- 73,041
- 59,785
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
ps
DC Studios THREAD - GunnVerse Begins - Chapter ONE: Gods & Monsters
- 31,856
- 26,150
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
- 31,856
- 26,150
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
Lee is not involved.
Like at all.
He is a mascot.
1. Jack Kirby was the principle creative force. Stan wrote corny dialogue.
2. Marvels real advantage is Kevin Fiege. Period, he is a dude who understands these characters, but also is great at casting and makes brilliant hires to direct and write.
everything was doomed the minute they hired Zach Snider.
and the more I read about this the more it seems like a Waterworld type disaster.
Last edited:
am1x90xnike
Banned
- 3,035
- 1,217
- Joined
- May 21, 2013
So you're telling me the Adaptor is more important than the Creator?
I didn't know you were in the room when Kirby and Lee were doing their thing, if that was the case then I'll concede, but until I have documented evidence that Stan Lee didn't help create these characters and worlds I'm maintaining Lee as an intrigual (not only,but important) part of the Marvel Universe.
Kirby died in '94, Marvel still came out with great characters after that...you know who didn't die? Lee. So unless you're going to tell me any new characters, new worlds, new story archs, revamps etc. that dropped after '94 were crap, then you have to admit Lee has had a great influence on the Marvel Universe/ brand.
I didn't know you were in the room when Kirby and Lee were doing their thing, if that was the case then I'll concede, but until I have documented evidence that Stan Lee didn't help create these characters and worlds I'm maintaining Lee as an intrigual (not only,but important) part of the Marvel Universe.
Kirby died in '94, Marvel still came out with great characters after that...you know who didn't die? Lee. So unless you're going to tell me any new characters, new worlds, new story archs, revamps etc. that dropped after '94 were crap, then you have to admit Lee has had a great influence on the Marvel Universe/ brand.
- 87,735
- 50,125
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
This is false and wreaks of that one sided revisionist history. Both Stan and Jack co-created most of the MU. Stan wrote and Jack would draw when it came to them collaborating. This is thoroughly documented.
More false revisionist history. If you want to play up like you're a huge Jack Kirby fan you should know better than this but it's coming off more that you dislike Stan.
Corny dialogue? Without Stan there'd be no Marvel comics. You should like thoroughly look this stuff up before you spread lies
I mean in the end yeah Stan got more praise cuz he was the showman but he never played Jack like he wasn't a co-creator. Jack was not creating all of these stories and origins and just letting Stan write "dialogue" The fact that you call it says a lot too. Have you ever read Kirby's run on Cap or Black Panther? Everything back then reads like corny dialog it was the 60s.So again no, Jack Kirby was not the principle creative force. That's a straight up lie.
- 53,150
- 20,698
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
Michael Keaton was a boss.
- 31,856
- 26,150
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
This is false and wreaks of that one sided revisionist history. Both Stan and Jack co-created most of the MU. Stan wrote and Jack would draw when it came to them collaborating. This is thoroughly documented.
More false revisionist history. If you want to play up like you're a huge Jack Kirby fan you should know better than this but it's coming off more that you dislike Stan.
Corny dialogue? Without Stan there'd be no Marvel comics. You should like thoroughly look this stuff up before you spread lies
So again no, Jack Kirby was not the principle creative force. That's a straight up lie.
I was being somewhat trollish in my first post, so allow me to clarify.
I haveve read endless amount of pages about the marvel universe, about Jack and Stan and Ditko and I believe Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko (in the case of spiderman ) were the principle creative forces behind their respective "co creations".
When I say Stan was a middle manager, I mean that, he was an effective salesman, and ultimately a good manager, and played an important role in the growth and development of marvel comics, but ultimately the "principle creative force" the person whose contribution are most irreplaceable were Jack Kirby's.
Jack Kirby was a genius, and Stan Lee while effective in his role is replaceable and significantly less important.
and it bugs severely that Stan Lee is see as the "creator" when what truly makes these characters so special, and their most important stories and enduring lore came from Jack Kirby.
Stan admits he didn't even know what the story was going to be untill he got the pages, as he had only brief conversations or sometimes one sentence directives before Jack came up with the real plot.
then he filled in the dialog. (the least important part of early marvel comics)
Last edited:
- 87,735
- 50,125
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
This is false and wreaks of that one sided revisionist history. Both Stan and Jack co-created most of the MU. Stan wrote and Jack would draw when it came to them collaborating. This is thoroughly documented.
