Unpopular Golden Age Opinions Thread! 9 9

[jimbo_7071]

On 9/10/2022 at 8:37 PM, ageofsilver said:

Unpopular idea. Hmmm. How about this one? Excluding importance to the whole industry, how many wonderful covers were produced and whether or not we include atomic age within golden age, the greatest body of golden age work is New Trend EC. Just try to disagree. 

In terms of the writing and the overall creativity, I would not disagree. The artwork was mixed. Ingels: A+. Wood: A+. Feldstein: A. Davis: B. Craig: C. Kamen: C.

I don't have an interest in collecting OA, but if I could have one example of OA to hang on my wall, it would be an Ingels splash page. Actually, I would probably take a Marie Severin hand-colored silver print of an Ingels splash over the original art. It would be much cheaper and more colorful!

Edited September 11, 2022 by jimbo_7071

[adamstrange]

On 9/10/2022 at 2:00 PM, buttock said:

"Crude" & "Bob Powell" don't go together.  He was an elite draftsman.  

More importantly, he was an inventive visual story teller.

There are occasional lapses in his draftsmanship but that might be due to his use of assistants to increase his output.

[jimbo_7071]

On 9/10/2022 at 9:24 PM, adamstrange said:

More importantly, he was an inventive visual story teller.

There are occasional lapses in his draftsmanship but that might be due to his use of assistants to increase his output.

It could be. I also don't know whether he inked his own pencils. I don't know a lot about the process, but I have to think that a ham-handed inker could obscure a master peciller's deft touch.

[N e r V]

On 9/10/2022 at 5:37 PM, ageofsilver said:

Unpopular idea. Hmmm. How about this one? Excluding importance to the whole industry, how many wonderful covers were produced and whether or not we include atomic age within golden age, the greatest body of golden age work is New Trend EC. Just try to disagree. 

I had to reread that because at first I thought of EC new direction books until it  registered. I don’t think that’s an unpopular opinion at all. I think the world of EC in both art and story in terms of quality being in rarified ground.

However in terms of sheer variety of artists as much as I truly love the EC books I actually prefer the Atlas books a bit more. EC destroys Atlas in storytelling but so many great artists working in the large Atlas line vs the smaller stable of regulars at EC gives them the edge in art. Bill Everett and others could easily go toe to toe with EC’s best with the exceptions being those few Frazetta works or the Kurtzman Mad run. That’s not to say Atlas artists were better than the EC guys just more volume and variety at Atlas.

My opinion of liking Atlas artists in general over EC artists is probably far more unpopular.

Edited September 11, 2022 by N e r V

[Comicdey]

On 8/10/2016 at 10:19 AM, rjpb said:

 

The covers always looked kind of blah to me, so I've never looked at any of the stories - are they Sheldon Mayer Red Tornado good, or just better than average, because if we are going to be honest, 95% of GA stories are chore to read, even if the art is compelling.

Agreed most covers are not awsome. But some are good.  Stories are actually kinda fun and campy.  Some excellent interior art and most were done by George Marcoux

[OtherEric]

On 9/11/2022 at 12:15 PM, Comicdey said:

Agreed most covers are not awsome. But some are good.  Stories are actually kinda fun and campy.  Some excellent interior art and most were done by George Marcoux

I really need to read the one issue of Supersnipe I have.

To follow up on the original observation, there is very little in all of comics that is Sheldon Mayer Red Tornado good.  But as my profile pic attests, I'm a pretty big Mayer fan...

[D84]

Classic covers and key issues are not the same thing.

[Yorick]

On 9/12/2022 at 12:28 AM, OtherEric said:

Sheldon Mayer Red Tornado

Is she the real first FEMALE superhero?  June 1939 - All American Comics #3.  No costume until June 1940...  (according to Wiki)

[AJD]

On 7/23/2016 at 11:53 AM, AJD said:

1) Fletcher Hanks. His facial drawings remind me of the Larson cartoon about the many moods of your Irish Setter. Except that Larson can draw.

 

2) Basil Wolverton. His work looks like underground comics from 30 years later - and not in a good way. (Hey, Jon, wanna start a thread about unpopular opinions about underground comix?) Especially Mad #11 - only the completist in me allowed me to buy such an unattractive comic.

 

3) I'm with .5 on the 1940s Kirby. In fact, I love Kirby's work from 1961 to 1970, but can't warm to much before or after that. (Notable exception is the cover of Foxhole #1 from 1954)

 

4) EC horror comics (for the most part). I love ECs and have about 150 of them now, but only have a couple of the horror comics because they tend to go for the gross out factor at the expense of decent story telling.

I don't see much there I'd disagree with today, though I've mellowed a bit on the EC horror.

