• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Stan Lee Lied - Your Handy Guide to Every Lie in the 'Origins of Marvel Comics'
11 11

Started by Prince Namor,

2,604 posts in this topic

comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/10/2024 at 4:11 AM, Prince Namor said:

If RMA was fact checking you the way he fact checked everyone else's debate tactics, the length of this thread would double.

@CGC Mike I saw this as being contentious. Drawing multiple people into an attack for the sake of an undue instigation.

Edited by comicwiz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 10/9/2024 at 6:42 AM, Prince Namor said:

Sounds like something Lee made up, because he assumes every one is as motivated by money as he was.

If Ditko was after money, he would've taken it when Lee reached out about the co-creator status to him during the first Spider-man movie hoopla. Ditko could've gotten paid big right then and there. I don't believe it was ever about the money. I believe it was over the work he'd done that Lee was credited for. 

96937b.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Administrator
  • Popular Post
CGC Mike

CGC Mike

Posted
  • Administrator
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 10/10/2024 at 8:35 AM, comicwiz said:

@CGC Mike I saw this as being contentious. Drawing multiple people into an attack for the sake of undue instigating.

I agree.  There should be no singling/calling  people out in the thread.  The post I quoted was more severe.  There is no one sided moderation.  I go by the words that are posted, and not the poster.   

Edit:

I say this as there have been reports of one sided moderation.  This is not the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
On 10/10/2024 at 8:56 AM, namisgr said:

It's attitudes like this that have no place in a healthy, respectful board discussion.

From where I'm sitting, and reading, the instigators are the ones being disrespectful.

No one is forcing anyone to buy this book.

That said, as someone who is currently reading this book, and who is looking forward to reviewing it when I'm done, with the added upside and opportunity to direct questions or comments to the author at that point in time, who also happens to be a long-time boardie, it is something I'd very much like to actualize. 

Without malcontents who bring zero to this discussion, except undue attacks against the author, as well as those who want to see this thread remain. 

Again, ff there's anyone being disrespectful, it's those that continue to bring undue instigation to this thread, with nothing to show. No evidence. Not one iota of research or receipts, particulalry when they double or triple down to make a baseless point.

Nothing but words trying to assail or disguise their true intent, which is to have this thread locked.

Edited by comicwiz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RockMyAmadeus

RockMyAmadeus

Posted
Posted
On 10/10/2024 at 6:02 AM, comicwiz said:

From where I'm sitting, and reading, the instigators are the ones being disrespectful.

No one is forcing anyone to buy this book.

That said, as someone who is currently reading this book, and who is looking forward to reviewing it when I'm done, with the added upside and opportunity to direct questions or comments to the author at that point in time, who also happens to be a long-time boardie, it is something I'd very much like to actualize. 

Without malcontents who bring zero to this discussion, except undue attacks against the author, as well as those who want to see this thread remain. 

Again, ff there's anyone being disrespectful, it's those that continue to bring undue instigation to this thread, with nothing to show. No evidence. No iota of research or receipts. Nothing but words trying to assail or disguise their true intent, which is to have this thread locked.

:applause:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Albert Tatlock

Albert Tatlock

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 10/10/2024 at 9:14 AM, Prince Namor said:

 

ESSAYs and TALKING POINTS from ‘Stan Lee Lied: Your Handy Guide to All of the LIES in ‘The Origins of Marvel Comics’. (The Book that Stan Lee Fans and Marvel Comics DON’T Want You to Read!) - Available now on Amazon!

 

STAN LEE MEDIA - Let’s Keep That on the Down Low!

One of the things that I didn't talk about in my book that I could've spent more time on, especially in a book called Stan Lee LIED, was one of his BIGGEST lies…

No, not Marvel Value Stamps. 

Yes, Lee DID promise in the mid-70s, that if you cut those stamps out of your comics and collected them in your Marvel Value Stamp book (which you had to purchase through the mail for 50 cents), you could win… well you weren’t SURE what you won… you had to send a self-addressed stamped envelope to Phil Seuling to see what the discount was to get into his New York Comic Art Convention Show.

