Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the 'Origins of Marvel Comics' 9 9

[sfcityduck]

On 9/27/2024 at 3:36 PM, Prince Namor said:

His track record speaks for itself.

 

On that we agree. Entirely independent of what co-credit he deserved for Marvel creations, Lee breathed life into the art with his dialogue which is essential to characterization. And his marketing ideas were genius. Marvel got publicity outsized to their sales figures because the man was a master at PR hype. Jack "King" Kirby was a Lee invention not something bestowed on Jack by his colleagues or fans. But it sure caught on, deservedly so because Jack turned out to really be the "King" artist of the SA due to his contributions to Marvel. 

[Prince Namor]

On 9/28/2024 at 5:54 AM, sfcityduck said:

On that we agree. Entirely independent of what co-credit he deserved for Marvel creations, Lee breathed life into the art with his dialogue which is essential to characterization. And his marketing ideas were genius. Marvel got publicity outsized to their sales figures because the man was a master at PR hype. Jack "King" Kirby was a Lee invention not something bestowed on Jack by his colleagues or fans. But it sure caught on, deservedly so because Jack turned out to really be the "King" artist of the SA due to his contributions to Marvel. 

And yet by 1977 they stood on the verge of bankruptcy.

Jim Shooter deserves more credit for bringing the Brand to the masses. 

[Prince Namor]

Let's look at some Joe Simon work from Sick Magazine! (Drawn by someone else, of course)

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

[Prince Namor]

Joe Simon made me laugh out loud: “You won’t find a human being anywhere in these books. And if you ever meet the guys who turn it out you’d run into the same trouble.”

Interesting that way back then, Simon making veiled and not-so-veiled references to Lee never being in the office (According to Thomas he only came in two days a week) and his use of ghostwriters (verified by Denny O'Neil, and soon to revealed... others who were there).

[Prince Namor]

So... does that cartoon surprise anyone?

Did you know it came out in the Fall of 1966???

Yeah... within the industry, people were well aware that Lee was a fraud. This wasn't something that came to life years after the fact.

Almost 60 years of propaganda, makes writing a book in 2024 about something that... 'the people who were there' already knew in 1966... kinda tough.

[miraclemet]

Wasn't there some inside joke meme that used to get used on the old CGc boards? Feel like it got trotted put whenever a thread wouldn't die....

 

I'm blanking on it...

[sfcityduck]

On 9/27/2024 at 3:50 PM, Prince Namor said:

Goodman was going to shut down. It's fact.

 

Serious question: Based on what evidence? In August 1958, they skipped a month of publication? Or do we have some definitive docs that Goodman had his attorney draft up the bankruptcy filing but when he saw Jack Kirby he called off the lawyers and said: "Let's give it a try!" 

[sfcityduck]

On 9/27/2024 at 4:15 PM, Prince Namor said:

So... does that cartoon surprise anyone?

Did you know it came out in the Fall of 1966???

 

Not me. In Fall 1966, Joe Simon was pursuing the Captain America rights and was very pissed at Marvel. I assume he was also annoyed with Jack Kirby who was supporting his then employer Marvel in its dispute with Simon. I assume the old guy with the bad memory was Simon's shot at Kirby for the kind of "recollection" seen in the July 1966 Declaration where Kirby said Timely owned Captain America. That declaration was probably presented to Simon before he sued Marvel during settlement discussions or an attempt at deterrence to let him know that Jack Kirby wouldn't back him. Simon went forward with the lawsuit anyway. He ultimately settled on unfavorable terms.

Sick, the publication you view as not a success, was much edgier and much more mature than MAD or Cracked. So I am not at all surprised that Simon used that creative outlet to take shots at Marvel and in 1966 Stan was the face of Marvel. Joe Simon was certainly courageous.

