Game: SILVER AGE SURVIVOR SERIES - Round 9

[AbsoluteCarnage]

flash 105 this round.. spidey is next... anyone who finds kirsten dunst attractive deserves to be voted off!

 

 

What the HLL is wrong with you? I guess you play on the other side?

 

OHHHHHH HOLD ON FOLKS THIS PHOTO WAS JUST RENDERED TO MAKE PEOPLE THINK THAT SHE LOOKED ALRIGHT.

 

NOW I SEE THE TRUTH!!!!!!! FORGIVE ME ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Silverspider]

I don't see how Kirsten Dunst being Hot or not has anything to do with the importance of Spidey #1? Your voting for the book not the movie franchise. I'm not seeing a Flash or Green Lantern movie anywhere at all so there you go.

 

Showcase #22 is next.

[eddly]

Oh trust me, Flash and Green Lantern will be gone as well. Although I do remember watching a Flash mini-series years ago...

 

As for Kirsten Dunst, it really shows how far technology has advanced when you can make her look somewhat pretty after hours of altering her looks with a computer (honestly though I think she is average and can't act).

[JohnT]

For one thing, if DC hadn't started successfully reintroducing kids to superheroes, Marvel would have kept right on with the oddball horror stuff they were doing, and we wouldn't be sitting here talking about Spider-man and Doctor Doom and Fantastic Four.

 

Nah, the time was just right for another wave of superheroes, and whenever there is a market need, someone will fill the void.

 

You give DC far, far, far too much credit. They were just reacting to sales and customer needs, just like Marvel did.

 

Check the facts I'm just going by the historical accounts, i.e. what people who were there at the time say happened...people like Stan Lee.

 

Stan's boss and company owner (Martin Goodman) told him "try some superheroes," in direct response to DC's success with them--especially the eye-opening new JLA books.

 

Keep in mind that superheroes were dead for most of the 50's, the only survivors being Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. Up to that point Stan had spent the majority of his career doing romances, westerns, horror, and funny animal stuff. By his own admission he wasn't a trend setter, he was a trend follower, and in the early 60's they (he and Goldman) thought that superheroes were just the latest in a series of market "fads" they needed to exploit.

 

Of course, it turned out that when Stan started creating new superheroes, the fad became a complete revolution of the comic book. But the fact is if DC hadn't pushed in that direction the Marvel Age would not have happened as it did, or when it did.

 

You have to realize how lowly Atlas/Marvel was at that time. DC had the company by the balls because they controlled their distribution, and by contract only let them have 8 titles a month. Goodman was very cautious about what those titles were, because they couldn't afford any duds. It was a big gamble to try superheroes. The only reason he went in that direction was he saw that DC was having success with superheroes.

 

That cautiousness explains why FF #1 didn't come out until the Silver Age was five years old. Think of all the SA DC characters and groups that predate FF 1...Flash, Green Lantern, Adam Strange, Challengers of the Unknown, Aquaman, Atom, Legion, Space Ranger, Hawkman, Suicide Squad, Martian Manhunter, Green Arrow, Rip Hunter Timemaster, Sea Devils, Justice League of America, Supergirl. (Who am I forgetting?)

 

The Silver Age was in full flower by the time Stan and Goodman dipped their toes in the water.

 

(But thank god they did!)

[joe_collector]

Do you really think that DC simply released more super-hero books because they were "trying to be trend-setters"? I believe a cultural movement like this, especially in the late-50's, early-60's, was driven by the people. We were just ready for another wave of super-hero books, and while DC recognized this need earlier than Marvel, the market always fills any void.

 

To look at it another way, Marvel and DC didn't stop printing Westerns and Romance comics because they "just felt like it" or "wanted to be trend-setters", but because sales were extremely low. Trends change and people just didn't want to read that genre anymore, and pop culture follows suit.

 

In the 60's, comics were ripe for change, and I firmly believe that customer demand and higher sales for super hero books (along with depressed sales for the old 50's "nuclear monster" tales) is what drove the revolution. Remember, DC was still producing their Big 3 super-hero books throughout that period and never stopped like Marvel.

 

I've also read the standard accounts of how FF 1 came into existence, and it's always Goodman telling Stan about how well the JLA is selling, as well as that many of the monster/fantasy books (like Amazing Adult Fantasy) were languishing.

 

The biz and the readers were changing, and Stan just happened to be in the right place at the right time. DC didn't cause this, and neither did Marvel.

[tth2]

I've also read the standard accounts of how FF 1 came into existence, and it's always Goodman telling Stan about how well the JLA is selling, as well as that many of the monster/fantasy books (like Amazing Adult Fantasy) were languishing.

Perhaps the monster/fantasy books were languishing because DC was cleaning their clocks with their new line-up of superheroes?

 

The biz and the readers were changing, and Stan just happened to be in the right place at the right time. DC didn't cause this, and neither did Marvel.

You seem to have this mistaken idea that just because someone was first by virtue of being in the right place at the right time, that they don`t deserve any credit for being first. History is littered with people who rightfully were acclaimed for being first and thereby influencing others that followed, despite the fact that they just happened to be in the right place at the right time.

