Stronguy Reviews The Marvel Bronze Age

[thehumantorch]

Great review. I love B.W. Smith art. He can be inconsistent but when he is on it is beautiful.

[Stronguy]

Great review. I love B.W. Smith art. He can be inconsistent but when he is on it is beautiful.

 

And the problem is, for much of the early issues and the ones he was rushed on, he was off... big time. I haven't looked too closely at his SSOC work of the same period. I wonder if it suffers the same ills.

[kdoginohio]

Is the 'Rare' term overused for issue #3? I see them for sale everywhere.

[Stronguy]

Is the 'Rare' term overused for issue #3? I see them for sale everywhere.

 

Mile High Chuck addressed this a few years ago. Basically it's BS.

 

Just so you don't think I am entirely innocent in this process, I want to tell you a short story about CONAN #3. For the past 25 years, that issue has been listed in the OFFICIAL OVERSTREET COMIC BOOK PRICE GUIDE as having low print runs in some areas. Ummm, I don't think that really true. Back in the early 1970's, CONAN was our best-selling title. A peculiarity about those early days, however, was that the CONAN paperback books were all still in print, and fans really cared about which issue adapted which particular R.E.H. story. Issue #3 contains the adaptation of Grim Gray God, which was especially popular. As result, we were constantly sold out of issue #3, while issue #1 tended to stick around longer because of the higher price. To rectify this problem, all the Denver area dealers started marking #3 as "scarce," and pricing it above #1. To our amazement, this "fact" ended up in Bob Overstreet's price guide soon thereafter. To this day, I can't help but smile whenever I see that notation in the guide.

[BlowUpTheMoon]

Nothing to get excited about here, just a partial reprint of X-Men 1 and the reprinted origin of Professor X from X-Men 38.

But what memories. As a nine year old I got to hold that book in my hands and feel the satisfaction of getting to read the stories and see the art that I had never been able to see.

 

Now seeing reprints is no big deal, but back then I was very happy with it.

 

Late to the party, but I had the same feeling as at about the same age with these X-Men reprints.

[BronzeBruce13]

Well done again...

 

PM me. I have an idea for you

[nmtg9]

Another cool review. Good to see you back Jeff. Neil

[namisgr]

Congrats on the reduced comic reading time (a.k.a., a new job). Got to agree that the early Smith art is nothing special, but I always thought it was cool to literally see the issue-by-issue increase in quality as Smith found his own style and became a unique comic artist. For me, the Smith art in Conan 14-20 (excepting the Kane fill-ins) is the pinnacle.

[whisp]

Nice thread.

[kdoginohio]

Congrats on the reduced comic reading time (a.k.a., a new job). Got to agree that the early Smith art is nothing special, but I always thought it was cool to literally see the issue-by-issue increase in quality as Smith found his own style and became a unique comic artist. For me, the Smith art in Conan 14-20 (excepting the Kane fill-ins) is the pinnacle.

As for me, I prefer the Severin art in Kull to BWS in Conan.

[seanfingh]

18 was a Gil Kane issue. I now question whether you actually read these comics, as well as my own place in the universe.

 

Is that the best you can do?

 

17 and 18 were both Kane... with some really god awful "drawing with triangles" art. And if you're going to get picky there's a GK back up story in 13. Also, 22 is a reprint of issue #1 because, according to the letters column, the art was lost in transit from England.

 

I guess so. Apparently, among my myriad mistakes was assuming you had a sense of humor. My bad.

[Zonker]

When I first came across the BWS Conan in those late '70s full-color paperback reprints, what struck me most was Smith's capture of that sense of wonder that I was already in the process of growing out of. Ancient golden towers, flying elephants, giant spider-gods. Great stuff! But his figures and especially his faces were not his strong suite at that time.

[Stronguy]

18 was a Gil Kane issue. I now question whether you actually read these comics, as well as my own place in the universe.

 

Is that the best you can do?

 

17 and 18 were both Kane... with some really god awful "drawing with triangles" art. And if you're going to get picky there's a GK back up story in 13. Also, 22 is a reprint of issue #1 because, according to the letters column, the art was lost in transit from England.

 

I guess so. Apparently, among my myriad mistakes was assuming you had a sense of humor. My bad.

 

I do... a very dry one at times. Take about 86.27684% of what I say on here as coming with a wry smile (and clinched fist... 'cuz that's how I roll).

[Zonker]

In Comic Book Artist #6, Bob Beerbohm also weighs in on the Conan #3 myth:

 

Beerbohm speaks of one of the speculators back in the day who hoarded thousands of copies of Conan #1, #2 and #4, but for some reason missed out completely on #3. This speculator supplied Beerbohm and the other first-generation comic book back issue dealers, so his oversight on #3 rippled throughout the dealer network as it existed at the time.

 

 

 

Is the 'Rare' term overused for issue #3? I see them for sale everywhere.

 

Mile High Chuck addressed this a few years ago. Basically it's BS.

