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

[Prince Namor]

On 10/6/2024 at 8:49 AM, VintageComics said:

It's established fact that eyewitness testimony and / or recollection of the past is not 100% accurate, which explains why these guys were contradicting themselves A LOT.

Where's Kirby contradicting himself? I'll wait.

On 10/6/2024 at 8:49 AM, VintageComics said:

What was possibly a 5 minute, forgettable, random conversation 60 years ago, about something unimportant at the time (like who gave Thor which attributes) all of a sudden becomes a literal million dollar question and then everyone struggles to recollect the details and everyone, inevitably gets them wrong, or at the very least nobody gets them all correct.

Which you're happily willing to accept when Stan Lee says them. Got it.

On 10/6/2024 at 8:49 AM, VintageComics said:

Kirby and Lee both constantly contradicted themselves on public record, and for this reason you can't build a gospel out of one fallible person's testimony. You certainly can't extrapolate one quote and build a thesis from it. 

Where's Kirby contradicting himself? I'll wait.

On 10/6/2024 at 8:49 AM, VintageComics said:

This is why it takes collective input, corroboration, and open discussion to get to the truth of a complex matter like who said what, in a 5 minute convo, 60 years ago.

Finally, when a one sided ideology refuses to subject itself to logic and reason, whether it's an oppressive regime, or just an unreasonable discussion, then, whether it's a jury, or a sanhedrin, or just a collection of people knowledgeable on a given topic, numbers of people who are knowledge on the matter begin to matter. 

So stop doing it.

Again - I gave you multiple reasons Lee most likely didn't have anything to do with the creation of Thor. YOU gave me, "because he said so."

Is that logic? Is that reason?

And then written a bunch of words to hide the fact that you painted yourself in a corner and have nowhere to go with that line of questioning.

So answer the question, Delic.

Is it logical to take Lee's side, when there are multiple reasons to show he DIDN'T, and the only pro on his side is that "he said so?"

Is that LOGICAL? Does that show REASON?

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 10/5/2024 at 8:17 PM, Prince Namor said:

Where's Kirby contradicting himself? I'll wait.

Which you're happily willing to accept when Stan Lee says them. Got it.

Where's Kirby contradicting himself? I'll wait.

So stop doing it.

Again - I gave you multiple reasons Lee most likely didn't have anything to do with the creation of Thor. YOU gave me, "because he said so."

Is that logic? Is that reason?

And then written a bunch of words to hide the fact that you painted yourself in a corner and have nowhere to go with that line of questioning.

So answer the question, Delic.

Is it logical to take Lee's side, when there are multiple reasons to show he DIDN'T, and the only pro on his side is that "he said so?"

Is that LOGICAL? Does that show REASON?

[VintageComics]

On 10/5/2024 at 11:09 PM, Prince Namor said:

On 10/5/2024 at 8:18 PM, VintageComics said:

For the same reason that Kirby ultimately wasn't as successful alone as he was with Simon and Lee.

What? Jack Kirby wrote and drew comics until the day he died. He WAS successful.

You're moving the goalposts again. 

I didn't say he wasn't successful. He wasn't AS successful without Lee or Simon. 

On 10/5/2024 at 11:09 PM, Prince Namor said:

On 10/5/2024 at 8:18 PM, VintageComics said:

So this post is not really addressing anything in the convo. 

But Marvel did become great again, and it was built on BOTH Stan and Kirby's initial achievements. 

But I thought it was 50/50? Didn't you say that?

All relationships are 50/50?

Seems the pay and the credit fell a bit short of that. 

You're moving the goalposts again. 

Every time I used my 50/50 quote, which stated every relationship is 50% what you do, and 50% what you allow, and it was directly referencing what sort of treatment Kirby allowed to himself, during his career in the same way an abused person allows their abuser to continue abusing them. 

It wasn't referencing their success.

But on that tangent, as far as their success goes, clearly it must be split 50/50. That's an entirely different discussion though, so you can't conflate between the two. 

It's these subtle movements of the goal posts that remove all credibility. 

 

On 10/5/2024 at 11:09 PM, Prince Namor said:

Who is talking about that? When did I say that? You're just making stuff up.

You stated this:

On 10/5/2024 at 7:50 PM, Prince Namor said:

Which brings up another point. If his ballyhoo was so great... why'd Marvel start crumbling to the point of near bankruptcy in the 70's with him as publisher?

Why'd the 'House of Ideas' suddenly have no ideas? Why'd it take, again, an outside creator (Star Wars) to come in and save the company?

Why'd Jim Shooter take over as EIC and turn Marvel into a REAL publishing juggernaut, far exceeding what Lee ever did? Even as DC got their act together and built back up, Marvel beat them in a competitive market - unlike the 70's where only DC's rapid decline enabled Marvel to claim #1, even with their own sales dwindling.

Asking for a friend.

I stated this:

On 10/5/2024 at 8:18 PM, VintageComics said:

For the same reason that Kirby ultimately wasn't as successful alone as he was with Simon and Lee. 

