about Avengers: Forever, which I just loved at the time. I couldn't wait until the next part. Classic stuff. I just love Busiek's work. Given any kind of power at Marvel, I'd immediately get rid of Bendis, Fraction, van Lente, et al and just divy up the main Marvel titles to him, Waid and Stern. And probably David, too.
On your advice, Humanbelly, I reread Sharon's chapter. Still don't see this love of Cap you identified. I'm sure she's lovely and not at all mean-spirited as a person. However, her tone - which from what you say was supposed to be humorous and playful - is quite cynical, one-sided and wearing. I can list loads of examples. She has a go at Cap for being angry with Rick for putting on the Bucky costume, for instance. I tried putting myself in Cap's emotional pirate boots: I only own one piece of clothing that belonged to my paternal grandfather - well, two, really: his shoes. He died twenty years ago and I still miss him a lot. If someone I had just met took out his shoes and put them on without asking I'd blow a gasket, too. And grandpa died of old age, he wasn't blow to pieces in front of my eyes. That was typical of the slant of the article. Very harsh and not at all understanding of Cap's position. (Unlike the recent Captain America: Man out of Time LS. It was fab and was a light but also serious retelling of Cap's dislocation upon being thawed out.)
Anyway, thanks for the book, guys, and the comments earlier. And if Sharon is still posting here, hi. Even after my criticisms, I'd still let you pat my rabbits, Noah and Harvey. Noah's the black one, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by owene on May 15, 2011 2:52:19 GMT -5
On your advice, Humanbelly, I reread Sharon's chapter. Still don't see this love of Cap you identified. I'm sure she's lovely and not at all mean-spirited as a person. However, her tone - which from what you say was supposed to be humorous and playful - is quite cynical, one-sided and wearing. I can list loads of examples. She has a go at Cap for being angry with Rick for putting on the Bucky costume, for instance. I tried putting myself in Cap's emotional pirate boots: I only own one piece of clothing that belonged to my paternal grandfather - well, two, really: his shoes. He died twenty years ago and I still miss him a lot. If someone I had just met took out his shoes and put them on without asking I'd blow a gasket, too. And grandpa died of old age, he wasn't blow to pieces in front of my eyes. That was typical of the slant of the article. Very harsh and not at all understanding of Cap's position. (Unlike the recent Captain America: Man out of Time LS. It was fab and was a light but also serious retelling of Cap's dislocation upon being thawed out.) I probably shouldn't get involved in this because despite enjoying v1 I don't have Assembled 2 and don't know exactly what Sharon wrote. However my memories of reading and reviewing the silver age avengers run for the old AML are quite strong and it was incredibly hard not to poke fun at Cap every single issue. In my experience doing these kind of articles you just kind of take it as read that if you love the silver age enough to be doing that kind of article people will understand you are coming from somewhere with affection even if you have to poke fun every now and again. Cap's characterisation was so limited and open to parody. (I don't belong here, Bucky's dead, young modern heroes arent a patch on Bucky) all of which actually lead to Cap being quite a pain to be around when looked at with even a vaguely critical eye. And the stuff with Rick Jones is just bizarre all of those things are fitting for the character in the circumstances but the execution by Stan and Roy was often hilarious. I have yet to do the same methodical review of Cap's solo series but it is definitely a problem that continues. I'd say only Stern, Waid and Brubaker have really consistently written a cap whose dialogue and angst hasn't been very ripe for parody, almost every other writer has him paralysed by issues that have to constantly be repeated due to the monthly comics format and the assumptions about the age/attention span of the reader. Other writers have definitely had good ideas and written good stories but their actual cap dialogue and characterisation has often pulled me out of those stories. (Gruenwald and Englehart in particular) Actually I like Kirby's Cap as well but I can't really make a case for the dialogue even if I like his take on the character. I was reading a gruenwald issue yesterday that had page after page of angst with him considering employing a PR company because he had killed a terrorist in the act of killing other people. Those kind of straw man moral arguments, when written at a level a 12 year old reader could understand do make cap open for affectionate sarcasm. This is a guy who was so desperate to go over seas and kill nazis as a scrawny teenager that he would risk his life with untried science experiments. not because he was bloodthirsty but because that was what needed to be done to protect others. And no i dont wan't a killer cap, but if anyone should be able to know when you take one life to save civilians it should be cap. People might not like Brubaker's take on Cap but at least he squares some sort of experience of World War 2 into Cap's character with the toughness that must have given him. I can not really buy that any major cap writer's cap is actually a WW2 veteran other than those 3 guys and Kirby. Oh can I echo Robert's comments about the recent Waid Cap mini series . Waid's take on the man out of time stuff is just so far ahead of almost everything else I've seen on that subject that it almost makes all the angsty whining over the years worthwhile. It got a bit lost in all the recent Cap one shots and minis but it really is some of the best Cap writing i've read. Oh and Robert I don't know if you've checked the beginners guide to the marvel universe thread over in Nostalgia but I have constantly been taken aback by Sharon's incredible command of the minutae of 60s Marvel, this is someone who definitely loves the stuff but has read so much that she also knows where the weird bits of characterisation are.
