New Mutants 87 9.8 How high will it go? 0

[RockMyAmadeus]

Besides...New Mutants #86 wasn't even Liefeld's first issue of New Mutants. He and McFarlane did the cover to #85, AND he had penciled the entire New Mutants Annual #5 from 1989, which was also a big deal at the time (1991-ish.)

Even X-Factor #40 was "hot" for a couple of minutes, as was Liefeld's 1st DC work, in Warlord #131, and, of course, the Hawk & Dove mini (which Karl Kesel had to rework because Liefeld was so lame.)

Edited June 1, 2018 by RockMyAmadeus

[Martin Sinescu]

15 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Besides...New Mutants #86 wasn't eve Liefeld's first issue of New Mutants. He and McFarlane did the cover to #85, AND he had penciled the entire New Mutants Annual #5 from 1989, which was also a big deal at the time (1991-ish.)

Even X-Factor #40 was "hot" for a couple of minutes, as was Liefeld's 1st DC work, in Warlord #131, and, of course, the Hawk & Dove mini (which Karl Kesel had to rework because Liefeld was so lame.)

Okay, sure, but 86 was Liefeld's first issue as the penciller on the main title (not the annual, not the cover artist) and this is how the issue was promoted in advance. He was billed as an up-and-comer that was taking over the regular art chores on the title, so naturally Marvel is going to pitch this to the distributors/dealers as a big deal. I'm absolutely sure they were looking to reproduce McFarlane's heat and already had him scouted as such, hoping to revive a languishing title. It's no different than the way Diamond and Previews highlighted stuff like this every month on numerous titles: New Creative Team, New Direction, etc. Same thing. They put this into out in advance so they can plump up the advance orders (I know you know this). Do you think a distributor who is looking to increases sales is gong to prep the advance listings and look over Marvel's PR blurbs, going, "Eh, this Liefeld kid already did the cover for 85 and the interiors on the Annual, no need to hype this issue 'cause he's taking over the art, just leave it as a small listing, no hype. Next!". Of course not. X-Men 268 was hyped and was hot for the same reason: Jim Lee takes over as regular artist on the title even though he'd been doing covers and interiors on UXM for far longer.

Yeah, I wish I could take up your challenge to produce the catalog, but it's long gone. You can accept my anecdote as a possibility or reject it. Although I saved all of my American catalogs, Previews, Diamond catalogs, Direct Currents, etc. for 15-20 years, they got recycled a while back, probably so I could use the boxes for more comics. I'd love to find some that someone's dumping just to relive the nostalgia of the monthly hype.

[RockMyAmadeus]

16 minutes ago, Martin Sinescu said:

Okay, sure, but 86 was Liefeld's first issue as the penciller on the main title (not the annual, not the cover artist) and this is how the issue was promoted in advance. He was billed as an up-and-comer that was taking over the regular art chores on the title, so naturally Marvel is going to pitch this to the distributors/dealers as a big deal. I'm absolutely sure they were looking to reproduce McFarlane's heat and already had him scouted as such, hoping to revive a languishing title. It's no different than the way Diamond and Previews highlighted stuff like this every month on numerous titles: New Creative Team, New Direction, etc. Same thing. They put this into out in advance so they can plump up the advance orders (I know you know this). Do you think a distributor who is looking to increases sales is gong to prep the advance listings and look over Marvel's PR blurbs, going, "Eh, this Liefeld kid already did the cover for 85 and the interiors on the Annual, no need to hype this issue 'cause he's taking over the art, just leave it as a small listing, no hype. Next!". Of course not. X-Men 268 was hyped and was hot for the same reason: Jim Lee takes over as regular artist on the title even though he'd been doing covers and interiors on UXM for far longer.

Yeah, I wish I could take up your challenge to produce the catalog, but it's long gone. You can accept my anecdote as a possibility or reject it. Although I saved all of my American catalogs, Previews, Diamond catalogs, Direct Currents, etc. for 15-20 years, they got recycled a while back, probably so I could use the boxes for more comics. I'd love to find some that someone's dumping just to relive the nostalgia of the monthly hype.

There's a distinct and important difference between a publisher "hyping" their own publications, and the hype that is naturally produced by reactions to those publications. I don't deny your anecdote at all, but it's important to look at it in its context. After all...Miller was enthusiastically introduced in Daredevil #158, but are you aware that other artists have likewise been hyped, who ended up going nowhere...? (Paul Smith, for example.) There's another artist, whose name I can't even remember now, who was likewise hyped when he began his tenure on a book...that, too, went nowhere. Wish I could remember what it was, but...that's the nature of going nowhere.

Of course a publisher is going to hype anything and everything they publish. But what I'm talking about is this: is the hype justified and does it produce a legitimate reaction in the collecting public?

I can assure anyone reading this that nobody (the general nobody) knew, nor cared about, Liefeld prior to several issues in to his run. After all...I don't see a single mention of his work on H&D in late 1988 prior to about late 1990. You begin to see sporadic mentions of his artwork in the Updates in the fall of 1990...almost a YEAR into his run on the title. We covered this in depth in another thread a couple of years ago.

Jim Lee is a little different. Again, Lee's art wasn't particularly appreciated at first. Before #267, he'd already done the interior art for four issues (#248, 256-258), and the covers for four more (#252, 260, 261, 264), while those were favorably received, no one really stood up and took notice UNTIL issue #268. #268 wasn't particularly hyped for that reason...it was the public reaction to #268 which turned the "hype" into reality, because Lee turned in such a brilliant job. That splash page of Cap is absolutely breathtaking.