Nobody has made the case that Stan Lee is the only reason that Marvel was successful and so this point is another Gower sidestep to the actual, germane points of the conversation.

Every single person that disagrees with your conclusions still believes that Marvel was better with Stan and Jack together than apart. 

So this post is not really addressing anything in the convo. 

But Marvel did become great again, and it was built on BOTH Stan and Kirby's initial achievements. 

Your first question is "If his ballyhoo was so great why did Marvel start crumbling with him as publisher" and the answer is in the quote above which you took one sentence out of context. 

The short answer is that Stan's "ballyhoo" coupled with Kirby's ability to create made them greater together than they were apart. Kinda like Disney. Or Barnum. Or Steve Jobs. 

Neither was as great afterward, as they were together during the 60's. It was lighting in a bottle.

Edited October 6 by VintageComics

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 10/5/2024 at 8:37 PM, VintageComics said:

It was lighting in a bottle.

[Prince Namor]

On 10/6/2024 at 10:37 AM, VintageComics said:

You're moving the goalposts again. 

I didn't say he wasn't successful. He wasn't AS successful without Lee or Simon.

And I said: Jack Kirby wrote and drew comics until the day he died. He WAS successful.

That's not moving the goalposts - Kirby did what he always did regardless of who he worked for.

And success is subjective term.

 

Wasn't as successful financially? Wrong. He made more money in animation than he ever did in comics.

Wasn't as successful spiritually? Wrong. He was much happier not having those two... to share credit with.

As far as sales? We don't have all the numbers.

As far as cultural significance - movies made of the characters - Marvel's stock price, etc. CORRECT.

Which did he benefit the least from? 

Success can be measured in a lot of different ways.

In the way YOU are measuring it - you are RIGHT. As a FAN, you're happy to be able to constantly enjoy the adventures of Captain America on the big screen or as a SELLER be able to sell the first appearance of Thor and make a lot of money from it. I get that. Money = Success to you.

On 10/6/2024 at 10:37 AM, VintageComics said:

You're moving the goalposts again. 

Every time I used my 50/50 quote, which stated every relationship is 50% what you do, and 50% what you allow, and it was directly referencing what sort of treatment Kirby allowed to himself, during his career in the same way an abused person allows their abuser to continue abusing them. 

It wasn't referencing their success.

I've worked with a lot of abused women in my life who wouldn't see it the same.

And I've watched EEOC handle many employee cases over the years who wouldn't see it the same either.

What you've done here is empower the abuser. You're leaving out important details in abusive relationships like promises made, manipulation, fear of losing your job, intimidation, etc. 

On 10/6/2024 at 10:37 AM, VintageComics said:

But on that tangent, as far as their success goes, clearly it must be split 50/50. That's an entirely different discussion though, so you can't conflate between the two. 

It's these subtle movements of the goal posts that remove all credibility. 

You have ZERO credibility in this. You still can't answer the Thor question.

You've proven NOTHING I've claimed as wrong.

On 10/6/2024 at 10:37 AM, VintageComics said:

 

You stated this:

I stated this:

Your first question is "If his ballyhoo was so great why did Marvel start crumbling with him as publisher" and the answer is in the quote above which you took one sentence out of context. 

The short answer is that Stan's "ballyhoo" coupled with Kirby's ability to create made them greater together than they were apart. Kinda like Disney. Or Barnum. Or Steve Jobs. 

Neither was as great afterward, as they were together during the 60's. It was lighting in a bottle.

No one's claiming it wasn't.

[DanJD]

This is a lot to take in.  Next someone is going to tell me Stan Lee wasn’t an important contributor to Deadpool and Wolverine.

[jimjum12]

On 10/5/2024 at 6:36 PM, namisgr said:

 

I'm old enough to have bought and read the 'Origins' book when it was first released.  It's not unlike reading a Bullpen page - promotional material plain and simple.

If so, you would have also had a chance for a 1st Edition of GNOMES by Huygen and Poortvliet, on sale around the same time. That was a good time to frequent book stores, as Martin and Roger Dean were beginning to crank out "art books" by the truckload. Frazetta  skyrocketed to fame in the tail winds of that genre. "How To Draw The Marvel Way" was my favorite of the Marvel trades from those days. Jack was NOT happy that Buscema was chosen. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friiend of jesus)

[jimjum12]

On 10/5/2024 at 11:37 PM, VintageComics said:

Neither was as great afterward, as they were together during the 60's. It was lighting in a bottle.

The social atmosphere of the 60's and 70's lent itself well to heroic fiction. The 80's, sometimes called "The Me, Me, Me Generation" spawned the anti-hero, and the working man's mythology was slowly crowded out. Stan "got" Carpe Diem, but then, his princess was in Junior High and High School in the 60's, so he had his finger on the pulse. JC was one of the "cool kids". GOD BLESS ... 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

Edited October 6 by jimjum12

[jimjum12]

On 10/5/2024 at 8:13 PM, Mmehdy said:

Winning or losing or settling in  court has sometimes nothing to do with the facts

It DOES, however, have to do with winning and losing, and *ahem* appeals. GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[jimjum12]

On 10/5/2024 at 9:58 PM, Mmehdy said:

I disagree, his DC work was great....however compared to marvel I understand...but look at the credits on his DC work...it was about time!!!!!!