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 15, 2011 5:52:50 GMT -5
I want to address some of your points, Owene, but I'm starting to get uncomfortable that my comments are turning into a series of anti-Sharon posts. Yes, no sensible person would disagree that Silver Age characterisation is uneven, or that Cap's self-pitying phase in his own comic seemed to go on forever, or that the notion Cap didn't kill anyone during WWII is just insanely niave. (I'd also add to this list his bumbling ineptness around women. Shy I get, useless is over-doing it.) However, I still thought it was a negatively-skewed article. Without Cap, there would be no Avengers. He took a lot of criticism for bringing in reformed villains, and despite the scepticism they would reform and become an effective team that's exactly what happened. All the responsibility fell on Cap's shoulders - a guy who has barely awoken from a deep freeze with no friends, family, partner or home to emotionally fall back on. He leads them into battle knowing that if they screw up and get injured or killed, he's the one to blame (echoes of Bucky again). Added to this, of course, Hawkeye is constantly sniping and undermining him. So Cap shows the pressure getting to him at times? Hardly surprising. No one could go on under that type of pressure without cracking at least a little around the edges.
As for the Rick Jones stuff. I still see Cap as being unable to accept Bucky's death and however much he tries to say Rick isn't Bucky somewhere in his unconscious he does actually want him to be. That always seemed to me the root of the later Steranko-era Rick-as-Bucky story. Also, attention was drawn to the fact Cap avoided the other adults to go off with the teenager. Why mention his age? I don't think age was the issue or important factor here. It is no stretch to me that Cap was put off talking to a "god" (he must have been unsure how to take that assertion) or a robot/ man in metal suit or an insect-sized woman or a giant. Rick's the only normal person in the room. Makes absolutely perfect sense to me on that level.
Owene, I want to stop now as I don't enjoy being negative - I'm actually thinking of writing a counter-article, although I've never written anything about comicbooks before apart from a few letters. Please read the article. It's really not a case of "poking fun every now and again". The truth is closer to character assassination.
|
|
|
Post by owene on May 15, 2011 6:31:26 GMT -5
Fair enough, I'd have to buy the book to really know what she wrote and thats not likely to happen in the short term so i'll let it go.
but as someone who has written quite a bit of fairly critical assessment of older comics I just dont see how anyone who didn't have affection for cap would have read enough to be able to write an article and I always take that onboard when reading peoples comments. I just assume if we are here talking about this stuff we must like it
Plus as I said I do think Cap is in a lot of ways a much more deserving target than a lot of characters.
But then I've never really got attached enough to the characters to think in terms of character assassination, i've always come at this stuff from liking comics as a medium whereas a lot of people do follow certain characters a lot more.
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 15, 2011 7:36:22 GMT -5
I'll take your advice and go over and read some of the Nostalgia board, Owene. I don't really use the interweb much (equal parts too busy and technophobic), but I was led here because of the book.
I also enjoy the Brubaker stuff and completely agree it's a more realistic and plausible take on Cap. (Just don't think they should have brought Bucky back, although I can't argue much with the way he's been written.)
As for the Stern-Byrne issues. It took me months to get over it when they left the comic. They were great comicbooks. I especially loved when a shield-less Cap is being crushed by Dragon Man. How does he get out of it? Removes a gauntlet and throws it into DM's eye! Cap, you da man!