If you bought 100 Marvel Comics in 1975, at 25 cents each, that would be $25.50 you spent, in order to get a discount to a comic book show that probably cost less than $5 to get into in 1975… Hmmm. Lee and Marvel of course promised more prizes and surprises later, but… the surprise for some was that nothing ever was actually given.

No, we’re on to something much bigger. As Lee got bigger, and his lifestyle got bigger - he needed bigger scams - and here we have one of his biggest.

Most people don't really know the story of Stan Lee Media because Marvel or Stan Lee Incorporated or somebody has done a great job of keeping it on the down low. It sort of glosses over it on his Wikipedia page, but… here I am to give you a more clear understanding of it!

So let's set the stage for this:

 

It's 1998, and Marvel is in trouble again financially. It seems that for the first 50 years of ‘Marvel Comics’, the only time that it was profitable and not on the verge of some type of falling apart or bankruptcy or whatever was when Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko were giving ideas that made it successful or when Jim Shooter was running it.

1958? Getting ready to close down. 1978? On the verge of bankruptcy. 1998? Declaring bankruptcy. The missing decades there: Kirby and Ditko's ideas in the 60s and Jim Shooter’s, organization and bringing in real creative talent in the 80’s. Just sayin’.  

At this point, 1998, Marvel Comics still didn't have a Big Screen Superhero Movie. They were still a few years away from that. Superman had four already. Batman had just finished ITS fourth movie. 

Marvel?

Sony’s first Spider-man movie was 4 years away, Fox’s X-Men was still 2 years away, and Marvel itself was 10 years away from the first Iron Man movie.

Who were the most popular characters in the world???

By 1998, Marvel Comics, run by Isaac Perlmutter had declared bankruptcy and decided to NOT re-up Stan Lee’s contract. I guess they figured, his name hadn't done a damn thing for them, why keep him around? Of course, Lee is furious.

He puts together a partnership with a two-time convicted felon, Peter Paul - Lee had a history, post-Marvel of deals with shady characters - and creates Stan Lee Media (SLM). But it's just a dot com company with no money and intellectual property in it. What they need is investors. So Lee plays dumb and makes people think that he’s bringing all of the characters from Marvel to Stan Lee Media.

Can you imagine?

People fall all over themselves to invest in the company. A brand new company with all of those characters and you have a chance to invest in it on the ground floor?

What he doesn’t say is that at the same time he is putting Stan Lee Media together, he is also negotiating with Marvel Comics for a new contract. And naturally, part of that negotiation is his agreement that he no longer claims the rights to those characters - in exchange for a lifetime contract. The Lee fanatics used to say that Lee never claimed that he actually owned the characters - WRONG - here he had specifically said he did and scared Marvel so much that they gave him a $1 million a year (plus perks) contract (oh, plus movie points) for the rest of his life. 

The REST of his LIFE. 

Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko probably rolled over in their graves.

 

(BARRON'S) November 1998 -- a month after assigning his intellectual property to Stan Lee Media -- Lee had gone to Marvel claiming half-ownership of Spider-Man, the X-Men and other characters, since Marvel had cancelled his previous rights assignment in its bankruptcy. Lee got a new contract for up to $1 million in annual salary and 10% of movie and TV profits, assigning Marvel his rights in those characters.  

 

Strangely - and you have to SUBSCRIBE to be able to look that up - Barron’s is one of the few who reported on this at time, that you can still access information on it.

Where did the reporting go on this topic?

 

So Stan Lee Media shoots straight up in value and then the slow realization begins that none of those Marvel characters would be a part of it. Slowly it turns the stock into worthless . They TRIED to prop things up with, ‘A new era of Stan Lee ideas’, mainly fueled by gullible dunces creating horrible ideas for the guy to let him sign his name to. It didn’t work.

Why didn’t Lee himself come up with ideas?

Seriously?

Do I have to say it?

Because Stan Lee wasn’t a writer or a real creator. Without someone doing the work for him to sign his name to, he had nothing.  

 

Example: How did Lee fail so spectacularly in Hollywood?

He was taking meetings (go read about it) with Michael Jackson and RZA and Francis Ford Coppola… they all were in awe of the man who… created the Marvel Universe?