Silvestri, who had been on the title for three years at that point, wasn't markedly different in style from Lee. And yes, as Marvel has done forever, it hypes everything, whether that hype is justified or not. You don't see tons of letters clamoring for more Lee before he was assigned the regular spot...but afterwards, when people saw #268, then #269, then #270...that's when things started to take off. And, artists like Portacio and Stroman were hyped for Uncanny X-Men and X-Factor...again, going nowhere.

Same with Liefeld. Cable and Liefeld were symbiotic; the character managed to strike a chord with readers. If not for Liefeld, Cable would probably have been ignored, and if not for Cable, Liefeld might probably have been a flash in the pan.

And...it's worth noting that, since 1993, there hasn't been any "breakout artist" that has hit the industry in the way that these guys from the 60s, 70s, and 80s did. Platt was the last "hot artist" whose work consistently sold for (and still sells for) a premium (Moon Knight #55-60.) Turner's work has never been "broken out", and Dell'otto has a following, but there's certainly no acknowledgement of that by the broader public. But I digress.

[kHAoS]

57 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

There's a distinct and important difference between a publisher "hyping" their own publications, and the hype that is naturally produced by reactions to those publications. I don't deny your anecdote at all, but it's important to look at it in its context. After all...Miller was enthusiastically introduced in Daredevil #158, but are you aware that other artists have likewise been hyped, who ended up going nowhere...? (Paul Smith, for example.) There's another artist, whose name I can't even remember now, who was likewise hyped when he began his tenure on a book...that, too, went nowhere. Wish I could remember what it was, but...that's the nature of going nowhere.

Of course a publisher is going to hype anything and everything they publish. But what I'm talking about is this: is the hype justified and does it produce a legitimate reaction in the collecting public?

I can assure anyone reading this that nobody (the general nobody) knew, nor cared about, Liefeld prior to several issues in to his run. After all...I don't see a single mention of his work on H&D in late 1988 prior to about late 1990. You begin to see sporadic mentions of his artwork in the Updates in the fall of 1990...almost a YEAR into his run on the title. We covered this in depth in another thread a couple of years ago.

Jim Lee is a little different. Again, Lee's art wasn't particularly appreciated at first. Before #267, he'd already done the interior art for four issues (#248, 256-258), and the covers for four more (#252, 260, 261, 264), while those were favorably received, no one really stood up and took notice UNTIL issue #268. #268 wasn't particularly hyped for that reason...it was the public reaction to #268 which turned the "hype" into reality, because Lee turned in such a brilliant job. That splash page of Cap is absolutely breathtaking.

Silvestri, who had been on the title for three years at that point, wasn't markedly different in style from Lee. And yes, as Marvel has done forever, it hypes everything, whether that hype is justified or not. You don't see tons of letters clamoring for more Lee before he was assigned the regular spot...but afterwards, when people saw #268, then #269, then #270...that's when things started to take off. And, artists like Portacio and Stroman were hyped for Uncanny X-Men and X-Factor...again, going nowhere.

Same with Liefeld. Cable and Liefeld were symbiotic; the character managed to strike a chord with readers. If not for Liefeld, Cable would probably have been ignored, and if not for Cable, Liefeld might probably have been a flash in the pan.

And...it's worth noting that, since 1993, there hasn't been any "breakout artist" that has hit the industry in the way that these guys from the 60s, 70s, and 80s did. Platt was the last "hot artist" whose work consistently sold for (and still sells for) a premium (Moon Knight #55-60.) Turner's work has never been "broken out", and Dell'otto has a following, but there's certainly no acknowledgement of that by the broader public. But I digress.

I don't know about the general public, but locally at the time, Liefeld was an up-and-comer when he took over New Mutants. Personally, I definitely remember reading What If #7 over-and-over because his art was distinctive. His filler issue for X-men and X-Factor, plus covers for Wolverine Saga #1, Marvel Comics Presents, and his pin-up in Wolverine #8 gave him good exposure. Granted, I was x-fan at the time, so I was happy to see him take over New Mutants and had it added my pull list after he was announced as the regular artist. His hype-train really got going after the Wolverine guest appearances and Xtinction Agenda, from what I recall. So you are probably right about Liefeld getting real buzz around 1990.

I felt like Jim Lee got really good buzz immediately after X-Men 248. Punisher War Journal 6 & 7 were immediate sellouts, while Punisher and Wolverine is what sold the book, those covers really put Lee on the map. Lee's run for Acts of Vengeance was really well received due Wolverine being heavily featured and Psylocke being rebooted. As much as I liked Silvestri, I was elated when he was announced as the regular artist. I'd have to re-read the letters page, but I'm pretty certain most fans liked Lee's work immediately after #248.

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 hours ago, kHAoS said:

I don't know about the general public, but locally at the time, Liefeld was an up-and-comer when he took over New Mutants. Personally, I definitely remember reading What If #7 over-and-over because his art was distinctive. His filler issue for X-men and X-Factor, plus covers for Wolverine Saga #1, Marvel Comics Presents, and his pin-up in Wolverine #8 gave him good exposure. Granted, I was x-fan at the time, so I was happy to see him take over New Mutants and had it added my pull list after he was announced as the regular artist. His hype-train really got going after the Wolverine guest appearances and Xtinction Agenda, from what I recall. So you are probably right about Liefeld getting real buzz around 1990.

