Game: SILVER AGE SURVIVOR SERIES - Round 17

[Park]

(thumbs u

 

There we go. Glad you got it tth2 as I couldn't figure out how to put a 2 in there and not sound like an imbecile.

[Aman619]

interesting rereading the premise of this whole exercise. Whoops! Seems lik ewere are NOT voting for most important book! Just what book\s we like best.

 

arrrggh. do we have to start over??

[kimik]

My voting for the last three Marvels will be based on movie franchises alone. As a result, the FF #1 gets my elimination vote this round (and probably next round as well as the X-Men #1 should be eliminated soon).

[phoenix215]

X-Men #1 seems to have an insurmountable lead on Showcase #4, thanks no doubt to the new polling system that doesn't allow all the zombies to shill vote, so shockingly the Final 3 will be what it should be.

 

Pretty funny how Just Certain members are getting so emotional as the contest winds down, particularly since their beloved X-Men are getting the boot before the Flash.

 

Yes just like no DC-ite would ever resort to shill voting

[joe_collector]

I do have to admit that I am a "zombie" as a certain poster Tends To Harp on about and I actually voted off X-Men 1 this round. I was swayed by the importance and impact and blah, blah, blah when in reality I find Flash utterly boring. If I could change my vote, I would definitely vote off the big pansy in red.

 

Probably a lot of people like you, swayed by OS and dealers proclaiming the Flash Cover as the first SA Book, when in reality, we wouldn't even be talking about a SA without FF 1, Spidey 1, X-men 1, Hulk 1, etc.

[JohnT]

DC's success in the SA era is basically non-existent. Showcase #4 is one of few that is the exception, and it worshiped by DC fans as a way to forget about all of the DC junk that was published. Showcase #4 was obviously not that important in terms of sales as DC was still in a sinking ship in following years.

 

 

 

This is just totally wrong. DC was very successful at the time, their new lineup was highly successful at the time, and the books hold up over time, as shown by collector interest in purchasing them.

 

I think Marvel fans believe that because DC wasn't Marvel-like--i.e. didn't have the character development, humor, etc.--they weren't good comics. Well, the Marvel style isn't the only comic style that works. The history of comics is peppered with many interesting styles, and there have been many high points of the art form. DC SA was one of the high points. Granted, DC's were more idealized (heroes were all good, bad guys all bad), and were targetted at a younger audience than Marvel appealed to. But DC was damn good at putting out creative, beautiful comics.

 

And they sold a lot more books than Marvel in the SA, because they had many more titles, and, as the sales figures posted show, some of their more popular titles outsold the big Marvel titles.

 

Also, keep in mind that DC had virtually every great artist active in the SA draw for them at one time or another, including Ditko and Kirby. Other greats include Kubert, Infantino, Anderson, Kane, Toth....on and on. Their covers were stunning, much more colorful than Marvel.

 

And for the record, I'm a big Marvel fan as well.

[KingOfRulers]

 

This is just totally wrong. DC was very successful at the time, their new lineup was highly successful at the time, and the books hold up over time, as shown by collector interest in purchasing them.

 

I think Marvel fans believe that because DC wasn't Marvel-like--i.e. didn't have the character development, humor, etc.--they weren't good comics. Well, the Marvel style isn't the only comic style that works. The history of comics is peppered with many interesting styles, and there have been many high points of the art form. DC SA was one of the high points. Granted, DC's were more idealized (heroes were all good, bad guys all bad), and were targetted at a younger audience than Marvel appealed to. But DC was damn good at putting out creative, beautiful comics.

 

And they sold a lot more books than Marvel in the SA, because they had many more titles, and, as the sales figures posted show, some of their more popular titles outsold the big Marvel titles.

 

Also, keep in mind that DC had virtually every great artist active in the SA draw for them at one time or another, including Ditko and Kirby. Other greats include Kubert, Infantino, Anderson, Kane, Toth....on and on. Their covers were stunning, much more colorful than Marvel.

 

And for the record, I'm a big Marvel fan as well.

 

First of all, those sales figures illustrate a much later scope of time then I am refering to. Sales figures of Marvel (Atlas) and DC titles pre 1961 and the next few years post-61' are what are needed. Also, I would not expect Marvel titles at this time to be surpassing DCs top sellers. There was too much of a following. Marvel heroes were new. It is the median sales that are more important, which encompass the publishers complete lineup. Also to be compared from this point to the late 60's so one can determine decreasing and increasing sales numbers on a yearly basis.

 

DC had virtually every great artist? Sure, maybe at "one time or another", but not consistently. DC had Infantino and Kubert, but overall DC art was far below Marvel in quality. Most of Marvel's SA artists were "good" and many were "great", with only a couple being not so good. Marvel had Kirby, Ditko, Ayers, Heck, Tuska, Severin, Romita Sr. and Buscema at the tail end of the era. All of these were fantastic artists, with guys like Roth in the mix who weren't so good.

 

I've never heard anyone refer to DC SA as one of DC's high points. Never. When people refer to DCs greatness, I always find it in the context of GA books. GA DC was DC's highpoint in my opinion, as it was rightfully earned. But SA DC...I call it poop.