Because of this topic, I actually did pick up a Kamandi 1 and a New Gods 3 to see how they stacked up from those days, when I liked Kamandi and Demon (a little) and was very underwhelmed by the rest. The NG 3 is the issue where Jack recycled his Silver Surfer idea, along with many other ideas used previously at Marvel. I still wasn't wowed by the Fourth World stuff, and still enjoyed Kamandi, despite it's lack of originality. By the way, Kirby received EVERY penny that his contract stipulated. Sometimes Contract Law isn't always "warm and fuzzy". GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

[vheflin]

[Albert Tatlock]

On 10/5/2024 at 11:58 PM, vheflin said:

Kirby was making loads in the 1960s, $35-$50/page and doing almost 2 pages/day.

Say 500 pages/year then he was making $17,500-$25,000 per annum.

Median home price in 1960s was around $20,000, so, Kirby was making about a house per year.

Now median home price is $412,000.

I think he was happy with the status quo.

Kirby was prepared to swallow his pride for a couple of years longer than Steve Ditko, who appears to have walked away on a point of principle.

Maybe Ditko would have put up with the slings and arrows of his editor had he not fallen under the baleful influence of Ayn Rand.

[comicwiz]

Posted on FB, art on display in Atlanta - close-up of bottom margin of Thor #129 splash. Always intriguing when the artist has to explain to the credited writer the plot he thought up up, along with pacing, characterizations, and even suggesting dialogue. Followed by the most vapid placement possible for his signature.

Edited October 6 by comicwiz

[namisgr]

It's page 1.  If ever there is a place for the artist to explain the flow of the story as drawn and suggest dialog in a couple of balloons, that would be it.

And yes, there's no question that Jack introduced characters and plenty of plot features.  But there's still a lot of room for the script writer and a co-plotter, too.  As for Stan's intrusive autograph, are we certain it was written at the time of publication, or instead decades later by request from the owner?

Edited October 6 by namisgr

[Mmehdy]

On 10/6/2024 at 8:31 AM, Albert Tatlock said:

Kirby was prepared to swallow his pride for a couple of years longer than Steve Ditko, who appears to have walked away on a point of principle.

Maybe Ditko would have put up with the slings and arrows of his editor had he not fallen under the baleful influence of Ayn Rand.

Kirby had a family to support Kids, wife...tougher move to risk that.

[Mmehdy]

On 10/6/2024 at 7:41 AM, vheflin said:

everyone takes from everyone....great find!

[Mmehdy]

On 10/6/2024 at 9:16 AM, comicwiz said:

Posted on FB, art on display in Atlanta - close-up of bottom margin of Thor #129 splash. Always intriguing when the artist has to explain to the credited writer the plot he thought up up, along with pacing, characterizations, and even suggesting dialogue. Followed by the most vapid placement possible for his signature.

Wow...just Wow!

[Albert Tatlock]

On 10/6/2024 at 5:22 PM, namisgr said:

As for Stan's intrusive autograph, are we certain it was written at the time of publication, or instead decades later by request from the owner?

Surely not even Stan would have had the brass neck to sign it at the time.

[Mmehdy]

On 10/6/2024 at 7:01 AM, jimjum12 said:

Because of this topic, I actually did pick up a Kamandi 1 and a New Gods 3 to see how they stacked up from those days, when I liked Kamandi and Demon (a little) and was very underwhelmed by the rest. The NG 3 is the issue where Jack recycled his Silver Surfer idea, along with many other ideas used previously at Marvel. I still wasn't wowed by the Fourth World stuff, and still enjoyed Kamandi, despite it's lack of originality. By the way, Kirby received EVERY penny that his contract stipulated. Sometimes Contract Law isn't always "warm and fuzzy". GOD BLESS ...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

The complexity of Kirbys DC world is best explained is one of the most complex interwoven stories every created for any comic series. I give my highest recommendation to you, if you dare...to purchase a book that I own( see amazon review) 'KIRBYS'S FOURTH WORLD"....the best bang for your bucks for under $100 with free shipping.  1,481 insane pages and one of the largest hardcover omnibus's I own.  This puts what he did, which was in my opinion never topped by anyone, issue by issue...how deep Kirby was as a thinker, and how great he was as a writer  This is put in issue order....its fantastic and that does not included Kamanadi , etc. I am not alone: On Amazon 253 reviews and 4.8 stars (89% five star)...check it out!

It me one month to get thru book...and it hit me like a thunder bolt how connected everything was....a true 4 th world. 

Do not underestimate Jack on this...it still might take another 20 years for us to catch up which what he was thinking.

I guarantee after going thru that book...your opinion will be that he took it to the next level, way above Marvel.

Edited October 6 by Mmehdy

[jjonahjameson11]