I felt like Jim Lee got really good buzz immediately after X-Men 248. Punisher War Journal 6 & 7 were immediate sellouts, while Punisher and Wolverine is what sold the book, those covers really put Lee on the map. Lee's run for Acts of Vengeance was really well received due Wolverine being heavily featured and Psylocke being rebooted. As much as I liked Silvestri, I was elated when he was announced as the regular artist. I'd have to re-read the letters page, but I'm pretty certain most fans liked Lee's work immediately after #248.

These things aren't black and white or absolute. There's a spectrum on which these things occur. I'm sure there WERE some people who felt that Liefeld had potential. His art...as terrible as it was even when he was trying...WAS dynamic. But his body of work before New Mutants was relegated to a handful of issues and pinups. Generally, he was an unknown. And I can say that because you won't find any mention of him in the trade publications as an "up and comer" until about the late summer/early fall of 1990. 

Do read the letters pages of X-Men from the time period. X-Men #248 went by the public, completely ignored for well over a year and a half, until X-Men #268 came about. You'll find some mention of the art, but editors always like to print some mention of the art in the letters they receive. It's easy to point out the catalyst for Lee, since #268 made such an impact. Before #268...nothing. After #268...? Wow. Who is this Jim Lee guy? This stuff is amazing! You won't see a mention of Jim Lee as a "hot artist" in any of the trade publications before X-Men #268. 

It's like Hulk #377 with Keown. Before that, meh. Generally, his art was ignored. #372 created a bit of a splash, but #377 was the issue where people said "hey...this guy's pretty good!"

PWJ #6 and #7 were sellouts because of the crossover of Wolvie and Punisher, the two hottest characters in comics at the time. I assure you, despite the fact that PWJ #6 is a classic, iconic cover, it had nothing to do with it being by "Jim Lee", who had already been working at Marvel for two years, and would be there for nearly another year before the collecting public noticed #268. That cover could have been drawn by Frank Robbins, and it still would have been an instant sellout.

Liefeld had no such "OMG, this is amazing!" issue. Like I said, Cable and he were symbiotic; without one, the other likely would never have achieved success.

Edited June 1, 2018 by RockMyAmadeus

[RockMyAmadeus]

By the by...I agree with you about What If #7. That cover was quite striking, and it did have an impact...but it also only came out a couple of weeks before Liefeld started his run on NM with issue #85. 

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

7 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

There's a distinct and important difference between a publisher "hyping" their own publications, and the hype that is naturally produced by reactions to those publications. I don't deny your anecdote at all, but it's important to look at it in its context. After all...Miller was enthusiastically introduced in Daredevil #158, but are you aware that other artists have likewise been hyped, who ended up going nowhere...? (Paul Smith, for example.) There's another artist, whose name I can't even remember now, who was likewise hyped when he began his tenure on a book...that, too, went nowhere. Wish I could remember what it was, but...that's the nature of going nowhere.

Of course a publisher is going to hype anything and everything they publish. But what I'm talking about is this: is the hype justified and does it produce a legitimate reaction in the collecting public?

I can assure anyone reading this that nobody (the general nobody) knew, nor cared about, Liefeld prior to several issues in to his run. After all...I don't see a single mention of his work on H&D in late 1988 prior to about late 1990. You begin to see sporadic mentions of his artwork in the Updates in the fall of 1990...almost a YEAR into his run on the title. We covered this in depth in another thread a couple of years ago.

Jim Lee is a little different. Again, Lee's art wasn't particularly appreciated at first. Before #267, he'd already done the interior art for four issues (#248, 256-258), and the covers for four more (#252, 260, 261, 264), while those were favorably received, no one really stood up and took notice UNTIL issue #268. #268 wasn't particularly hyped for that reason...it was the public reaction to #268 which turned the "hype" into reality, because Lee turned in such a brilliant job. That splash page of Cap is absolutely breathtaking.

Silvestri, who had been on the title for three years at that point, wasn't markedly different in style from Lee. And yes, as Marvel has done forever, it hypes everything, whether that hype is justified or not. You don't see tons of letters clamoring for more Lee before he was assigned the regular spot...but afterwards, when people saw #268, then #269, then #270...that's when things started to take off. And, artists like Portacio and Stroman were hyped for Uncanny X-Men and X-Factor...again, going nowhere.

Same with Liefeld. Cable and Liefeld were symbiotic; the character managed to strike a chord with readers. If not for Liefeld, Cable would probably have been ignored, and if not for Cable, Liefeld might probably have been a flash in the pan.

And...it's worth noting that, since 1993, there hasn't been any "breakout artist" that has hit the industry in the way that these guys from the 60s, 70s, and 80s did. Platt was the last "hot artist" whose work consistently sold for (and still sells for) a premium (Moon Knight #55-60.) Turner's work has never been "broken out", and Dell'otto has a following, but there's certainly no acknowledgement of that by the broader public. But I digress.

Campbell? Hughes?

[Martin Sinescu]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

These things aren't black and white or absolute. There's a spectrum on which these things occur. I'm sure there WERE some people who felt that Liefeld had potential. His art...as terrible as it was even when he was trying...WAS dynamic. But his body of work before New Mutants was relegated to a handful of issues and pinups. Generally, he was an unknown. And I can say that because you won't find any mention of him in the trade publications as an "up and comer" until about the late summer/early fall of 1990. 