More false revisionist history. If you want to play up like you're a huge Jack Kirby fan you should know better than this but it's coming off more that you dislike Stan.
Corny dialogue? Without Stan there'd be no Marvel comics. You should like thoroughly look this stuff up before you spread lies
So again no, Jack Kirby was not the principle creative force. That's a straight up lie.
I was being somewhat trollish in my first post, so allow me to clarify.
I haveve read endless amount of pages about the marvel universe, about Jack and Stan and Ditko and I believe Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko (in the case of spiderman ) were the principle creative forces behind their respective "co creations".
When I say Stan was a middle manager, I mean that, he was an effective salesman, and ultimately a good manager, and played an important role in the growth and development of marvel comics, but ultimately the "principle creative force" the person whose contribution are most irreplaceable were Jack Kirby's.
Jack Kirby was a genius, and Stan Lee while effective in his role is replaceable and significantly less important.
and it bugs severely that Stan Lee is see as the "creator" when what truly makes these characters so special, and their most important stories and enduring lore came from Jack Kirby.
Stan admits he didn't even know what the story was going to be untill he got the pages, as he had only brief conversations or sometimes one sentence directives before Jack came up with the real plot.
then he filled in the dialog. (the least important part of early marvel comics)
Overall I can say I disagree but yeah it seems you're either not remembering correctly, interpreting what was said wrong, or purposely putting things in a false context to support your narrative.
Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were co-creators on everything they worked on. When Stan says he had conversations with Kirby and he had to figure out the story once he got the pages that's because they worked in what became to be known as "Marvel style". It was efficient and fast given Stan's work load seeing as in the beginning of Marvel he was the sole writer of all of their books that eventually became popular and kicked off the silver age. So while I'd agree Kirby was a creative force I can only see it as a 50/50 thing with him and Stan. They'd talk about the story for an issue before pen went to paper. Both Stan and Jack would joke they wouldn't listen to each other completely so when the art came in Stan had to adapt for what changes were made and what was done or not done. Now maybe you heard that the way you wanted and ran with Kirby telling the story in art and Stan filling in words but to actually say anybody else could've done what Stan did is a crock of ****. To me that's a full 50/50 partnership in telling stories. Without actually being their behind the scenes I wouldn't go any further than that in claiming who created what or who came up with what idea even though if you wanted to go in depth about character creation there is in depth talk about how Spider-Man (especially him), Dr. Doom, F4, X-Men, and Dr. Strange were created among a few other popular heroes.
Steve Ditko is still alive and has already talked on stuff like this when a guy like Jack who felt under appreciated at times would start ego tripping claiming he created Spider-Man on his own and everything else (and that is honestly untrue). Stuff like that would simply go on as Marvel became more successful off of their work and there were arguments and falling out.
Also to say the narrative of a story, the dialogue, and everything else that involves reading were the least important part of early Marvel comics is just more ridiculous nonsense bull ****. I dunno, it's like you don't know what it actually takes to do that part of creating a good comic or you dislike Stan's writing that much. There's no denial that comics are a visual medium but the best artists today and the legends will tell you how important a writer is in creating good characters, stories, etc. If not every damn artist would also write.
As if Stan hadn't gone on to create and write without Jack Kirby in the 60s and 70s when he left for DC before coming back on two separate occasions. Just a few years ago he added a story to an anniversary issue of Amazing Spider-Man (I think 600 or 500). I mean it's pretty much seems it's coming down to you saying Stan isn't a good writer or a creator, which is fine if it's your personal opinion despite it flying in the face of history, but in the creation and success of Marvel comics there is no doubt Stan Lee is equally responsible as any other artist/storyteller he collaborated with.
It's unfortunate that Stan is seen as the main creator of everything and the co-creators don't get the same amount of recognition and praise but it makes no sense to downplay the man's skill and talent because he had a magnetic personality and was able to sell the excitement of comics the way he did. It's not like he ever once claimed sole creation in these characters. He's never belittled the artists role in creating the comic. Even now, today when you get him talking about his early work he doesn't hesitate to mention Ditko, Kirby or Everett.
