WELCOME TO THE MARVEL MULTIVERSE -*RIP STAN LEE & Boseman* - XMEN97 release 3/20

Farewell to a Marvel

Unless you have been hiding in a cave somewhere… or down with the Mole Man in the bowels of the Earth… by now you will have read that Stan Lee has died, at the age of 95.

A good age, that. Stan Lee lived a long life, and leaves a grand and glorious legacy behind him. He has been part of my world for so long that it seems impossible that he is gone.

Not that I can claim to have been a friend. I never had that honor. Oh, yes, I met Stan a dozen times or so, at various San Diego Comic-Cons over the years. Every time I did, it was like meeting him for the first time; he never remembered our previous meetings, and I don’t think he had any idea who I was. It made no matter. He was always genial and generous to me, as he was to all the fanboys who surrounded him at those cons. And when I was in Stan’s presence, that’s just what I was: a fanboy, slightly tongue-tied and more than a little in awe.

I owe so much to Stan Lee. He was, in a sense, my first publisher, my first editor. “Dear Stan and Jack.” Those were the first words of mine ever to see print. In the letter column of FANTASTIC FOUR #20, as it happens. My first published loc, a commentary on FF#17, compared Stan to… ah… Shakespeare. A little overblown, you say? Well, okay. I was thirteen…

And yet, and yet… the comparison, when you think about it, is not entirely without merit. There were plays before Shakespeare, but the Bard’s work revolutionized the theatre, left it profoundly different from what it had been before. And Stan Lee did the same for comic books. I had been reading comics all through my childhood, but by the late 50s I had started to drift away from them. I was buying fewer and fewer “funny books” (as we called them back then), and more SF and fantasy paperbacks. The DC comics that dominated the racks had become so formulaic and tired, they were no longer holding my interest as they had when I was younger. I was “outgrowing” comics.

And then Stan Lee came along, and pulled me back in. The first issue of FANTASTIC FOUR that I chanced on (#4, it was, the one where the FF met Prince Namor) caught my interest as nothing had for years. A short while later, along came Spider-Man. And then the rest, one by one, in an astonishingly short period of time. The Hulk. Thor. Iron Man. Ant-Man (and the Wonderful Wasp). The X-Men. The Avengers. Wonder Man (who died in the same issue he was introduced). Black Panther. The Inhumans. Galactus and the Silver Surfer. And the villains… Dr. Doom, Dr. Octopus, the Vulture, the Sandman, Mysterio, Loki… and on and on. (We will not talk about Paste-Pot Pete. This is a tribute).

These characters had personalities. Quirks, flaws, tempers. The heroes were not all good, the villains were not all bad. The stories had twists and turns, I could not tell where they were going. Sometimes good guys fought other good guys. The characters grew and changed… over at DC, Superman and Lois Lane had been locked into the same relationship for decades, but Peter Parker went through girlfriends like a real teenager, he graduated high school and went to college, people could and did die.

You had to be there to understand how revolutionary all this was. Comics as we know them today would not exist except for Stan Lee. They might not exist at all, if truth be told.

No, of course, he did not do it all alone. The genius of Marvel’s artists, especially Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko, should never be minimized. They were a huge part of Marvel as well. But Lee was at the center of it all.

That letter in FF#20 was only the first of many I sent to Stan and Jack, and Stan and Steve, and Stan and… whoever the artist was on the book I was writing to. A number were published, with my full address attached. Other comics fans around the country saw the letters, and began sending me fanzines and letters of their own. My friendship with Howard Waldrop began thanks to those letters… him in Texas, me in Jersey. And after reading some of those early ditto’d fanzines, I began to write for them as well. My first published stories. Heroes of my own creation. Manta Ray. Garizan the Mechanical Warrior. The White Raider (who, like Wonder Man, died in his first story). And, then, a little later, heroes created for STAR-STUDDED COMICS by my friends from the Texas Trio, Powerman and Dr. Weird. I could not draw so I wrote “text stories,” superhero stories in prose. Which people liked. Which encouraged me to keep writing. And as I wrote, I did my best to write like Stan Lee.

These days, in interviews, I am often asked which writers influenced me most when I started out. There were a lot of them. For SF there were Heinlein and Andre Norton and Eric Frank Russell, for fantasy Robert E. Howard and JRRT and Fritz Leiber, for horror the inimitable H.P Lovecraft. Later on, when I was older, there was Jack Vance and Ursula K. Le Guin and Roger Zelazny and Samuel R. Delany and Alfred Bester, and later still William Goldman and F. Scott Fitzgerald.