Do read the letters pages of X-Men from the time period. X-Men #248 went by the public, completely ignored for well over a year and a half, until X-Men #268 came about. You'll find some mention of the art, but editors always like to print some mention of the art in the letters they receive. It's easy to point out the catalyst for Lee, since #268 made such an impact. Before #268...nothing. After #268...? Wow. Who is this Jim Lee guy? This stuff is amazing! You won't see a mention of Jim Lee as a "hot artist" in any of the trade publications before X-Men #268. 

It's like Hulk #377 with Keown. Before that, meh. Generally, his art was ignored. #372 created a bit of a splash, but #377 was the issue where people said "hey...this guy's pretty good!"

PWJ #6 and #7 were sellouts because of the crossover of Wolvie and Punisher, the two hottest characters in comics at the time. I assure you, despite the fact that PWJ #6 is a classic, iconic cover, it had nothing to do with it being by "Jim Lee", who had already been working at Marvel for two years, and would be there for nearly another year before the collecting public noticed #268. That cover could have been drawn by Frank Robbins, and it still would have been an instant sellout.

Liefeld had no such "OMG, this is amazing!" issue. Like I said, Cable and he were symbiotic; without one, the other likely would never have achieved success.

Ohhhh kay.... disagree. Lots. Seriously, look at the cover for 258 -- are you really telling me that that just blew right past X-Fans with no notice?!... or do you think readers picked that up and said, "Leapin' Lemurs, that's f-ing righteous,"?!? The answer is B. I had been following X-Men for a few years at that point and Lee was KILLING IT when he came on (although I will concur with you that 248 made no splash in my opinion either). Jim Lee was ab-so-lutely a known quantity before he joined on for 268 and had been putting together a great body of work through UXM for a while. To me, he was the next logical evolution from Silvestri's art and more than capably filled that role when asked.  The problem was that the book had no stable art team and was a disjointed revolving door of (very talented) artists for months. 268 was key because that's when Jim Lee, one of the big, rising talents for Marvel at that time, secured a permanent spot as the monthly artist on one of their biggest titles -- a run which eventually led to his own X-book, of course.  And, yes, they did promote it as the new regular creative team because the book needed that consistency and Lee's contributions had been stellar up to that point. However, it did NOT make an impact because people said "Wow, Who is this Jim Lee guy?". I mean, I guffawed when I saw you wrote that. Are you simply going by the letters columns as contemporary evidence, because I'm surprised at how different our experiences of this era seem to be.

While I agree that the first Punisher vs. Wolverine "battle" (letdown that it was) was going to sell the fool out of those two issues of PWJ if I'd drawn them, you've got to also take into account that the Punisher was scorching hot at this time, enough so to get a second book when very few Marvel properties had more than one title, and Lee was a regular artist on that series. They are not going to hand over the art for one of their biggest money-making characters to some schmoe. Consider that Whilce Portacio was working on the main title at the same time. Look at the cover for #4, where I think Lee starts to assert his style over the previous covers by Carl Potts. I vividly remember that cover and felt that's where the series was really kicking in, almost definitely because of Lee's influence. I think you're really doing Lee a disservice by implying that he just happened to be working on the title at the right time and was irrelevant in the hype around 6 & 7. I mean, Marvel could have run that meeting in either of the characters' main ongoing series at the time, but they chose War Journal and I would suggest that it was at least in part because they wanted to give it to the artist they felt would put on a visual showcase for the momentous event.

You know what would be cool, if we could get @stinkininkin here to share his thoughts on Lee's impact at Marvel through that period.

What If? 7... yeah, zero disagreement there and nice to see some acclaim from others for that cover. I've always loved it, likely my favorite bit of Liefeld art, and actually the only issue I kept when I sold off the rest of my What If? run. I didn't even realize he had done it until probably a few months after the fact when his name had become a "household" one, but it was a cover that instantly bowled me over.

One more thing while I've got you here, when you mentioned the sales numbers between NM 86 and 87, did you check 85 as well? I'm curious as to whether there was any bump at that point.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, Martin Sinescu said:

Ohhhh kay.... disagree. Lots. Seriously, look at the cover for 258 -- are you really telling me that that just blew right past X-Fans with no notice?!... or do you think readers picked that up and said, "Leapin' Lemurs, that's f-ing righteous,"?!? The answer is B.

Disagree.

That may have been YOUR reaction...and I don't doubt that it certainly was the reaction of many...but it wasn't "OMG THIS GUY IS AMAZING!!!!" THAT came 10 issues later, with #268.

X-Fans were used to fantastic covers. After all...remember #251? Just 7 issues prior? #234? #212? #211? #207? #205?

They were used to having such dramatic, well executed covers.

1 hour ago, Martin Sinescu said:

I had been following X-Men for a few years at that point and Lee was KILLING IT when he came on (although I will concur with you that 248 made no splash in my opinion either). Jim Lee was ab-so-lutely a known quantity before he joined on for 268 and had been putting together a great body of work through UXM for a while.

Ok...show me.

The best indicator we have for general reaction, unfortunately, is back issue value. 

So...show me where and how Jim Lee was a "known quantity" by pointing to anything prior to the release of #268 in July of 1990. Mentions in the OPG Update, CBG, higher prices for #248, #256-258...anything. 

None of those issues were sellouts, and all of them were readily available long after publication for a nominal price.

#268 was a sellout across the nation, as was #270 (so much so that they reprinted it immediately. It's no coincidence that #268 was chosen to be part of the JCPenney reprints two years later.)

