Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2010 - 7:15 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

I've also begun re-exploring Frank Miller's first run on Daredevil. Read issues 159-161, where Bullseye puts out a contract on hornhead in order to film DD in action so that he might get an edge in his own impending duel with The Man Without Fear. Frank Miller wasn't the writer of these stories, Roger McKenzie was, and in the lettercol there is mention of how McKenzie and Miller have Daredevil plotted well in advance. I have to wonder, given my distaste for Miller's post-DD work, how much of a factor Roger McKenzie played in creating this immortal run on the book. I'm not saying that he was *the* guy, but there must've been something McKenzie contributed to make it so memorable.

 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2010 - 8:07 AM   
 By:   Gary S.   (Member)

RE: Jim Steranko

He's another titan that was largely absent from my comic-buying days, so I have to ask when was his time as Marvel's (and comics') leading light? I'm vaguely aware of those Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD stories but is that largely where his legacy rests?


He did several issues of Captain America.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2010 - 9:21 AM   
 By:   neotrinity   (Member)



The Dark Surrealist Department:

That’s the highly evocative title an appreciative writer/fan named Ouzomandias christened Mr. Steranko with,
and we can’t conceptualize a more admirably accurate description.



He's another titan that was largely absent from my comic-buying days, so I have to ask when was his time
as Marvel's (and comics') leading light?




His senses-shattering tenure at the (then truly) House of Ideas began in the late sixties and ended in
the early 70s when his independent spirit necessitated he explore other realms and mediums of expression
that would keep him evolving as an artist instead of becoming a commodity to be further exploited with
no say in what/how/what/why and when his creativity was best expressed.



His watershed work had unmistakable echoes of Will Eisner’s



seminal influence



with unmistakable echoes of Salvador Dali’s



equally striking superlative surrealism.



As Roy Thomas told the tale:



[ “I met Jim (in 1965); he brought his work up to Marvel then, I think, but it wasn't considered quite pro
quality yet. The next year ... he came up to the office again — I presume he had an appointment —
and I was sent out by Sol [Brodsky] to look at his work and basically brush him off. Stan was busy
and didn't want to be bothered that day.



But when I saw Jim's work, which was even better than what I'd seen the previous year, on an impulse
I took it in to Sol and said, 'I think Stan should see this'. Sol agreed, and took it in to Stan. Stan brought
Steranko into his office, and Jim left with the 'S.H.I.E.L.D.' assignment. ... I think Jim's legacy to Marvel was
demonstrating that there were ways in which the Kirby style could be mutated, and many artists
went off increasingly in their own directions after that.” ]



I'm vaguely aware of those Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD stories but is that largely where his legacy rests?



We dearly doubt it – those may be his specific masterworks,



but he boldly blasted the envelope of graphic brilliance in a way



that foreshadowed his contemporary Barry Windsor-Smith’s



wonderful work on a certain Cimmerian and profoundly laid the galvanizing groundwork for



Mr. Miller





Ouzomandias encapsulates and summarizes the subject under scope with far more eloquence than we could:



[ Steranko did not remain long in comics. The essential creations from his pen dated from the late
sixties, and a collector could assemble a portfolio of his work that demonstrated all of his strengths
without needing later material. In this, he fit the profile of the great illuminator that does not long endure.



But, as did so much of the luminous talent of the late sixties, Steranko deliberately and permanently
absented himself from the medium after only a short tenure of work that pushed the boundaries
of its medium. One need not look into his history or character to understand this; superhero comics
enjoys a casualty list of alienated talent driven away by overwork, low pay, and under-recognition
that suggests no one need multiply causes to explain anyone's departure.



Still, in a sense, the pioneers justify the medium by the works they leave behind, and, even in passing,
demonstrate that serial art need not pander to juvenile tastes nor lower the standards of its consumers.
Steranko's work stands as one of the justifications of a medium. ]




 
 Posted:   Sep 18, 2010 - 12:05 PM   
 By:   Gary S.   (Member)

Steranko also wrote a well regarded tome called The History of Comics. Then there are his covers for various paperbacks including some reprints of The Shadow.

 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2010 - 4:07 PM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

Luke Cage, Hero For Hire #14



He was one bad dude...

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2010 - 4:37 PM   
 By:   The Man-Eating Cow   (Member)

Shut your mouth!

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 28, 2010 - 4:41 PM   
 By:   The Man-Eating Cow   (Member)

I've also begun re-exploring Frank Miller's first run on Daredevil. Read issues 159-161, where Bullseye puts out a contract on hornhead in order to film DD in action so that he might get an edge in his own impending duel with The Man Without Fear. Frank Miller wasn't the writer of these stories, Roger McKenzie was, and in the lettercol there is mention of how McKenzie and Miller have Daredevil plotted well in advance. I have to wonder, given my distaste for Miller's post-DD work, how much of a factor Roger McKenzie played in creating this immortal run on the book. I'm not saying that he was *the* guy, but there must've been something McKenzie contributed to make it so memorable.



I just finished re-reading Daredevil #162, a fill-in issue with art by the astonishing Steve Ditko. For all the hype about Frank Miller and the rest of these modern guys*, Ditko has it all over pretty much all of them. Ditko's work just has a fluidity to it that puts all of them to shame.