But my #1 unpopular opinion today is that I'd love to see a substantial downwards correction in prices for GA books. The past few years has been nuts.

[Robot Man]

On 9/10/2022 at 11:43 AM, N e r V said:

 

A number of years ago a group of 4 or 5 fans at SDCC approached an old time artist about some cover and asked if he had done it since one of them believed he had and the rest thought not. When the artist admitted he certainly had the rest of the group jumped all over that pretty much calling him a liar. The artist tried to defend his position by providing information on how it was done, when, etc. and was still mocked. After about 20 minutes into this there were several other artists in the guys booth defending him as the artist but the crowd apparently were experts and would have none of this.

I’m always reminded by that story and by a long talk I got to have with the late John Buscema about how many hands could be involved at Marvel with art from start to finish. The many hands involved in art goes all the way back to comics roots and even the artists weren’t always sure who did what sometimes.

We track the artists we like in comics but I’ve come to realize a great cover is still a great cover no matter who drew or how many helped draw it. PL #17 will always be a classic to many.

At this point, frankly I don’t care who did it. I still remember seeing it for the first time over 50 years ago. The minute I saw it, I knew I HAD to have a copy. Was the most beautiful and intriguing woman I’d ever seen on a comic book. Easily in my top 10 favorite covers of all time. I have had it pop up on my phone every time I turn it on as long as I have had one. 

[N e r V]

On 10/20/2022 at 8:08 AM, D84 said:

Classic covers and key issues are not the same thing.

That’s true sometimes but a key book can also have a classic cover just not the other way in reverse. The power of the cover is often shown in those keys that lack a cover presence. I have little doubt books like Strange Tales #110 would fetch much higher values if the doctor was on the cover. Even super keys like All  Star #8 would punch higher if WW was on that cover. I never underestimate the power of the cover today. 
 

Maybe we could start talking about key classic covers to own…

[IngelsFan]

Steering this back to the unpopular opinion theme, and since it is the spooky season I’ll give you one that is horror-related: Tomb of Terror 15 is not a horror cover, it’s a sci-fi cover. That is a robot/android head exploding, not a human being.

[adamstrange]

On 10/22/2022 at 1:05 AM, IngelsFan said:

Steering this back to the unpopular opinion theme, and since it is the spooky season I’ll give you one that is horror-related: Tomb of Terror 15 is not a horror cover, it’s a sci-fi cover. That is a robot/android head exploding, not a human being.

I don't recall the source, but evidently the extra gear/mechanical thingy were added after the cover was drawn because it was considered too gruesome even for Harvey.

[Pantodude]

On 10/22/2022 at 1:05 AM, IngelsFan said:

not a horror cover, it’s a sci-fi cover.

Try selling that to the HORRIFIED woman on the cover!  

Edited October 23, 2022 by Pantodude

[Readcomix]

While we’re on Chamber of Chills, here’s my surely unpopular opinion: CoC #23 is the lousiest, dopiest “classic” cover out there. Harrumph! 

[jimbo_7071]

Here's an opinion that's sure to be unpopular:

Continual discussions that focus on how much comics are selling for make the hobby less enjoyable because I feel like I might as well be on a message board for stock futures or annuities.

[Jayman]

On 10/22/2022 at 9:44 PM, Readcomix said:

dopiest “classic” cover out there.

[rjpb]

On 10/22/2022 at 12:09 AM, adamstrange said:

I don't recall the source, but evidently the extra gear/mechanical thingy were added after the cover was drawn because it was considered too gruesome even for Harvey.

It's been years since I read it, but here is the synopsis of the cover story as per GCD

A woman is tired of her scientist husband always spending time in his lab. She later finds out that he made a perfect robot replica of himself. Tired of being ignored, she sneaks into the lab and destroys the robot. She later realizes that she accidentally killed her husband and not his robot duplicate!

Not exactly the cover image, and of course it is not the robot that is destroyed, but it may be that they were always part of the artwork. If you want to imagine the cover art being independent of the story featured in the text block, you don't have to believe the sprocket and gear are coming out of the head, but part of what caused the head to explode. 

 

 

 

[rjpb]

Unpopular opinion of the day. Most 1938 -39 Centaurs are uninteresting. 

[MrBedrock]

On 9/8/2022 at 7:26 PM, szav said:

Guaranteed to be unpopular take:

  Hide contents

Fantastic Comics #3, hate it.  The musculature looks messed up, the pose is completely wrong for someone swinging a heavy morning star, there would be way more tension.  His left hand seems to be gently caressing the robot, with the left bicep bulging for some reason, all while he's about to hit himself in the back of his own head with that morning star.

 

Fantastic 3 isn't even in my top 5 favorite Lou Fine covers. It's a cool book but probably not one I'll ever go out on a limb to buy.