1 hour ago, Martin Sinescu said:

To me, he was the next logical evolution from Silvestri's art and more than capably filled that role when asked.  The problem was that the book had no stable art team and was a disjointed revolving door of (very talented) artists for months.

I disagree. Silvestri's last issue, #261, capped off a moderately successful 3+ year run on the title, which only saw a handful of fill-ins, most by Lee, during his tenure. #262-#266 had fill-in artists Kieron Dwyer, Mike Collins, and Bill Jaaska, none of whom I would call "very talented" (thought Kieron certainly improved over the years), and this was during its bi-monthly summer season, starting with issue #263. So, there were only 5 issues, over 3 months, in which the title had "no stable art team."

1 hour ago, Martin Sinescu said:

268 was key because that's when Jim Lee, one of the big, rising talents for Marvel at that time, secured a permanent spot as the monthly artist on one of their biggest titles -- a run which eventually led to his own X-book, of course.  And, yes, they did promote it as the new regular creative team because the book needed that consistency and Lee's contributions had been stellar up to that point. However, it did NOT make an impact because people said "Wow, Who is this Jim Lee guy?". I mean, I guffawed when I saw you wrote that. Are you simply going by the letters columns as contemporary evidence, because I'm surprised at how different our experiences of this era seem to be.

#268 was key because it was a stunning piece of work that made the comic collecting community take a collective gasp from the first page to the last. 

It absolutely put Jim Lee on the map, and for those not already familiar with him...which was a lot of people...it ABSOLUTELY, UNEQUIVOCALLY made an impact because people said "Wow, who is this Jim Lee guy??" 

I don't know where you're coming up with some of your comments; I assume you don't regularly read what I write here. I'm going by many things; mostly what was written in the comics industry trade journals of the time, such as the Overstreet Update, the Comics Buyers Guide, Marvel Age, catalogs from companies like Mile High, American Entertainment, East Coast Comics, all of which I highly recommend to you to give you a clearer picture of the shape of the national market in those pre-internet days, as well as letters in letter cols, and, of course, my own personal experience.

You may not be aware of this, but at this time, the X-Men were in a considerable slump, as reported in all the collecting publications of the time. While the title rode high into the mid 80s, by 1987, the title started a long slide into mediocrity, confusing storylines, never resolved plot points, and a most definite "X-Fatigue." It wasn't Jim Lee's presence on #248, or #256, 257, or 258 that changed that. It was #268...then #269...then X-Tinction Agenda, which was monstrous; the most successful X-Crossover of all time up to that point.

Of course Marvel promoted it as the new regular creative team; that isn't remotely in dispute. Marvel promotes EVERYTHING IT DOES, and always has.

1 hour ago, Martin Sinescu said:

While I agree that the first Punisher vs. Wolverine "battle" (letdown that it was) was going to sell the fool out of those two issues of PWJ if I'd drawn them, you've got to also take into account that the Punisher was scorching hot at this time, enough so to get a second book when very few Marvel properties had more than one title, and Lee was a regular artist on that series.

I already did take that into account. I mentioned it in my last post. Punisher and Wolverine were both the most popular characters in comics. 

Very few Marvel properties had more than one title...?

Uncanny X-Men/New Mutants/X-Factor/Excalibur/Classic X-Men/Wolverine/Alpha Flight

Amazing Spiderman/Web of Spiderman/Marvel Tales/Spectacular Spiderman

Avengers/West Coast Avengers

That's almost half the Marvel line being published at the time.

If there's a single mention of Lee being the artist on PWJ prior to X-Men #268, I'd be very, very surprised. The reason those books were so hot was because of the two of them together...not Jim Lee.

2 hours ago, Martin Sinescu said:

They are not going to hand over the art for one of their biggest money-making characters to some schmoe.

Um...you DO realize this is MARVEL we're discussing, right...? You know, the Marvel that handed the art for one of their biggest money-making characters to Erik Larsen...?

Marvel has always been reactionary when it comes to art. In that time period, all that mattered to Marvel was milking every last penny out of every single property (then as now) that they could. Those doing the art chores were secondary. The editors were the ones making the art decisions, and that was not because of any "money-making" concerns, but rather, who could turn in serviceable work on time. I guarantee you, the decision to "hand over the art for one of their biggest money-making characters" entered NO ONE'S mind at that point...or they probably wouldn't have given it to a nobody like Jim Lee. The reason Jim did the work was because Carl Potts liked working with him. Were you aware that Jim didn't even pencil the first three issues of PWJ...? CARL POTTS was the one who was "handed the art for one of their biggest money-making characters."

When was the last time you heard of "Carl Potts" and "Hot Artist" in the same breath...? Carl is a fine craftsman, and I enjoy his work...but "hot artist", he was not.

2 hours ago, Martin Sinescu said:

Consider that Whilce Portacio was working on the main title at the same time. Look at the cover for #4, where I think Lee starts to assert his style over the previous covers by Carl Potts. I vividly remember that cover and felt that's where the series was really kicking in, almost definitely because of Lee's influence. I think you're really doing Lee a disservice by implying that he just happened to be working on the title at the right time and was irrelevant in the hype around 6 & 7.

Whilce Portacio was another nobody who happened to be able to turn in serviceable art on time. Portacio got zero recognition of his quite considerable talent until he moved to X-Factor with issue #63. I didn't imply that Lee was irrelevant to the hype around PWJ #6 and 7: I outright state it. Those books did not sell because of Jim Lee. They sold because of Wolverine and Punisher. 

