gunsmokin

Take

Take

Take

Take

I would have been intrigued to see how Stan and Carmine squared off/worked together.

I think a more intriguing "what if" might be what the product would have looked like if Lee and Schwartz had switched places in 1960. Granted Schwartz was an editor but how would he have handled the writing/art assignments?

Take

Take

What a loss. My condolences to all of you that knew him well. I used to buy many books from Ed in his pre-HA.

And after the Sentinels story ark, same with the X-men

we could beat each other's brains in over each others opinions. Everyone is pretty set in their ways. Kirby created the art and plotted pretty much everything initially. Lee fleshed out the characters personalities. Lee had a very competent artist in Maneely that he could have done this with if they were truly Lee's characters. Their most popular output was Ms. Lyon's cubs.

that came off a lot like, "hey kid, get off my lawn". It sounds like what you are saying is that those multiple contracts gave Lee the idea that he did indeed own the characters. The ownership of the characters seems like a central theme to start up of Stan Lee media I would think. Sounds like a claim of ownership to me at least. Lee filed a lawsuit against Marvel over ownership, what more proof do you need that he felt like he owned the characters. Proof of the legalities seems pretty easy to track down. Is Barron's no longer to be trusted in the Lee camp?

I don't recall. I was watching it on USA network or maybe disney and it was kind of a 2 minute snippet. Probably out there on youtube somewhere.

going to be a bit busy for the next few days but by Monday or Tuesday, I'll see what I can dig up. I know I have Son of Origins but not sure if I have the first book. I do recall seeing a brief documentary tied into the first Thor movie where Lee is on camera explaining how he came up with the name of Thor which was rather hilarious. He lists a few Greek gods and then pops up with Thor out of the blue.

I'll see if I can dig out one of the Origin fireside books. Feels like you already have your answer, so wondering why I should look up mine for you? You've been arguing to the contrary with Chuck and whoever else will listen for quite some time.

the primary argument seems to be that Stan gave them the personality that made the characters so popular so therefore he created the characters. Kirby and Ditko created the visual and the origins and it seems that you think that is all they are entitled to but at a minimum, they were all plotted by Kirby and Ditko. They were paid as artists only while Lee got editor and writer pay which was grossly unfair.

In the introduction.

I’ll be the first to say that Michael Hill is a hardcore Kirby enthusiast and there is plenty of sarcasm involved but it does have somewhat of an academic feel to it. It is a rather thick paperback.

I’d start with this one. The other was given to another boardie. Both written by Michael Hill. I’d also read Dr. Michael Vassolo’s blog regarding Timely/Atlas/Marvel. I’d consider Doc to be the preeminent expert and still some unbiased.

Our opinions on the matter are so different on the matter, it really seems pointless to argue about it with you. I’ll let Chuck carry the flag from here on out.

There are at least two very good books regarding Kirby’s side of the story that you should consider reading. You seem to believe only what the corporate employee had to say on the matter.

You didn’t answer my question. As far as weaving stories, he occasionally forgot characters actual first names. Characters he claimed he created. This whole argument really starts and ends with Lee claiming sole ownership and creatorship or the characters in his fireside origin books.

I don’t know who wrote the article and it doesn’t really matter as far as I’m concerned. Let me ask you this… did Stan deserve to be paid the full writers pay or should it have been shared with his plotters/artists?