Steve Ditko actually wrote about Spider-man... A LOT 5 5

[Prince Namor]

3 hours ago, N e r V said:

Pretty sparse, huh? But there is something of note in this run that Lee/Romita did here vs the Lee/Ditko run. Several villains prior to this had several appearances in those first 38 issues. But after the Kingpin was introduced in issue #50 his storyline as a Spider-Man villain occupied more than 1/3 of the Spider-Man comics for the next 35 issues. That was by design and in the process the Kingpin became not just a major Spider-Man villain but a major Marvel villain. 

Was it by design? The first few issues after the Green Goblin unmasking, Romita gave us the Rhino and then the Shocker - I think Stan quickly saw what was Romita's strength and what wasn't.

No one's trying to diminish Romita's contribution to Spider-man and to Marvel Comics in general. Really he's probably the unsung hero of the entire line of comics from 1966 to 1976. He's my favorite Marvel/DC artist of all time. He's the FACE of Marvel.

But I have no problem saying he wasn't very good at creating VILLAINS. Everything else I think he was the best at. 

3 hours ago, N e r V said:

Lee/Ditko took Spider-Man in one direction and Lee/Romita built on that and did their own thing in yet another direction. Lee left the series around the time of the famous drug issues so he ended on a high note. Romita left even earlier but stuck around making important contributions to the series for the next few years. 

They had to. Romita's strength was what it was. And it made the book enjoyable in a completely different way. 

3 hours ago, N e r V said:

I think they all were important to the Spider-Man legacy but their contributions to the series were different so I find it unfair to compare them. 

It's not unfair to compare them. They were both Spider-man artists. When people say, "Romita was so much better at drawing females", no one says, "Well it's unfair to compare them, that wasn't Ditko's strength."

Both artists had their strengths and their weaknesses.

Ditko created 19 villains in the first 38 issues of the ASM. Comparatively to Kirby on FF, or Batman or Infantino's Flash (though maybe even moreso than), it is maybe one of the most fertile villain creation periods in the history of comic books. 

Romita (or his defenders of, as I'm one of them) has no reason to be shamed by this - NO ONE in the history of comics can really make a claim to being as prolific as that - other than maybe in those other three instances. Romita had his greatness in other forms, most of them far better than Ditko - but villain creation - ESPECIALLY at the pace Ditko did it in this series - just wasn't one of them. Hardly anyone EVER did.

[Prince Namor]

5 hours ago, RANDOM ACTS said:

Can`t argue as those first 38 issues of Amazing Spider-Man were the best with Ditko. Weird though that when John Romita took over than Amazing Spider-Man went on to become the best selling super hero comics of the late 60s and 1970s.

We don't know that. Apparently all of the sales numbers from that era are fabricated and untrustworthy to gage as to what was printed.

[Prince Namor]

On 2/26/2020 at 2:41 AM, VintageComics said:

Agreed. Romita took the focus off of the villains, which eventually became just backdrops to Peter Parker's personal life.

I'd never made the connection to the romance work Romita did until someone mentioned it in this thread but it makes perfect sense as to why Spider-man took the direction he did once Romita took over.

It really is an example of how much the artists actually wrote the book. And I don't mean that in a way that takes from Stan Lee - obviously he had his input into what the storylines would be - especially outside of Kirby and Ditko.

But go and read some of those Romita romance comics... Romita didn't write them - he used full scripts at DC - but when you compare them to ASM you can definitely see the influence and how it shaped him in structuring the stories. 

If Stan had a million things going on and said to Romita, "How about in this issue we have Spidey being chased by the police and the Kingpin breaks out of jail!" Romita would take that and turn it into a comic that focused on the characters and their private lives, as opposed to the typical boring repeated process of just turning the action of it into 20 pages. 

This was an AMAZING ability. It was his STRENGTH. It's what he had (unknowingly) trained to do at DC for 7 years!

What is even MORE incredible about it (and often gets under valued) was his ability to make GREAT action sequences. Of all of the artists Stan tried to get to do it the 'Kirby's way', I find Romita's fight sequences far and away the absolute BEST. WAY WAY WAY under rated in my opinion.

THIS is what made the ASM the BEST of all of them - his ability to expand on the characterization in a way no one ever had before (and Stan's years of doing romance played a big part in this as well, I'm sure) and combine that with great ACTION sequences....

Romita's work on this book just doesn't get it's due.