 

Elvis Presley was not the most talented musician or singer of his generation by any stretch of the imagination, nor was he the creator of rock and roll. But, he had the good fortune of being exactly what rock music needed at that time, which was a good looking white singer with a decent voice who was cool enough to attract the guys while being sexy enough to attract the girls. If he hadn`t been there, perhaps they would have manufactured someone else. But the fact was that he WAS there, and it was so much easier for every rock and roll musician who followed him to make it big.

 

It`s the same with comics. Perhaps things were in a clear lull in the mid-1950s, as you say, and it was inevitable that something new would be tried. I`m not as confident as you that anybody other than DC would have been willing to try it, and more importantly, that they would have been able to succeed because nobody had the distribution channels and shelf space allocation that DC did. As some people have mentioned, Atlas tried to resurrect some of their superheroes in the early 1950s, to little effect. If that attempt had been successful, then perhaps we would be tracing the Silver Age to the re-appearance of Captain America in Young Men`s Comics in 1953.

 

But, there`s no point in speculating about what might have been and what could have happened. The indisputable facts are that DC DID launch a new generation of superheroes in 1956, the new superheroes DID succeed, it DID spawn a bunch of imitations, something which Stan Lee has openly admitted, and the success of DC`s relaunch DID make it much easier for Marvel to successfully launch its own superheroes. The fact that Marvel then went on to out-do DC doesn`t diminish DC`s pivotal role of beginning the SA by one iota, just as Alfred Sloan and GM cleaning Ford`s clock from the 1930s onwards doesn`t diminish Henry Ford`s critical role in popularizing the automobile by one iota.

[joe_collector]

just as Alfred Sloan and GM cleaning Ford`s clock from the 1930s onwards doesn`t diminish Henry Ford`s critical role in popularizing the automobile by one iota.

 

Huh?

 

Do you actually compare the SA of super-heroes with the invention of the automobile and the mass market assembly line?

 

And this highlights my point even more, super-hero comics NEVER died out, and DC continued to print their Big 3 throughout this period. Plus, they just recycled old GA characters rather than producing anything new, which lowers the DC case even more.

 

I firmly believe that without Marvel and their brand-new characters and teams, that we wouldn't even be talking about a Silver Age of comics, and CGC or these boards might not even exist.

[Zonker]

I firmly believe that without Marvel and their brand-new characters and teams, that we wouldn't even be talking about a Silver Age of comics, and CGC or these boards might not even exist.

 

That's of course an impossible-to-determine assertion. I tend to think the super-hero revival would have continued along quite successfully even if Marvel hadn't come along. But it would have probably remained largely as a pre-teen phenomena, rather than the full-fledged 1960s youth cultural avalanche it became thanks to Stan Lee. I'm prepared to vote Amazing Fantasy #15 or FF #1 as the last survivor in this contest (haven't decided which yet). But I do think Showcase #4 belongs in the Top 3 based on its status as the first, the trail-blazer. It will be interesting to see how people who disagree with that logic vote on the Silver Age X-men #1, Lee & Kirby's least successful creation that only becomes important in retrospect after the explosion of the X franchise in the 1980s.

 

And this highlights my point even more, super-hero comics NEVER died out, and DC continued to print their Big 3 throughout this period. Plus, they just recycled old GA characters rather than producing anything new, which lowers the DC case even more.

 

I wonder how much the imposition of the Comics Code made the super-hero revival inevitable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't all the unsuccessful super-hero revivals at Atlas Comics pre-Code? As such, they probably paled in comparison to ECs and other pre-Code horror and crime books (as did Superman, Batman & Wonder Woman of the time). Now of course super-heroes can be done as dark or adult as you like, but they don't have to be. Contrast that with crime comics or horror/"mystery" comics that became hard to take at all seriously under the strictures of the original Comics Code.

[seank]

 

And this highlights my point even more, super-hero comics NEVER died out, and DC continued to print their Big 3 throughout this period. Plus, they just recycled old GA characters rather than producing anything new, which lowers the DC case even more.

 

 

Not quite true. The successful DC characters were recycled GA heros. But in the early silver age DC also gave us the Martian Manhunter, Challengers of the Unknown, Sea Devils, the Suicide Squad, and probably others I can't think of right now.

 

Also, Marvel recycled also. The Human Torch and the Angel were both revamps. Captain America and the Submariner were both revivals of 1940s characters And I'm not quite sure where Ka-Zar fits into the equation.

 

Honestly, I think that without DC, and without Julius Schwartz specifically, there may not have been a Silver Age. Without Lee and Kirby, we probably wouldn't be having this argument right now. Schwartz kick-started the Silver Age with Showcase 4. Lee and Kirby ensured its success with the Fantastic Four.