Like Howard the Duck, Lee was literally trapped in a world that he never made. He took meetings with everyone over the years. He had opportunity after opportunity to create something for any one of the celebrities and creative people he met with. But he kept waiting for THEM to give HIM ideas, not vice versa.

In the end, Lee would be a comic con signing celebrity, propped up like the boss in the movie ‘Weekend at Bernie’s’. Existing to make the fans happy, with no expectation to create anything.

He came to Hollywood in 1981. He’d finally become an actor - just not the one he’d hoped to be - settling on playing a cameo in many of the Marvel Movies.

Deep inside he’d hope to show he could still be a viable creator… but he had to settle for vapid fame, and a big Marvel contract. In the end, the fans he’d created, decided what they wanted him to be. Just like one of those twist-ending stories…

 

Strangely… much of the information about the early days of Stan Lee Media and its relationship to the Marvel characters has vanished from the internet. As if, maybe people will forget…

But the investors DIDN’T forget.

In 2009 they sued Stan Lee Media, and Marvel Comics:

 

“Stan Lee, the comics creator, and Marvel Entertainment were among the defendants named in a lawsuit filed on Monday in federal court in Manhattan by investors who say they are owed profits from films and other works that feature Marvel characters, The Associated Press reported.”

- New York Times, January 27, 2009

 

“Shareholders from the ill-fated .com enterprise, Stan Lee Media, are seeking $750 million in profits made from films and other works based on characters created by Stan Lee.  High-powered attorney Martin Garbus, who has argued four major cases before the Supreme Court, has filed a suit on behalf of a number of Stan Lee Media stockholders including Jose Abadin and Nelson Thall, claiming that they were harmed when Marvel and Lee transferred ownership of Lee’s creations from Stan Lee Media to Marvel in a 1998 agreement, which was supposedly signed a month after Lee had assigned his rights to Stan Lee Media.  Lee’s 1998 agreement with Marvel was the basis for a 2002 lawsuit by Lee against Marvel, which was settled confidentially in 2005.”

- ICv2, January 27, 2009

 

So did Stan Lee end up going to jail for that?

LOL. Uh, no. Somehow, he got through it unscathed.

None of what happened later would have happened at all, without Lee promising those characters were going to be a part of Stan Lee Media. But somehow, Lee dodged it.

Of course, Peter Paul, his partner, the two-time convicted felon did NOT dodge it. Another in a long line of people who worked for Stan Lee that got screwed over in dealing with him.

The man that so many people looked up to as a father figure - as somebody sweet and wonderful - as somebody who they got their first Marvel Comic book written by him, was in fact a very ruthless backstabbing, lying conniving goniff. 

He screwed over Martin Goodman, who gave him a 30+ year job that helped him build his wealth throughout his life, where most of the time he didn't even have to be in the office.  

He screwed over Goodman's son Chip, which is partially how he screwed over Martin by stealing the publisher position from him (and running the business to the verge of bankruptcy over the next five years.)

He screwed over Jack Kirby, who not only saved his job but, along with Steve Ditko, gave all of the ideas that helped make Marvel Comics successful. He screwed them both over.

He screwed over Roy Thomas, who basically was told he would be the number one guy after Lee left. Thomas knows some secrets about the 60’s that, unfortunately, we may never hear, because he was Lee’s lap dog, and because they would eventually reconcile. Lee gave him a cushy newspaper strip to ghostwrite for him, and in exchange, Thomas would print his pro-Lee propaganda for eternity.

He screwed over Marvel Comics, threatening to take characters that he didn't really create, and in exchange for them, receive a lifetime contract. Technically, that's blackmail. (Lee would later sue Marvel for not paying what he believed he was owed from the movies - but even worse than that, in 2007 his lawyers claimed he DID NOT give Marvel copyright interests in the characters and sued them for that!)

He screwed over Peter Paul, even though he was a pretty shady character in the first place and somebody who you have to question why Lee would have that relationship with in the first place. Paul took it on the chin for Stan Lee Media, while Lee walked away free and clear.

And of course he screwed over those who invested heavily in Stan Lee Media on the promise that those characters would be a part of it.