Last edited:
- 11,113
- 3,728
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
Geez Superman cant even have a decent sequel... New casting every month.. Why dont they just come out and say this is a justice league movie
- 31,856
- 26,150
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
Overall I can say I disagree but yeah it seems you're either not remembering correctly, interpreting what was said wrong, or purposely putting things in a false context to support your narrative.
Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were co-creators on everything they worked on. When Stan says he had conversations with Kirby and he had to figure out the story once he got the pages that's because they worked in what became to be known as "Marvel style". It was efficient and fast given Stan's work load seeing as in the beginning of Marvel he was the sole writer of all of their books that eventually became popular and kicked off the silver age. So while I'd agree Kirby was a creative force I can only see it as a 50/50 thing with him and Stan. They'd talk about the story for an issue before pen went to paper. Both Stan and Jack would joke they wouldn't listen to each other completely so when the art came in Stan had to adapt for what changes were made and what was done or not done. Now maybe you heard that the way you wanted and ran with Kirby telling the story in art and Stan filling in words but to actually say anybody else could've done what Stan did is a crock of ****. To me that's a full 50/50 partnership in telling stories. Without actually being their behind the scenes I wouldn't go any further than that in claiming who created what or who came up with what idea even though if you wanted to go in depth about character creation there is in depth talk about how Spider-Man (especially him), Dr. Doom, F4, X-Men, and Dr. Strange were created among a few other popular heroes.
Steve Ditko is still alive and has already talked on stuff like this when a guy like Jack who felt under appreciated at times would start ego tripping claiming he created Spider-Man on his own and everything else (and that is honestly untrue). Stuff like that would simply go on as Marvel became more successful off of their work and there were arguments and falling out.
Also to say the narrative of a story, the dialogue, and everything else that involves reading were the least important part of early Marvel comics is just more ridiculous nonsense bull ****. I dunno, it's like you don't know what it actually takes to do that part of creating a good comic or you dislike Stan's writing that much. There's no denial that comics are a visual medium but the best artists today and the legends will tell you how important a writer is in creating good characters, stories, etc. If not every damn artist would also write.
As if Stan hadn't gone on to create and write without Jack Kirby in the 60s and 70s when he left for DC before coming back on two separate occasions. Just a few years ago he added a story to an anniversary issue of Amazing Spider-Man (I think 600 or 500). I mean it's pretty much seems it's coming down to you saying Stan isn't a good writer or a creator, which is fine if it's your personal opinion despite it flying in the face of history, but in the creation and success of Marvel comics there is no doubt Stan Lee is equally responsible as any other artist/storyteller he collaborated with.
It's unfortunate that Stan is seen as the main creator of everything and the co-creators don't get the same amount of recognition and praise but it makes no sense to downplay the man's skill and talent because he had a magnetic personality and was able to sell the excitement of comics the way he did. It's not like he ever once claimed sole creation in these characters. He's never belittled the artists role in creating the comic. Even now, today when you get him talking about his early work he doesn't hesitate to mention Ditko, Kirby or Everett.
Ultimately this depends on who's accounts do you believe on what went on during those story meetings, and in my opinion, on what i've read Stan Lee was important was as an editor and salesman and NOT as a writer.
the plot and images in early comics were more important than the dialogue, I think thats pretty obvious in early comics, ultimately thats what endures and is timeless, not the 60's dialogue.
If I'm being charitable. I think its like Jordan and Phil Jackson, would Jordan have won as many championships without Phil? Probably not. But do I view the Jordan and Phil contributions as 50/50? no.
Kirby is Jordan, he's unquestionably the GOAT.
its even obvious in their respective descriptions on what made these characters important, Stan Lee has a mostly surface and sometimes nonsensical interpretation, and you here Kirby talk about the internal logic that made their greatest stories compelling, you can see the nuance and the understanding of what these characters mean.
Last edited:
- 87,735
- 50,125
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
Yeah that's the thing though, if you take in the accounts of everyone involved then it'd clearly point to Stan Lee being the writer and co-creator of Marvel comics. The accounts from Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko, Roy Thomas, Martin Goodman, etc. I'd urge you to take in EVERYONE'S account of the beginning success of Marvel comics and if you must check Stan's history in comics. This is all detailed and heavily documented. Saying Stan Lee is not the writer is false. If he truly wasn't the writer, none of the other creative partners would've went along with it given the fact that at the time when things were looking really bad business wise coming out of the 50s there would be no reason to attribute the writing credits to Stan to so many books given there was no guarantee they'd be received well. You really trying to say Stan didn't write and co-plot This Man, This Monster?
