Bronze Age Fantastic Four Appreciation Thread 8 8

[MattTheDuck]

[Dick Pontoon]

Giant-Size FF #4 was not an issue that stood out for me, so when prices shot up with movie hype, I sold my nice copy, something I don't usually do. I still have my undercopy.

 

[Spider-Variant]

On 9/10/2023 at 2:25 PM, MR. Pontoon said:

Giant-Size FF #4 was not an issue that stood out for me, so when prices shot up with movie hype, I sold my nice copy, something I don't usually do. I still have my undercopy.

 

I had this issue, but I have no recollection of how I came to own it.  

[WernerVonDoom]

Catching up:

[Spider-Variant]

On 9/10/2023 at 6:37 PM, WernerVonDoom said:

Catching up:

 

I always felt Giant-size Spider-Man was not up to the same standard as the Amazing Spider-Man series, both in story and art, especially art.  Do others feel that the GS series, such as FF, were up to snuff or were they lacking something as compared to their regular series?

[WernerVonDoom]

On 9/10/2023 at 8:32 PM, Spider-Variant said:

 

I always felt Giant-size Spider-Man was not up to the same standard as the Amazing Spider-Man series, both in story and art, especially art.  Do others feel that the GS series, such as FF, were up to snuff or were they lacking something as compared to their regular series?

I haven't read them in a very long time, but I don't remember them being that much better or worse than the regular series (at the time).

[WernerVonDoom]

[WernerVonDoom]

Moving on to Copper FF thread tomorrow. Starting with Byrne's FF 232.

[MattTheDuck]

One of all-time favorite FF villains.

 

[MattTheDuck]

On 9/11/2023 at 5:39 PM, WernerVonDoom said:

Moving on to Copper FF thread tomorrow. Starting with Byrne's FF 232.

It's on page 5

 

[WernerVonDoom]

On 9/11/2023 at 9:10 PM, MattTheDuck said:

It's on page 5

 

Not for long. 

[Dick Pontoon]

On 9/10/2023 at 11:32 PM, Spider-Variant said:

 

I always felt Giant-size Spider-Man was not up to the same standard as the Amazing Spider-Man series, both in story and art, especially art.  Do others feel that the GS series, such as FF, were up to snuff or were they lacking something as compared to their regular series?

Here's my hastily written two cents.

If we consider the parents of Giant-Size, the Annuals or King-Size Specials, then initially those were indeed just as good as the regular series of both FF and ASM. The first annuals of each title were huge and full of all-new material We got the epic Sub-Mariner vs. the Human Race and Spider-Man vs. the Sinister Six. Reprint material started to be included with the second issues but the new material was still top shelf. Since Jack Kirby was such a workhorse and endless fountain of ideas, the FF Annuals kept firing on all cylinders until #7 when they went all-reprint.

Since an annual basically amounted to an entire extra book that had to be shoehorned into an artist's and writer's monthly workload, it was undoubtedly pretty tough to maintain quality. I think ASM Annuals #3-5 slipped a bit with the usual creative team not at bat, not terrible but not as good as the monthly book. Afterwards the ASM Annual went reprint.

When the concept was revised as Giant-Size with all new material we're back in the same boat, trying to squeeze out an extra book in the same amount of time.

I started collecting in the mid-'70s, and was buying ASM, MTU, Marvel Tales, FF and Marvel's Greatest Comics off the racks, so I grew up with Kirby/Buckler/Perez FF and Ditko/Romita/Andru Spider-Man. I thought the Giant-Size were a mixed bag. Giant-Size Super Stars #1 with the Hulk and Buckler's Kirby-style art I liked. Giant-Size Super Heroes #1 with Morbius and the Man-Wolf and Gil Kane I liked. Giant-Size FF #2-4 were snoozers and I thought the art was meh. Then they went reprint. Giant-Size ASM #1-3 didn't do anything for me either, despite the regular team being on board. Shang-Chi? Doc Savage?  However, #4 with the Punisher was a-okay and felt just like a regular ASM issue, as did #5 with the Lizard and the Man-Thing, two characters I liked a lot.

So I guess my answer is sometimes yes, sometimes no.

[Spider-Variant]

On 9/12/2023 at 7:08 AM, Pontoon said:

Here's my hastily written two cents.

If we consider the parents of Giant-Size, the Annuals or King-Size Specials, then initially those were indeed just as good as the regular series of both FF and ASM. The first annuals of each title were huge and full of all-new material We got the epic Sub-Mariner vs. the Human Race and Spider-Man vs. the Sinister Six. Reprint material started to be included with the second issues but the new material was still top shelf. Since Jack Kirby was such a workhorse and endless fountain of ideas, the FF Annuals kept firing on all cylinders until #7 when they went all-reprint.

Since an annual basically amounted to an entire extra book that had to be shoehorned into an artist's and writer's monthly workload, it was undoubtedly pretty tough to maintain quality. I think ASM Annuals #3-5 slipped a bit with the usual creative team not at bat, not terrible but not as good as the monthly book. Afterwards the ASM Annual went reprint.

When the concept was revised as Giant-Size with all new material we're back in the same boat, trying to squeeze out an extra book in the same amount of time.

I started collecting in the mid-'70s, and was buying ASM, MTU, Marvel Tales, FF and Marvel's Greatest Comics off the racks, so I grew up with Kirby/Buckler/Perez FF and Ditko/Romita/Andru Spider-Man. I thought the Giant-Size were a mixed bag. Giant-Size Super Stars #1 with the Hulk and Buckler's Kirby-style art I liked. Giant-Size Super Heroes #1 with Morbius and the Man-Wolf and Gil Kane I liked. Giant-Size FF #2-4 were snoozers and I thought the art was meh. Then they went reprint. Giant-Size ASM #1-3 didn't do anything for me either, despite the regular team being on board. Shang-Chi? Doc Savage?  However, #4 with the Punisher was a-okay and felt just like a regular ASM issue, as did #5 with the Lizard and the Man-Thing, two characters I liked a lot.

So I guess my answer is sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Thanks for your detailed response!

[MR SigS]

Catching up.

 

[FlyingDonut]

On 9/6/2023 at 5:15 PM, WernerVonDoom said:

That book looks familiar.

[namisgr]

If memory serves me, the Giant-Size Super-Stars (FF) #1 with its May, 1974 cover date was the first Marvel giant that began their brief regular production.  The first with Spidey has a June, 1974 cover date, and is also one of just a handful with a 35 cent cover price.

This was the copy I bought off the rack at the time.  I remember it was unusual to see in that it was giant-size but not an Annual, and didn't come out during summertime the way Marvel had rolled out its annuals in the past, when kids were off from school and had more free time.

Edited September 14, 2023 by namisgr

[WernerVonDoom]

On 9/14/2023 at 4:28 AM, namisgr said:

If memory serves me, the Giant-Size Super-Stars (FF) #1 with its May, 1974 cover date was the first Marvel giant that began their brief regular production.  The first with Spidey has a June, 1974 cover date, and is also one of just a handful with a 35 cent cover price.

This was the copy I bought off the rack at the time.  I remember it was unusual to see in that it was giant-size but not an Annual, and didn't come out during summertime the way Marvel had rolled out its annuals in the past, when kids were off from school and had more free time.

So impressive to have in that condition off the rack.

[WernerVonDoom]

New addition:

[namisgr]

On 9/18/2023 at 1:01 PM, WernerVonDoom said:

So impressive to have in that condition off the rack.

Thanks!  But the book has a ding to the lower left corner visible on the front cover that keeps it from the NM grade range.

[FlyingDonut]