Can you believe I wrote a book called Stan Lee Lied, and people are taking me to task for it?

Jimmy Freaking Cricket on Popsicle Stick, this guy might be one of the biggest scam artists in the history of ALL media.

 

Every time I go into a conversation about, especially about my book, Lee fanatics always say the same thing: you're not telling all the sides of the STORY.  You're not telling Lee’s side of the story. (This is despite the fact that my book QUOTES DIRECTLY FROM Lee’s side of the story. Duh.)

Well, when it comes to Stan Lee Media, I would LOVE to hear Lee’s side of the story, but unfortunately, they're keeping HIS side of the story quiet. This is something they DON’T want to have a conversation about. So the next time you’re having a debate with someone about Lee’s shady dealings from the Silver Age and they say, “why don’t you tell both sides?”… ask them about Stan Lee Media.

Because Stan Lee made sure he kept HIS side of the story as quiet as possible.

Screen Shot 2024-10-10 at 10.57.38 AM.png

Wow!

This latest post is an eye-opener.

My gallery of Marvel super-villains use to be headed by Docs Doom and Octopus, Magneto, Baron Zemo, Kang, Loki and a few others.

Now Stan has shouldered his way to the front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/10/2024 at 9:07 AM, Albert Tatlock said:

Wow!

This latest post is an eye-opener.

My gallery of Marvel super-villains use to be headed by Docs Doom and Octopus, Magneto, Baron Zemo, Kang, Loki and a few others.

Now Stan has shouldered his way to the front.

I tried responding to this, but for some reason my post vaporized when I hit submit reply. I won't retype that out again, but I would highly recommend doing some reading on the Martin Garbus led lawsuit, lots of pertinent details worth devling into. The Wiki news link I provided is just a starting point, lots more where that came from, if you choose to go down that rabbit hole. And one final point, anyone that tries to diminish Kirby, by bringing-up work after he left Marvel, should do themselves a favour and research how abborhent that entire sham that was SLM, but particularly the 7th Portal. There's no way anyone can come out of that crash course EVER thinking Lee was capable of doing things on his own, or without the talents of Kirby or Ditko.

Edited by comicwiz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Administrator
  • Popular Post
CGC Mike

CGC Mike

Posted
  • Administrator
  • Popular Post
Posted

I am going to unlock this thread now.  I expect this debate to remain civil.  That means no personal attacks at people that you disagree with.  Do not make it personal.  This got out of line and caused the thread to be locked.  By now, most all have made up their mind as to which side they are on.  Yes, there are sides.  Some do not like to see their comic creator idol raked across the coals.  Others want to expose him for taking credit away from others.  This can be discussed.  However, I have been more than patient in this thread.  Some people say remove the trolls that are attacking the book.  I am not going to do that for obvious reasons.  The author had to know that there are going to be some people that have strong feelings against what was written.  They are not trolls.  On the flip side, the author has a right to defend what he has written.  People have the right to agree with what was written in the book, thus defending the author.  They are not trolls either.  All of this can be discussed here in a civil manner.  If problems continue in this thread, it will be shut down permanently.  I have other duties, and I am not going to come here several times a day and try to sort out a big mess.  You are all adults so please make sure you act like one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Get Marwood & I

Get Marwood & I

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

I've been working through the book and it does exactly what it says on the cover. It's not a biography, so I'm not sure why many are criticising it for being - for want of a better phrase - 'one sided'. As I see it, the starting point is Stan's book. That doesn't include any self criticism. It is a one sided attempt to present history as Stan would want the reader to see it. Chuck's book simply rebuts the content of Stan's book, citing sources. The reader can get the balanced view by reading both books and then making their minds up. That's what I'm doing. I knew Stan wasn't whiter than white, but I wasn't quite prepared for learning the extent to which that was the case.

Chuck, I'm secretly jealous of anyone who gets a comic related book into print. It remains one of my own goals, and when I finally get around to it, it will be based on facts and only facts. Well done for getting your book out there, and giving readers the opportunity to see Stan in a different, likely far more realistic light.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
11 11
Go to topic listing