(*Though, truth be told, I do like another Steve, Steve "the Dude" Rude immensely, and he's one of the modern guys!)

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2010 - 12:29 PM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

Reading those Miller Daredevil stories, nearly thirty years later, I only now realize how much this was a dress reheasal for his Batman stories of a decade later. One could easily substitute Daredevil for Batman in these stories, though that very argument is undone by the fact that Matt Murdock is a more fragile individual, emotionally speaking, than Bruce Wayne, the latter a character we never really get to know.

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2010 - 2:15 PM   
 By:   neotrinity   (Member)



There were two epic storylines during the 80s which recaptured, redefined and powerfully repackaged
the Marvel Magic of the 60s, the Jean Grey/Phoenix saga



and, both above and beyond them all (even more so, we feel, than his Dark Knight-ish take on it later),
the shattering, unerringly, inevitably-like-a-grandly glorious-four-color Greek-tragedy:









With our all-tyme favorite, beautifully-breathtaking { Redemption-Resurrection } image:

 
 Posted:   Sep 29, 2010 - 3:00 PM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

Great Frank Miller interview!

Talk about synchronicity: I just read that issue of Daredevil where The Kingpin pulverizes those sparring partners and I log on to find your post.

As much as I like Miller's first run on Daredevil, I can't say it leaves me feeling like a world beater; it's just so grim (not Ben). I'd even go so far as to say that when I read it as a child, it depressed the heck out of me!

20P; Brit edition!

 
 Posted:   Oct 15, 2010 - 4:15 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

BTW, I've always liked the Denny O'Neil/Klaus Janson tenure on DAREDEVIL that immediately followed Frank Miller's first run. It helped that Janson remained and that O'Neil had the scripting chops to write stories of a "Millerian" fashion. After all, Denny and Neal Adams worked similar magic with their Batman collaboration of a decade earlier for Marvels's Distinguished Competition.

 
 Posted:   Oct 15, 2010 - 4:35 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

Another aspect of Jim Shooter's reign as Marvel's Editor-in-Chief is the demise of "Stan's Soapbox." I don't recall it being a part of the "Bullpen Bulletins" page starting around 1980. I wonder if that was Stan's decision? Surely, Shooter couldn't have been "the boss of him", too?

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 15, 2010 - 10:02 AM   
 By:   neotrinity   (Member)



Even tho he did accomplish the industry equivalent of 'getting the trains to run on tyme' during his reign
(of creative terror), we'd really prefer putting him on permanent ignore since we regard his tenure as among
the most artistically destructive (we won't EVEN go near the professional-personal aspect of that thesis)
in Marvel history.



Whatever the reasons Smiley decided not to continue his Soapbox', we dearly doubt The Tall One
(not FSM's TeeGee wink) could've stopped the former all by his lonesome (as to that, the latter did make an
embarrassing effort to continue the tradition on his own and it sank deeper than even Namor could've imagined). roll eyes roll eyes roll eyes

 
 Posted:   Oct 16, 2010 - 8:03 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

Even tho he did accomplish the industry equivalent of 'getting the trains to run on tyme' during his reign (of creative terror), we'd really prefer putting him on permanent ignore since we regard his tenure as among the most artistically destructive (we won't EVEN go near the professional-personal aspect of that thesis)in Marvel history.

Yes, he was positively Stalinesque in his "shaping" of the company. DC Comics, however, must thank him for all his hard work, as they received the exodus of talent that Shooter allowed to get away.



big grin

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 16, 2010 - 8:50 AM   
 By:   neotrinity   (Member)

the exodus of talent that Shooter allowed to get away.

... pushed,



ALIENATED and



drove away.
mad mad mad

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2010 - 7:10 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

I've never been big on "sword and sorcerer" stories, but the Roy Thomas/Barry Windsor-Smith/Gil Kane/John Buscema CONAN THE BARBARIAN is a book I've long been interested in exploring. There's a series of spiffy-looking trade paperbacks of this run that looks to be my ticket in--funds allowing, natch:

Here's the first Conan cover that I can recall making an impression on me: issue #95:

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2010 - 7:32 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

To give an idea of how Shooter tampered with things, he took Gene Day off of Master of Kung Fu and on to the decidedly less artistic "The Further Adventures of Indiana Jones." Day retained his trademark panel style which was inappropriate on such a safe book. MoKF was where Day should've stayed, as the book was only a few issues awy from being cancelled anyway.

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2010 - 11:08 AM   
 By:   neotrinity   (Member)



Roy Thomas’ crowning achievement and career pinnacle is his wondrous
wordsmithing in artistic alliance with



(particularly) Barry-Windsor Smith





and especially Big John Buscema



oughta have a series of one'a those Marvel Masterwork volumes devoted to it
(our favorite storyline is when the Cimmerian encountered



and its memorable conclusion. Damn, do they still sing even after all these eons!!!!!!

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2010 - 11:14 AM   
 By:   neotrinity   (Member)



(Not) Speaking of Which – But We Will Any Ol’ Way Department:



Our Favorite Windsor-Smith“Fate Sowing the Stars”.



And his creative collaboration with many of his equally illustrious peers at the tyme:





Tho less not forget this



or



In Appreciation of Him.

 
 Posted:   Dec 28, 2010 - 3:53 PM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

Birthday wishes to Stan "The Man" Lee!!!

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.