 

Just so you don't think I am entirely innocent in this process, I want to tell you a short story about CONAN #3. For the past 25 years, that issue has been listed in the OFFICIAL OVERSTREET COMIC BOOK PRICE GUIDE as having low print runs in some areas. Ummm, I don't think that really true. Back in the early 1970's, CONAN was our best-selling title. A peculiarity about those early days, however, was that the CONAN paperback books were all still in print, and fans really cared about which issue adapted which particular R.E.H. story. Issue #3 contains the adaptation of Grim Gray God, which was especially popular. As result, we were constantly sold out of issue #3, while issue #1 tended to stick around longer because of the higher price. To rectify this problem, all the Denver area dealers started marking #3 as "scarce," and pricing it above #1. To our amazement, this "fact" ended up in Bob Overstreet's price guide soon thereafter. To this day, I can't help but smile whenever I see that notation in the guide.

[seanfingh]

18 was a Gil Kane issue. I now question whether you actually read these comics, as well as my own place in the universe.

 

Is that the best you can do?

 

17 and 18 were both Kane... with some really god awful "drawing with triangles" art. And if you're going to get picky there's a GK back up story in 13. Also, 22 is a reprint of issue #1 because, according to the letters column, the art was lost in transit from England.

 

I guess so. Apparently, among my myriad mistakes was assuming you had a sense of humor. My bad.

 

I do... a very dry one at times. Take about 86.27684% of what I say on here as coming with a wry smile (and clinched fist... 'cuz that's how I roll).

 

Then we are all good, SG. Looking forward to the rest of the MU reviews.

[Zonker]

I'm also going to call BS on Mile High Chuck's version of events. (I know, I know... I'll need to stand in a very long line when it comes to calling out Chuck's version of history )

 

In the first place, although I wasn't there at the time, it doesn't seem to ring true that fans of the Conan paperbacks would be extraordinarily fond of the REH story adaptations by Thomas & Smith. Based on what I've experienced of fannish preferences, I'd bet they would fall into one of two camps: 1) those that would turn up their noses at a necessarily-condensed adaptation of an REH original story; or 2) those that would be more interested in reading a *new* Conan story, rather than a re-hash of what they had already read in the original.

 

In the second place, I'm not even sure #3 was a REH Conan adaptation. I'm away from the books right now, and a quick online check did not reveal a clear answer. But I'm pretty certain the follow up issue #4 was a straight adaptation by Thomas & Smith of Howard's "The Tower of the Elephants." If Chuck is correct, why wouldn't #4 have been in at least as great a demand as #3 back in the day?

[Stronguy]

I'm also going to call BS on Mile High Chuck's version of events. (I know, I know... I'll need to stand in a very long line when it comes to calling out Chuck's version of history )

 

In the first place, although I wasn't there at the time, it doesn't seem to ring true that fans of the Conan paperbacks would be extraordinarily fond of the REH story adaptations by Thomas & Smith. Based on what I've experienced of fannish preferences, I'd bet they would fall into one of two camps: 1) those that would turn up their noses at a necessarily-condensed adaptation of an REH original story; or 2) those that would be more interested in reading a *new* Conan story, rather than a re-hash of what they had already read in the original.

 

In the second place, I'm not even sure #3 was a REH Conan adaptation. I'm away from the books right now, and a quick online check did not reveal a clear answer. But I'm pretty certain the follow up issue #4 was a straight adaptation by Thomas & Smith of Howard's "The Tower of the Elephants." If Chuck is correct, why wouldn't #4 have been in at least as great a demand as #3 back in the day?

 

Chuck doesn't say that issue 3 is a Conan story, it's an adaptation of a non-Conan REH story (the first one)... the kind of cut/paste I was talking about. Issues 1 and 2, as far as I can tell, are original stories but Thomas. So Chuck may be on the right track. As a REH fan I *do* find it interesting to see how Thomas was able to work these stories around Conan (sometimes good and oftentimes not so good).

 

Now if we follow your logic about readers not really caring about re-reading a Conan story they already had read then you would be right on the money with issue 4... the Tower of the Elephant.

 

All that aside, I don't think it really matters. Issue 3 is no harder to find that any of the others. Maybe there are fewer hoarded cases out there but you can't swing a dead cat at a con without hitting several issues.

[Stronguy]

When I first came across the BWS Conan in those late '70s full-color paperback reprints, what struck me most was Smith's capture of that sense of wonder that I was already in the process of growing out of. Ancient golden towers, flying elephants, giant spider-gods. Great stuff! But his figures and especially his faces were not his strong suite at that time.

 

You're right about that. BWS' strong points, even early on, were his wonderful background and amazing fantasy creatures. Don't get me wrong, when he's on he's on. But when he's off... OMG! It's a complete mess.

[namisgr]

Man, I'd love to own the art to either of these pages:

 

 

 

And who said he didn't do faces well?

 

 

and

 

 

 

[Zonker]

 

And who said he didn't do faces well?

 

 

Actually I said they were not his strong suite at that time.