By all means, if you can prove me wrong, I would be thrilled to change my mind. Show me evidence that it was Jim Lee, the artist, that was the reason those books sold like they did, rather than Wolverine and Punisher.

2 hours ago, Martin Sinescu said:

I mean, Marvel could have run that meeting in either of the characters' main ongoing series at the time, but they chose War Journal and I would suggest that it was at least in part because they wanted to give it to the artist they felt would put on a visual showcase for the momentous event.

That's not how Marvel works, as I said earlier. The reason why PWJ #6 and #7 exists is either A. Carl Potts approached Tom DeFalco, who approached Claremont and Bob Harras, and thought it was a good idea, OR...B. DeFalco told Potts, Claremont, and Harras what he wanted to do, and they did it. PWJ was a higher cover price book at the time (even though costs were virtually the same by this time; another dirty little secret of comics publishing) so it made sense for the crossover to happen there. "Visual showcase for the momentous event"...? You realize, this is from the same company that published Secret Wars II, which featured art by Al Milgrom...? The series that was their "main event" of 1985...?

I guarantee you, who did the art was not even in their top 10 reasons for doing the crossover, so long as it was serviceable and on time. Here's yet another dirty little secret of comics publishing: publishers, editors, and creators VERY RARELY involved themselves with what was popular in comics at the time. They were concerned with what would sell 6 months from now, not what was on the shelves, and God forbid, in the back issue bins. They didn't care what was valuable, what was hot, what back issues people were searching for. It didn't matter, because they were working on what was coming out next. Their feedback to the market was, especially in those days, limited to LETTERS written in to them, to tell them that they liked this character, or that storyline, or that artist over there. While, yes, they were generally aware of the popularity of Wolvie and Punisher, I SERIOUSLY DOUBT (in fact, I'm quite sure of it) that anyone working for Marvel knew that ASM #129 was a $75 book by the spring of 1989, nor would they have cared if they did. All they knew was that sales of Punisher and PWJ were going up every month, and they wanted to keep that going. The "why" didn't so much matter, at least on a macro level.

Do not forget: PWJ was being published every 6 weeks at this point, because even the whore Marvel wasn't sure how well it would do. They chose War Journal because it was someone with editorial control's idea. Oh, and by the way...Portacio had finished his run on Punisher a couple of months before PWJ #6, and would only do one more cover, #20.

2 hours ago, Martin Sinescu said:

You know what would be cool, if we could get @stinkininkin here to share his thoughts on Lee's impact at Marvel through that period.

I'm sure it would be interesting to get his input, but as I said, creators are very rarely connected to the "back issue market." He may prove to be an exception.

2 hours ago, Martin Sinescu said:

One more thing while I've got you here, when you mentioned the sales numbers between NM 86 and 87, did you check 85 as well? I'm curious as to whether there was any bump at that point.

There was not. Cap City numbers were about 35,000 at this time. There was no significant bump in numbers until issue #93, which went up to 39k, and then #95, which went to 52k, which was a giant leap.

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 hours ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

Campbell? Hughes?

Name any book that has ever been broken out because of Campbell's work.

Any one at all.

And not just "Hi, I'm hot cheesecake cover artist J. Scott Campbell! My work sells because I draw slutty women really well on very limited variant covers!"

No, a regular issue that is broken out, highlighted, because of his actual work on the actual book....and not just a book that is valuable because of an impactful cover, either. I'm talking about the classic "this book is valuable because this artist drew it, regardless of how well."

Now do the same for Hughes.

I can do it for McFarlane: ASM #298-328. Hulk #330-346

Jim Lee: Alpha Flight #51, X-Men #248,256-258, 268, etc.

Liefeld: New Mutants #86-100.

Neal Adams: X-Men #56-63, 65, Batman various

John Byrne: Giant Size TOD #5, X-Men #108-143, MTU #53

Stephen Platt: Moon Knight #55-60

Jim Starlin: Cap Marvel #25-34, ST #178-181, Warlock #9-15

Art Adams: Longshot #1-6, X-Men Annual #9, 10

 

[Broke as a Joke]

5 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Name any book that has ever been broken out because of Campbell's work.

Any one at all.

And not just "Hi, I'm hot cheesecake cover artist J. Scott Campbell! My work sells because I draw slutty women really well on very limited variant covers!"

No, a regular issue that is broken out, highlighted, because of his actual work on the actual book....and not just a book that is valuable because of an impactful cover, either. I'm talking about the classic "this book is valuable because this artist drew it, regardless of how well."

Now do the same for Hughes.

I can do it for McFarlane: ASM #298-328. Hulk #330-346

Jim Lee: Alpha Flight #51, X-Men #248,256-258, 268, etc.

Liefeld: New Mutants #86-100.

Neal Adams: X-Men #56-63, 65, Batman various

John Byrne: Giant Size TOD #5, X-Men #108-143, MTU #53

Stephen Platt: Moon Knight #55-60

Jim Starlin: Cap Marvel #25-34, ST #178-181, Warlock #9-15

Art Adams: Longshot #1-6, X-Men Annual #9, 10

 

If Art Adams and the Longshot mini gets a nod then Campbell and the Gen13 original mini should also get one.  And I'm not even a JSC fan, but Gen13 was arguably the hottest book in the industry for a time and he was a hot artist at that moment.

[Broke as a Joke]

Also Uncanny X-Men 270 went to a second printing due to The Extintion Agenda crossover and not because of Jim Lee.  Case in point, X Factor 60 also went to an immediate second printing and it wasn't because of the artist on that book.  