[jmg3637]

These arguements are certainly pointing out that atfer flash 105 ZOOOOMS out this round the next 2 to be voted off are FF5 and then ASM1

 

after those gone we can talk again about which of the remaining 9 FIRST appearances are less important

[sborock]

For one thing, if DC hadn't started successfully reintroducing kids to superheroes, Marvel would have kept right on with the oddball horror stuff they were doing, and we wouldn't be sitting here talking about Spider-man and Doctor Doom and Fantastic Four.

 

Nah, the time was just right for another wave of superheroes, and whenever there is a market need, someone will fill the void.

 

You give DC far, far, far too much credit. They were just reacting to sales and customer needs, just like Marvel did.

 

Check the facts I'm just going by the historical accounts, i.e. what people who were there at the time say happened...people like Stan Lee.

 

Stan's boss and company owner (Martin Goodman) told him "try some superheroes," in direct response to DC's success with them--especially the eye-opening new JLA books.

 

Keep in mind that superheroes were dead for most of the 50's, the only survivors being Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman. Up to that point Stan had spent the majority of his career doing romances, westerns, horror, and funny animal stuff. By his own admission he wasn't a trend setter, he was a trend follower, and in the early 60's they (he and Goldman) thought that superheroes were just the latest in a series of market "fads" they needed to exploit.

 

Of course, it turned out that when Stan started creating new superheroes, the fad became a complete revolution of the comic book. But the fact is if DC hadn't pushed in that direction the Marvel Age would not have happened as it did, or when it did.

 

You have to realize how lowly Atlas/Marvel was at that time. DC had the company by the balls because they controlled their distribution, and by contract only let them have 8 titles a month. Goodman was very cautious about what those titles were, because they couldn't afford any duds. It was a big gamble to try superheroes. The only reason he went in that direction was he saw that DC was having success with superheroes.

 

That cautiousness explains why FF #1 didn't come out until the Silver Age was five years old. Think of all the SA DC characters and groups that predate FF 1...Flash, Green Lantern, Adam Strange, Challengers of the Unknown, Aquaman, Atom, Legion, Space Ranger, Hawkman, Suicide Squad, Martian Manhunter, Green Arrow, Rip Hunter Timemaster, Sea Devils, Justice League of America, Supergirl. (Who am I forgetting?)

 

The Silver Age was in full flower by the time Stan and Goodman dipped their toes in the water.

 

(But thank god they did!)

 

[tth2]

just as Alfred Sloan and GM cleaning Ford`s clock from the 1930s onwards doesn`t diminish Henry Ford`s critical role in popularizing the automobile by one iota.

 

Huh?

 

Do you actually compare the SA of super-heroes with the invention of the automobile and the mass market assembly line?

Ah, such a predictable response from you. And by the way, Henry Ford neither invented the automobile nor the mass market assembly line. Which is why I used him and GM in my analogy, because DC in 1956 did not invent the superhero. What Henry Ford DID do was to popularize the automobile, and what DC DID do in 1956 was to re-popularize the superhero.

 

And this highlights my point even more, super-hero comics NEVER died out, and DC continued to print their Big 3 throughout this period. Plus, they just recycled old GA characters rather than producing anything new, which lowers the DC case even more.

 

I firmly believe that without Marvel and their brand-new characters and teams, that we wouldn't even be talking about a Silver Age of comics, and CGC or these boards might not even exist.

Read my post again. I totally agree that Marvel took superhero comics to the next level, hence my analogy to GM, which clearly took cars to the next level in the 1930s. But notwithstanding, that doesn't diminish the critical role of DC or Henry Ford in their respective industries. In both cases, Marvel and GM built on the foundation that had been laid by DC and Ford.

 

So what if DC had been continuing the Big 3 throughout the 1950s? No one's ever claimed that DC invented the superhero in 1956. What did happen was a reinvigoration of the superhero concept thanks to the launch of new characters who were new and yet had enough of a tie to the past to cause new readers and old readers to pick up a comic again. It clearly generated new interest in the genre. There's a reason that Marvel succeeded in 1961 but didn't back in 1953 or 1954, and that's because the market hadn't been sufficiently primed yet for them, BY DC.

 

Also, it could be argued that all Marvel did back in 1953 was just relaunch the same old characters, whereas by 1961 they had gotten a clue FROM DC that what the public wanted was something new, but with a hint of something old (hence the resemblance of Human Torch and Mr. Fantastic to older superheroes).

[tth2]

Goodman was very cautious about what those titles were, because they couldn't afford any duds. It was a big gamble to try superheroes. The only reason he went in that direction was he saw that DC was having success with superheroes.

Exactly! And it wasn't the tired old Big 3 of DC that caused Goodman to realize there was a viable new concept, it was the success of DC's new characters, particularly the Justice League.

[Sal]

i'm just loving the discussion of SA books in General. carry on

[shiverbones]

begrudgingly , flash 105, thor is still a doofus pippi longstockings though...

[uclapeterg]

thor or iron man...hmm... such decisions...

[Aces]

thor or iron man...hmm... such decisions...

 

FF 5

[uclapeterg]

thor or iron man...hmm... such decisions...

 

FF 5

 

[Scheradon]

It's going to be interesting to see where all those Flash #105 votes go in round 10.