Overall I can say I disagree but yeah it seems you're either not remembering correctly, interpreting what was said wrong, or purposely putting things in a false context to support your narrative.
Stan Lee and Jack Kirby were co-creators on everything they worked on. When Stan says he had conversations with Kirby and he had to figure out the story once he got the pages that's because they worked in what became to be known as "Marvel style". It was efficient and fast given Stan's work load seeing as in the beginning of Marvel he was the sole writer of all of their books that eventually became popular and kicked off the silver age. So while I'd agree Kirby was a creative force I can only see it as a 50/50 thing with him and Stan. They'd talk about the story for an issue before pen went to paper. Both Stan and Jack would joke they wouldn't listen to each other completely so when the art came in Stan had to adapt for what changes were made and what was done or not done. Now maybe you heard that the way you wanted and ran with Kirby telling the story in art and Stan filling in words but to actually say anybody else could've done what Stan did is a crock of ****. To me that's a full 50/50 partnership in telling stories. Without actually being their behind the scenes I wouldn't go any further than that in claiming who created what or who came up with what idea even though if you wanted to go in depth about character creation there is in depth talk about how Spider-Man (especially him), Dr. Doom, F4, X-Men, and Dr. Strange were created among a few other popular heroes.
Steve Ditko is still alive and has already talked on stuff like this when a guy like Jack who felt under appreciated at times would start ego tripping claiming he created Spider-Man on his own and everything else (and that is honestly untrue). Stuff like that would simply go on as Marvel became more successful off of their work and there were arguments and falling out.
Also to say the narrative of a story, the dialogue, and everything else that involves reading were the least important part of early Marvel comics is just more ridiculous nonsense bull ****. I dunno, it's like you don't know what it actually takes to do that part of creating a good comic or you dislike Stan's writing that much. There's no denial that comics are a visual medium but the best artists today and the legends will tell you how important a writer is in creating good characters, stories, etc. If not every damn artist would also write.
As if Stan hadn't gone on to create and write without Jack Kirby in the 60s and 70s when he left for DC before coming back on two separate occasions. Just a few years ago he added a story to an anniversary issue of Amazing Spider-Man (I think 600 or 500). I mean it's pretty much seems it's coming down to you saying Stan isn't a good writer or a creator, which is fine if it's your personal opinion despite it flying in the face of history, but in the creation and success of Marvel comics there is no doubt Stan Lee is equally responsible as any other artist/storyteller he collaborated with.
It's unfortunate that Stan is seen as the main creator of everything and the co-creators don't get the same amount of recognition and praise but it makes no sense to downplay the man's skill and talent because he had a magnetic personality and was able to sell the excitement of comics the way he did. It's not like he ever once claimed sole creation in these characters. He's never belittled the artists role in creating the comic. Even now, today when you get him talking about his early work he doesn't hesitate to mention Ditko, Kirby or Everett.
Ultimately this depends on who's accounts do you believe on what went on during those story meetings, and in my opinion, on what i've read Stan Lee was important was as an editor and salesman and NOT as a writer.
I mean seriously Stan has been writing comics since he was 19 in the late 1930s and 1940s. He's been with Marvel in it's different forms (Timely, Atlas) that entire time for the most part. He's written in several different genres; romance, war, comedy, slice of life, etc. He is a writer. Trying to say he isn't a writer just comes off as you trying to slight him when it comes to the creation of Marvel comics. He's been the same writer getting better with his work that whole time. Check his Timely work, check his Atlas work, check his Stan Lee Media work, check his one project with DC, check his work with mangaka, etc.
Again it also seems you don't know what it entails tone a collaborator on a comic.
Fam the writer has just as much to do with the plot as the artist does drawing it. Trying to separate the plotting from the writing when it comes to Stan is just simply not credible.
A basketball metaphor really doesn't fit here at all given how much Stan and Jack were doing to create the Marvel universe especially you look to the work Stan did without Jack.
Well I wouldn't agree with that at all given the Kirby work I have where it's all him and nobody else. Like I said check his solo work and his independent work.
I'd really like to know what you've read or watched to come to these conclusions. I'd suggest you read Marvel Comics: The Untold Story or The Secret History of Marvel Comics to get things a bit more clear.