[RockMyAmadeus]

24 minutes ago, Broke as a Joke said:

Also Uncanny X-Men 270 went to a second printing due to The Extintion Agenda crossover and not because of Jim Lee.  Case in point, X Factor 60 also went to an immediate second printing and it wasn't because of the artist on that book.  

All three of the first parts of X-Tinction (not "Extinction") Agenda went to a second printing, because they were sold out nationwide in a matter of days. X-Men #270, New Mutants #95, X-Factor #60.

Why did they sell out...?

"Jim Lee", as immeasurable as that is, is part of that reason. So is Liefeld. Not so much, Bogdanove, but the book sold out nonetheless, because it was part of X-Tinction Agenda.

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It was #268...then #269...then X-Tinction Agenda, which was monstrous; the most successful X-Crossover of all time up to that point.

Jim Lee was a serious factor....an UNKNOWABLE AS TO EXTENT factor...but a definite factor in the popularity of X-Tinction Agenda.

It's like saying "why is ice cream so popular in the summer? Is it because it's cold, or because it tastes so good?" The answer, of course, is "yes."

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

35 minutes ago, Broke as a Joke said:

If Art Adams and the Longshot mini gets a nod then Campbell and the Gen13 original mini should also get one.  And I'm not even a JSC fan, but Gen13 was arguably the hottest book in the industry for a time and he was a hot artist at that moment.

No. 

Longshot wasn't "a hot mini" when it came out, and Campbell was FAR from being a "hot artist" at the time of Gen 13. His art is pretty awful. 

Gen 13 was popular because it was underordered and struck a chord in buyers. 

Longshot, however, was drawn by a guy who went on to become the most popular new artist since John Byrne. The Longshot mini didn't achieve its peak value until the top of the "hot artist" movement in 1990, several years after it was published.

Longshot became, over time, popular. It wasn't an instant smash success, like Gen 13. And Gen 13 wasn't a smash success because of Campbell's art, which was, as mentioned, awful. Fairchild's legs aren't 5 feet long. It was GOOD ENOUGH, but it's not why it became so hot.

Two completely different trajectories.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

7 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Name any book that has ever been broken out because of Campbell's work.

Any one at all.

And not just "Hi, I'm hot cheesecake cover artist J. Scott Campbell! My work sells because I draw slutty women really well on very limited variant covers!"

No, a regular issue that is broken out, highlighted, because of his actual work on the actual book....and not just a book that is valuable because of an impactful cover, either. I'm talking about the classic "this book is valuable because this artist drew it, regardless of how well."

Now do the same for Hughes.

I can do it for McFarlane: ASM #298-328. Hulk #330-346

Jim Lee: Alpha Flight #51, X-Men #248,256-258, 268, etc.

Liefeld: New Mutants #86-100.

Neal Adams: X-Men #56-63, 65, Batman various

John Byrne: Giant Size TOD #5, X-Men #108-143, MTU #53

Stephen Platt: Moon Knight #55-60

Jim Starlin: Cap Marvel #25-34, ST #178-181, Warlock #9-15

Art Adams: Longshot #1-6, X-Men Annual #9, 10

 

I don't disagree that Campbell's and Hughes's popularity doesn't lend itself to the popularity of a run of books, but I would certainly describe them as "hot artists"; what that term means is a little different now, as collectors seem to be more focused on covers. (Can't see the insides when the books are in slabs.)

Quesda's work saw some interest for a while, although not to the extent of the others. There were a few others later in the '90s that were hot briefly, but that may have been more from speculation of trying to identify the next hot artist than legitimate interest from readers.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

don't disagree that Campbell's and Hughes's popularity doesn't lend itself to the popularity of a run of books, but I would certainly describe them as "hot artists"; what that term means is a little different now, as collectors seem to be more focused on covers. (Can't see the insides when the books are in slabs.)

Quesda's work saw some interest for a while, although not to the extent of the others. There were a few others later in the '90s that were hot briefly, but that may have been more from speculation of trying to identify the next hot artist than legitimate interest from readers.

@Mysterio was talking about this in another thread; we're in an era (and have been for a very long time) where there really isn't such thing as a "hot artist" anymore. Maybe we'll cycle back, but it's been an awful long time. And now, it's not the artist, but rather the subject matter, that attracts the interest. Hughes drawing a scantily clad Catwoman, WW, Zatanna, or Tomb Raider? $$$. Hughes drawing Archie...? Not so much. So now it's more of an "artists we like, drawing pictures we really like" thing, whereas, Byrne could just look at a book and it would be broken out in the OPG, regardless of the quality or subject matter (see: Iron Man #118.)

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

@Mysterio was talking about this in another thread; we're in an era (and have been for a very long time) where there really isn't such thing as a "hot artist" anymore. Maybe we'll cycle back, but it's been an awful long time. And now, it's not the artist, but rather the subject matter, that attracts the interest. Hughes drawing a scantily clad Catwoman, WW, Zatanna, or Tomb Raider? $$$. Hughes drawing Archie...? Not so much. So now it's more of an "artists we like, drawing pictures we really like" thing, whereas, Byrne could just look at a book and it would be broken out in the OPG, regardless of the quality or subject matter (see: Iron Man #118.)

Yeah, but that didn't always hold true for Byrne. His She-Hulk series didn't have particularly impressive sales.