[phoenix215]

And they sold a lot more books than Marvel in the SA, because they had many more titles, and, as the sales figures posted show, some of their more popular titles outsold the big Marvel titles.

 

 

 

I don't know, to me those figures posted show a marked decline in those popular DC titles whilst the Marvel titles were able to maintain a constant level

 

 

 

[alwaysbronze]

not much suprises left here, it will play out, x-men, showcase, ff, AF15

[ft88]

I believe the general consensus is that Showcase 4 is the start of the Silver Age, and was the influential comic that led to all the other issues. I really don't care that I am susceptible to Overstreet and other dealers who are pushing this book. Its a great cover, a great history, and reasonably believable. X-men 1 has never really done it for me but then again, neither has FF1. Pretty much copycat characters with some new interactive concepts. As they have grown I find that series to be incredibly boring with some exceptions in their heyday of 40-60. Plus the cover to FF1 is clearly a bad cover for the status it holds. As crappy as the SA X-men characters were, the cover to #1 is really a good one.

 

With that, I put Showcase 4 way above FF1. SC4 has a the best cover of all the final four and for that matter better than ALL the ubber keys of the SA.

 

 

Ed

[JohnT]

 

This is just totally wrong. DC was very successful at the time, their new lineup was highly successful at the time, and the books hold up over time, as shown by collector interest in purchasing them.

 

I think Marvel fans believe that because DC wasn't Marvel-like--i.e. didn't have the character development, humor, etc.--they weren't good comics. Well, the Marvel style isn't the only comic style that works. The history of comics is peppered with many interesting styles, and there have been many high points of the art form. DC SA was one of the high points. Granted, DC's were more idealized (heroes were all good, bad guys all bad), and were targetted at a younger audience than Marvel appealed to. But DC was damn good at putting out creative, beautiful comics.

 

And they sold a lot more books than Marvel in the SA, because they had many more titles, and, as the sales figures posted show, some of their more popular titles outsold the big Marvel titles.

 

Also, keep in mind that DC had virtually every great artist active in the SA draw for them at one time or another, including Ditko and Kirby. Other greats include Kubert, Infantino, Anderson, Kane, Toth....on and on. Their covers were stunning, much more colorful than Marvel.

 

And for the record, I'm a big Marvel fan as well.

 

First of all, those sales figures illustrate a much later scope of time then I am refering to. Sales figures of Marvel (Atlas) and DC titles pre 1961 and the next few years post-61' are what are needed. Also, I would not expect Marvel titles at this time to be surpassing DCs top sellers. There was too much of a following. Marvel heroes were new. It is the median sales that are more important, which encompass the publishers complete lineup. Also to be compared from this point to the late 60's so one can determine decreasing and increasing sales numbers on a yearly basis.

 

DC had virtually every great artist? Sure, maybe at "one time or another", but not consistently. DC had Infantino and Kubert, but overall DC art was far below Marvel in quality. Most of Marvel's SA artists were "good" and many were "great", with only a couple being not so good. Marvel had Kirby, Ditko, Ayers, Heck, Tuska, Severin, Romita Sr. and Buscema at the tail end of the era. All of these were fantastic artists, with guys like Roth in the mix who weren't so good.

 

I've never heard anyone refer to DC SA as one of DC's high points. Never. When people refer to DCs greatness, I always find it in the context of GA books. GA DC was DC's highpoint in my opinion, as it was rightfully earned. But SA DC...I call it poop.

 

Agreed, late 50's early 60's sales would be very interesting.

 

I just totally disagree that Marvel had lots of good artists in the SA. Ayers, Heck, Tuska...all bland and very average, in my opinion. Severin and Romita good not great. Love Buscema. But outside of Kirby and Ditko, Marvel was not about great artwork, they were about great stories.

 

I'm at a loss to figure out how you could say no one refers to SA DC as one of the company's high points. The general view of the history of comics is that comics peaked in the GA and the SA, with DC being a big part of both. This isn't to say there weren't great things to come later, but surely you realize SA DC's are some of the most sought after comics in the collecting community?

[JLA_ALL_THE_WAY]

Hey JC,

 

No last minute rallying of the troups to try & save X-Men......?

 

Guess there is some justice (league) after all.

 

Rick

[Aman619]

well, we made thru this round... a tough pill to swallow for Marvel-centric fans,

 

so lets just skip the next round. its a n0-brainer. Time to invoke the "10 run rule" like in softball!!

[JLA_ALL_THE_WAY]

Agreed.

 

I'll concede that it's going to be 4 against the Spider (whether I agree with it or not).

 

But then, why stop there; anyone really think that FF will overcome Spidey's popularity? Not should...but will?

 

Congrats Peter Parker, YOU'RE HIRED!

 

Rick

[Shadow]

Whew... Good posts and debates, everyone.

 

When I've done these Polls on a different site in the past (not comic related), they've tended to evolve and take a life/direction of their own. This has been no different. I started with what I least liked in "Ant-Man" but found I changed my thinking as time went on. (And, if I could do it over, I wouldn't have voted Ant-Man off so soon. ) Had I voted what I like this time, I would've never voted off X-Men as they're my 2nd biggest part of my collection following JLA.

 

I know we can already pretty much guess the Final 2 but I'll try to stick by the Rules and we will have a Round 18.