Last edited:
- 3,768
- 1,120
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2012
Warner Bros. Details Plans for ‘Justice League’ Movie
http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-SEB-80848
First came “Man of Steel.” Next up is “Batman vs. Superman.” And then, “Justice League.”
Confirming the studio’s plans for a movie based on its iconic super-team for the first time, Warner Bros. president of worldwide production Greg Silverman said the studio has set plans to make a “Justice League” movie.
Like “Man of Steel” and its follow-up, which starts production next month, “Justice League” will be directed by Zack Snyder. Henry Cavill is expected to return as Superman, along with Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot, who play Batman and Wonder Woman, respectively, in 2016’s “Man of Steel” sequel tentatively titled “Batman vs. Superman.”
“It will be a further expansion of this universe,” said Mr. Silverman. “’Superman vs Batman’ will lead into ‘Justice League.’”
A script is still in development and Warner has not set a release date, though the movie is unlikely to come out before 2018. Mr. Silverman would not comment on what other heroes might join Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman in the movie. However the studio has recently been casting the role of Cyborg, a half-robotic hero who is expected to have a cameo in “Batman vs. Superman” and then appear in “Justice League.” Other DC heroes who have been in Justice League comic books include Aquaman, Flash and Green Lantern.
The plans for three superhero movies in relatively quick succession show how intent Warner is on catching up with rival Walt Disney Co.’s Marvel Studios in building a cinematic superhero universe after years lagging behind.
Although the “Dark Knight” trilogy was a hit, Warner’s other efforts such as “Green Lantern” and “Jonah Hex” have flopped. A “Justice League” movie with a young cast that was to be directed by George Miller of “Mad Max” fame nearly went into production in 2008 but was killed at the last minute.
Warner Bros. has several other movies in development unconnected to the Justice League that are based on DC superheroes and fantasy and crime titles from its Vertigo line of genre comics, said Mr. Silverman and Toby Emmerich, president of Warner’s New Line Cinema label. They include “Shazam,” “Metal Men,” “100 Bullets,” and “Fables.”
And while there are no plans yet for a “Justice League” spinoff featuring Ms. Gadot’s “Wonder Woman,” Warner executives said they are warm to the idea.
“That is our hope,” said Sue Kroll, president of worldwide marketing. “With the right script, that could be viable. The world is ready for her.”
http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-SEB-80848
Last edited:
- 43,402
- 42,952
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
After avengers this just seems like a copy cat move.
If it sucks good lord...... The net will explode
If it sucks good lord...... The net will explode
Last edited:
am1x90xnike
Banned
- 3,035
- 1,217
- Joined
- May 21, 2013
What's good with a capon marvel movie? Cast little younging from The Goldbergs to play Billy Batson.
- 53,150
- 20,698
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
So are they just ignoring that the green lantern movie exists?
- 3,768
- 1,120
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2012
- 53,150
- 20,698
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
It would've been nice to see ryan reynolds show up out of nowhere and Superman punch his face into the consistency of pudding.
- 12,443
- 1,194
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2005
Could have sworn they said they were planning a second Green Lantern movie.
Last edited:
- 86
- 34
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2013
- 4,052
- 1,210
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
still feels like this isn't going to happen
i don't have any faith in this team
i don't have any faith in this team
- 43,402
- 42,952
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
I see them ******** on the cast that doesn't have a movie (GL doesn't count because that movie was maybe the worst comic book movie ever). Those characters they're throwing in have their own stories to tell. I mean at least the obligatory origin movie.
Maybe they'll make it lord of the rings style, 3 long movies with the first being the cast coming together. Doubt it, think they'll just make a 2hr rush fest
Maybe they'll make it lord of the rings style, 3 long movies with the first being the cast coming together. Doubt it, think they'll just make a 2hr rush fest
- 57,117
- 60,097
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
Nvm
Last edited:
- 935
- 143
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2012
Wow! Can't wait for the Shazam movie.
Why is DC promoting Cyborg so heavily?
Around 5 years ago, I've only seen him on Teen Titans. Now he's almost in every animated film and they even made him a part of the Justice League.
Why is DC promoting Cyborg so heavily?
Around 5 years ago, I've only seen him on Teen Titans. Now he's almost in every animated film and they even made him a part of the Justice League.
Last edited:
- 21,183
- 18,094
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2007
- 30,131
- 5,140
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2002
Man,
why can't they use John Stewart version of GL?