Regarding Hughes, Campbell, etc., yeah, it's the combination of those things. Other artists doing similar subject matter don't necessarily guarantee similar results.

Agreed that trends change in collecting. The only thing that seems to persist through all ages is the desire for first appearances of characters. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

12 minutes ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

Yeah, but that didn't always hold true for Byrne. His She-Hulk series didn't have particularly impressive sales.

Regarding Hughes, Campbell, etc., yeah, it's the combination of those things. Other artists doing similar subject matter don't necessarily guarantee similar results.

Agreed that trends change in collecting. The only thing that seems to persist through all ages is the desire for first appearances of characters. 

Byrne's She-Hulk was after the fact, long after he was no longer a "hot artist." I'm referring to his books from 1975-1982, round about 1983-1985, when he was he hottest comics creator on the planet. 

It's not about other artists doing "good girl, pinup" art...it's about Hughes and Campbell doing just those specific types of art. Hughes and Campbell drawing, say, Batman or Archie, has virtually no impact on anyone. It could be Hughes, it could be Campbell, it could be Ramos, it could be Jae Lee, it could be Sal Buscema, it could be Nick Bradshaw, it could be quite literally anyone, and the reaction is generally the same: meh.

But you have Hughes draw a sexy woman in a sexy pose, and THAT SPECIFIC combination...Hughes AND sexy woman pose...and now you've got something, Hughes and no sexy woman pose? No interest. Catwoman #44? No interest. Wonder Woman #172? Meh. No sexy woman. Catwoman #70? Zatanna #16? Now we lose our collective minds.

So, the subject matter has overtaken the artist, in the minds of the buying public. The artist MATTERS...provided they're drawing "the right thing." It's like Warhol doing something besides soup or Marilyn Monroe. Those two? We lose our minds. Something else...? Meh. Sure, it's a WARHOL...but it's not THAT Warhol.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Byrne's She-Hulk was after the fact, long after he was no longer a "hot artist." I'm referring to his books from 1975-1982, round about 1983-1985, when he was he hottest comics creator on the planet. 

It's not about other artists doing "good girl, pinup" art...it's about Hughes and Campbell doing just those specific types of art. Hughes and Campbell drawing, say, Batman or Archie, has virtually no impact on anyone. It could be Hughes, it could be Campbell, it could be Ramos, it could be Jae Lee, it could be Sal Buscema, it could be Nick Bradshaw, it could be quite literally anyone, and the reaction is generally the same: meh.

But you have Hughes draw a sexy woman in a sexy pose, and THAT SPECIFIC combination...Hughes AND sexy woman pose...and now you've got something, Hughes and no sexy woman pose? No interest. Catwoman #44? No interest. Wonder Woman #172? Meh. No sexy woman. Catwoman #70? Zatanna #16? Now we lose our collective minds.

So, the subject matter has overtaken the artist, in the minds of the buying public. The artist MATTERS...provided they're drawing "the right thing." It's like Warhol doing something besides soup or Marilyn Monroe. Those two? We lose our minds. Something else...? Meh. Sure, it's a WARHOL...but it's not THAT Warhol.

Arguably something similar happened in the '80s and '90s. While people sought after some of Lee's and McFarlane's earlier work, it was Lee's X-men books and McFarlane's Hulk and Spider-man books that were important. I don't recall huge demand, after McFarlane exploded, for his Infinity Inc. books. Or Coyote. Or the odd issues of G.I. Joe, Daredevil, Alpha Flight, or New Universe books they worked on. A slight bump, maybe, but then again, how much of that was speculation by people thinking they *should* be worth more, rather than legitimate demand?

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

Arguably something similar happened in the '80s and '90s. While people sought after some of Lee's and McFarlane's earlier work, it was Lee's X-men books and McFarlane's Hulk and Spider-man books that were important. I don't recall huge demand, after McFarlane exploded, for his Infinity Inc. books. Or Coyote. Or the odd issues of G.I. Joe, Daredevil, Alpha Flight, or New Universe books they worked on. A slight bump, maybe, but then again, how much of that was speculation by people thinking they *should* be worth more, rather than legitimate demand?

I'm not talking about work on specific characters or titles. I'm talking about specific subject matter; in this case, scantily clad females drawn by popular artists.

ASM #311 wasn't worth anything more than ASM #313, and #306. #302 and #305 were worth "the same." Hulk #341 was worth as much as #344, or #338 as #334.

However, Catwoman #69 and #71 aren't really worth a premium...but Catwoman #70, with its sexy Catwoman with cleavage and siren red background...?

Now you're talking.

Very, very, very few hot artists of the past had covers break out on their own, by their own merits. None of John Byrne's covers is especially "iconic", on its own merits. A lot of his so-called "classic covers" are classics because of the story contained within. ASM #300? Hardly an iconic cover on its own. It's a nice work, but there's nothing particularly special about it. Todd's cover to #316 is far superior in layout, theme, composition, and linework. Far superior. So is, by the way, #325, which is, in my opinion, the finest cover he's ever done, on any title, ever. But that cover to #300 has become "iconic" because of the story inside.

Interestingly enough, you have to go back to the Golden Age to see comics that are iconic for the sole and only reason of its cover.

Startling Comics #49 is a great example of that. Can you tell me what happened in Startling that was important...? Nothing. It was a typical, run of the mill GA story.

But that Schomburg cover...it struck the right chord for a lot of people. So did Spirit #22. What happened in that issue? Nothing of importance. But boy, that Eisner cover...