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 15, 2011 7:51:23 GMT -5
Had a wee read - I have to go to Ibrox Stadium with my dad soon to celebrate, so time is short! - at the Nostalgia board, Owene. Sharon certainly knows her stuff. Very impressive. I was surprised to see that her little picture - What do you call it? - is Cap! That was taken from the appeal for a young co-star for the abandoned musical in the 1980s. I always wondered who drew that. Looks like Sal Buscema's work, although I'm not certain. Anyone know?
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 17, 2011 13:18:48 GMT -5
Owene, on the subject of Bill Mantlo, I was rereading some old FFs last night and came across something interesting. Bill wrote a letter to the FF Letters Page to praise Roy Thomas (the then-writer). If that letter's any indication, Bill's a decent bloke. Also, in his letter he mentioned that he'd been collecting the FF since #1. It's a shortish letter but quite interesting.
Robert
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 17, 2011 13:50:15 GMT -5
Owene, on the subject of Bill Mantlo, I was rereading some old FFs last night and came across something interesting. Bill wrote a letter to the FF Letters Page to praise Roy Thomas (the then-writer). If that letter's any indication, Bill's a decent bloke. Also, in his letter he mentioned that he'd been collecting the FF since #1. It's a shortish letter but quite interesting. Robert I'm pretty sure I remember seeing Bill on some Hulk & Avengers letters pages, too. It's always kinda neat to see that someone was able to pursue a youthful passion into their adulthood. Boy, I just checked Bill out on Wikipedia, though, and had no idea that his life took an incredibly tragic turn at a relatively young age. He was the victim of a hit&run accident while he was roller blading nearly 20 years ago, and it effectively ended his life as a productive member of society. After recovering from a coma, he has since been completely debilitated by severe brain damage. He must have been just over 40 when the accident happened. Geeze. To me, of course, he was a long-time writer on the Hulk. He was not my favorite at first, by a long-shot, but as I've mentioned else-thread, my current re-read of the title revealed a much, much greater depth to his writing than I had initially given him credit for. The several-month lead-up to issue #300 (as Bruce Banner's idyllic life inexorably unravels) is just a heartbreak happening in slow-motion. And I still think that, at some point, some editorial staff is going to come back to the Dimensional Crossroads saga that immediately followed, and recognize it for the quiet, under-appreciated classic series of tales that it was (much of it including possibly the best artwork of Sal Buscema's career-- plus Mike Mignola later on). Liked the Micronauts a lot. Didn't care for Rom at all. But you know what? Like Al Milgrom, you had a sense that he was someone that his co-workers were glad to have around. I'm SURE there was a hefty dose of him being "the kid", as it were, and all of the endearments that went along with that. . . ! Yep, we need to get Sharkar back in here to weigh in-- she's always got the deep-background info and perceptive personal insights. HB
|
|
robert
Force Works-er
Posts: 21
|
Post by robert on May 17, 2011 14:38:25 GMT -5
I remember the incident being reported at the time, Humanbelly. My memory isn't great but I seem to recall them saying that Bill wrote to pay his college tuition (so he wrote all these comicbooks AND was studying!) and that the accident happened after he had graduated (as a lawyer, I think) and was finished with comics.
I also read recently (in the Sal B book?) that Sal Buscema and him had a falling out due to derogatory comments Bill had made about the former's art. Amazingly, Sal didn't even know about the accident, either!
It's funny Bill writing to Roy Thomas. I don't think Roy was/ is half the writer Bill was. And good shout about the Crossroads storyline. Haven't read these issues for a while, but I loved them.
Oh, and the FF ish was #170!
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on May 18, 2011 19:16:54 GMT -5
All: not to worry, I believe everyone is entitled to express his or her opinion.
Shiryu, HB and Owen: I am very,very moved by your kind and generous words. *group hug*
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 19, 2011 4:53:44 GMT -5
All: not to worry, I believe everyone is entitled to express his or her opinion. Shiryu, HB and Owen: I am very,very moved by your kind and generous words. *group hug* Uh-oh--- you guys are gonna want me to have a shower first. . . hang on. . . HB
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on May 19, 2011 7:07:59 GMT -5
Ah, good. That's better. Alright, Teammates-- Come to PoppaBelly!
(*SQUISH*)
Oh, see? That was nice. . .
HB
|
|
|
Post by sharkar on May 20, 2011 9:50:32 GMT -5
Alright, Teammates-- Come to PoppaBelly! (*SQUISH*) LMAO!!! ;D
|
|