Edited February 27, 2020 by Chuck Gower

[Prince Namor]

4 hours ago, N e r V said:

But after the Kingpin was introduced in issue #50 his storyline as a Spider-Man villain occupied more than 1/3 of the Spider-Man comics for the next 35 issues. That was by design and in the process the Kingpin became not just a major Spider-Man villain but a major Marvel villain. 

They'd already done this previously. After the Green Goblin was introduced in #14 he appeared in 1/3 of the Spider-man comics for the next 26 issues.

[Prince Namor]

It's been many years since I've read this run (have done it 3 times), but yeah... after #39-41, it gets... less memorable. The art is still great. But, #69-75 in particular is classic. The way Romita told this story and the artwork...

When Jim Mooney did inks over Romita from #67 (?) through 70 (?), it's probably my favorite run of art on the book ever. 

After that... I have a great affection for #80 - a great one shot story that brought the Chameleon back, but outside the art, it feels a bit autopiloted until the drug issues...

And the Roy Thomas/Gil Kane issues... ugh...

 

[bababooey]

2 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

We don't know that. Apparently all of the sales numbers from that era are fabricated and untrustworthy to gage as to what was printed.

No way are ALL the sales numbers inaccurate...not sure what sort of revelation has taken hold since page 26 of this thread  I'm skimming  While I'm sure there are inconsistencies, errors and the like....there is no reason to totally ignore industry statistics from this era or any era for that matter.  

[KPR Comics]

On 2/24/2020 at 9:27 PM, N e r V said:

Since Thor is brought up now in this thread how about this story by Ditko done a bit earlier...
 

 

 “Well, this is a surprise. From Charlton's OUT OF THIS WORLD# 11 back in 1959, we find a weakly blond man entering a cave in Scandanavia and emerging with impressive muscles and the Hammer of Thor. He uses this new power to repel invaders. Huh. There are more differences than similarities here to the Marvel Thor origin in JOURNEY INTO MYSTERY# 83 three years later, to be sure, but it's interesting. Comics were a small world in that era, creators chatted and gossiped and swapped ideas cheerfully. Maybe Stan Lee or Jack Kirby read this story, maybe Steve Ditko was in the office one day and said, "You know, I did a Thor story a few years ago" and told them about it.”

 

 

All due respect to Steve Ditko, if this conversation did take place I imagine that Stan said: "Stick to pencils, Steve."  That Thor story is not good.

[Prince Namor]

Some thought it outrageous that Steve Ditko's dark humor take on 'ownership of a character' could be extended to Martin Goodman, since HE made all the final decision's in things. But maybe it wasn't so outrageous... from 1947:

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

[jjonahjameson11]

On ‎2‎/‎26‎/‎2020 at 2:38 AM, VintageComics said:

I actually loved Sinnott's work on those early Byrne pencils. Sinnott made art look like classic, superhero comics no matter who he was inking.

What I didn't like is how Byrne changed his style in #232 onward. Everyone had big heads and the bodies of teenagers and it drove me crazy when the issues came out. I was a big fan of his work on X-men but honestly, I really forced myself to look past things I didn't like about his new style in his 2nd tenure on the FF.

I think Byrne changed his art style to look more contemporary because Frank Miller was starting to make a big impact at Marvel around this time (1981) and everyone's styles were changing in an effort to either mimic Miller or push the envelope and compete with him (my opinion).

Austin's inks are great but Byrne's new style pencils really kind of ruined it for me.

Roy, what happened with Byrne's style on FF 232 & several issues onward, is that he penciled AND inked his own interiors on the title (Austin inked the covers), hence the root cause of the stuff that drove you crazy. 

 

[Prince Namor]

A lot of writer/artists use this method, especially to work quicker: Pencil breakdowns and then do the real detail in ink. Some will even block in text before hand to save on not drawing what’s going to get covered up.

I’m in the same group - I prefer Bryne’s work when inked by Austin. I enjoy it more than anything else he’s done. 
 

Others may see it differently. 
 

Bryne seems a bit touchy about the subject. 

[Logan510]

15 hours ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Roy, what happened with Byrne's style on FF 232 & several issues onward, is that he penciled AND inked his own interiors on the title (Austin inked the covers), hence the root cause of the stuff that drove you crazy. 

 

This might be the first time I've ever heard anyone speak negatively of his FF run 

[jjonahjameson11]

8 hours ago, Logan510 said:

This might be the first time I've ever heard anyone speak negatively of his FF run 

I was merely replying to Roy’s question

[Logan510]

1 hour ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

I was merely replying to Roy’s question

I know you were, I have him on ignore but since you quoted him I saw his post.