[Prince Namor]

On 9/28/2024 at 6:39 AM, sfcityduck said:

Serious question: Based on what evidence? In August 1958, they skipped a month of publication? Or do we have some definitive docs that Goodman had his attorney draft up the bankruptcy filing but when he saw Jack Kirby he called off the lawyers and said: "Let's give it a try!" 

JL Mast's book which comes out next year is going to shock some comic book people with its content. 
He dug thru the Stan Lee archives and the New York City archives and he dug deep. 
 

A lot of interesting information that makes me smile. 
 

And one of them is a document proving that Goodman was going to shut down, dated about a week after Maneely's death. 

[sfcityduck]

On 9/27/2024 at 5:01 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

And one of them is a document proving that Goodman was going to shut down, dated about a week after Maneely's death. 

What is it?

When did Maneely die?

And when exactly did Kirby walk in the door?

Edited 11 hours ago by sfcityduck

[Prince Namor]

On 9/28/2024 at 7:00 AM, sfcityduck said:

Not me. In Fall 1966, Joe Simon was pursuing the Captain America rights and was very pissed at Marvel. I assume he was also annoyed with Jack Kirby who was supporting his then employer Marvel in its dispute with Simon. I assume the old guy with the bad memory was Simon's shot at Kirby for the kind of "recollection" seen in the July 1966 Declaration where Kirby said Timely owned Captain America. That declaration was probably presented to Simon before he sued Marvel during settlement discussions or an attempt at deterrence to let him know that Jack Kirby wouldn't back him. Simon went forward with the lawsuit anyway. He ultimately settled on unfavorable terms.

Sick, the publication you view as not a success, was much edgier and much more mature than MAD or Cracked. So I am not at all surprised that Simon used that creative outlet to take shots at Marvel and in 1966 Stan was the face of Marvel. Joe Simon was certainly courageous.

I never viewed it as not a success. You keep misrepresenting what I've clarified numerous times. 
 

That is clearly disingenuous. 
 

Simon claimed ownership rights for HIMSELF, minus Kirby. Kirby had no reason to back that. 

Edited 9 hours ago by Prince Namor

[Prince Namor]

On 9/28/2024 at 7:02 AM, sfcityduck said:

What is it?

When did Maneely die?

And when exactly did Kirby walk in the door?

Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to All of the Lies in the Origins of Marvel Comics!

Available Now at Amazon!

[comicwiz]

On 9/27/2024 at 7:00 PM, Prince Namor said:

Let's look at some Joe Simon work from Sick Magazine! (Drawn by someone else, of course)

That opening panel made me immediately think this was done after Dripko left Marvel (Nov 1965).

[sfcityduck]

On 9/27/2024 at 5:04 PM, Prince Namor said:

I never viewed it as not a success. You keep misrepresenting what I've clarified numerous times. 
 

That is clearly disingenuous. 
 

Simon claimed ownership rights for HIMSELF, minus Kirby. Kirby had to reason to back that. 

Kirby could have joined him but he was at height of his success at Marvel.

[sfcityduck]

On 9/27/2024 at 3:30 PM, Prince Namor said:

 

Kirby created a whole new UNIVERSE of characters - Gods battling throughout the Universe - that no one in Mainstream Funny Books was doing.

Uh. … isn’t that Thor and Tales of Asgard?

[Prince Namor]

On 9/28/2024 at 8:30 AM, sfcityduck said:

Uh. … isn’t that Thor and Tales of Asgard?

He expanded from that, yes, but that was also Kirby.

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

On 9/28/2024 at 12:21 AM, miraclemet said:

Wasn't there some inside joke meme that used to get used on the old CGc boards? Feel like it got trotted put whenever a thread wouldn't die....

 

I'm blanking on it...

I believe it was this. I could be wrong, but I do remember seeing this a lot. Haven't seen it about for a while.

Spoiler

 

Edited 7 hours ago by Paul © ® ⚽️💙™

[Prince Namor]

I have never really understood people who aren't interested in a topic, yet come into a thread to complain about it. Weird.