But the greatest influences are the earliest influences, I think, and at the beginning there was only Stan Lee.

Comics have had a lot of great writers in the half century since the Marvel Age began. Neil Gaiman, Len Wein, Alan Moore, and more and more and more… the list goes on and on. But if not for Stan Lee and the worlds and characters and style he created, their own careers and accomplishments would have been very different, if not impossible.

Let me close with one last letter of comment.

Dear Stan,

You did good work. As long as people still read comic books and believe in heroes, your characters will be remembered. Thanks so much. Make Mine Marvel.


George R. Martin
35 East First Street
Bayonne, New Jersey



:nthat:
This puts a fire under his *** to finish asoiaf
 
This puts a fire under his *** to finish asoiaf
:lol: Sure hope so.

Why tf is Marvel wasting time and money on the Eternals?? The only thing I can think of is they will be the segue into Homo Superior in the MCU. My “sauce” told me a while back that Marvel was contemplating a Squadron Supreme movie which could still happen I guess with the Eternals being a segue into that as well but this seems odd. This is worse than Inhumans...
You were 100 % wrong about all of that :lol:

****ing Squadron Supreme? Really? Marvel is gonna up and decide to DC's job for them? :lol: Instead the endless material Stan and Jack have created? Especially when the only character from SS worth exploring is Nighthawk.

Why are you still holding on to it?
 
Last edited:
travis_knight.jpg
Crazy he was all rookie second team with Kobe and Ray Allen
 
Given stans passing im trying to be nice about this but the inaccurate tributes are grating on me.
Doesn't really matter if you're nice about it or not.

Stan's death and whatever inaccuracies you would gripe about are largely irrelevant in comparison.
 
Doesn't really matter if you're nice about it or not.

Stan's death and whatever inaccuracies you would gripe about are largely irrelevant in comparison.
Well obviously, I'm just an *** hole on the internet. But that applies to everyone in this thread and litterally every topic y'all talk about so I don't understand the point you're making.


Personally I don't thi mm obituarie need to call stan a charlatan and a huckster, while aaccurate is probably innapropriate in the wake of a man's death, but at least do a little research and be clearer about what he's responsible for creating and not.

Casting him as this legendary creative inventor who created all these things is clearly inaccurate.
 
You were 100 % wrong about all of that :lol:

****ing Squadron Supreme? Really? Marvel is gonna up and decide to DC's job for them? :lol: Instead the endless material Stan and Jack have created? Especially when the only character from SS worth exploring is Nighthawk.

Why are you still holding on to it?

Hyperion would be a very interesting character especially if they’re going this route with an Eternals film but I completely agree that there are way better choices of characters deserving of films compared to the Eternals.

Well obviously, I'm just an *** hole on the internet. But that applies to everyone in this thread and litterally every topic y'all talk about so I don't understand the point you're making.


Personally I don't thi mm obituarie need to call stan a charlatan and a huckster, while aaccurate is probably innapropriate in the wake of a man's death, but at least do a little research and be clearer about what he's responsible for creating and not.

Casting him as this legendary creative inventor who created all these things is clearly inaccurate.

Regardless of the misdealings Stan committed in the past against other heavyweights like Kirby and Ditko there’s is no dispute that Stan is the lead architect of the Marvel universe
 
Hyperion would be a very interesting character especially if they’re going this route with an Eternals film but I completely agree that there are way better choices of characters deserving of films compared to the Eternals.



Regardless of the misdealings Stan committed in the past against other heavyweights like Kirby and Ditko there’s is no dispute that Stan is the lead architect of the Marvel universe
he came up with the idea of the universe being interconnected. correct, and he was an awesome editor, and marketing guy yes.

but when it comes to the creation of the characters, it's pretty clear from the record he was a passenger on the bus, the Ditko, Kirby and guys like Wally Wood to a lesser extent were driving.
 
he came up with the idea of the universe being interconnected. correct, and he was an awesome editor, and marketing guy yes.

but when it comes to the creation of the characters, it's pretty clear from the record he was a passenger on the bus, the Ditko, Kirby and guys like Wally Wood to a lesser extent were driving.

If you’re speaking on character designs, then of course I agree. But if you’re talking about characters at the core and legendary stories that would’ve made those iconic character designs frivolous and left dead in the 60’s...that’s all Stan. “This man, this monster”, “If this be my destiny/The final Chapter”, these are legendary stories that headlined the unsure, mortal psyche of these heroes that Marvel built their fortune off off and it’s 100% Stan writing those. Quotes like “It’s Clobberin Time” and “With great power, comes great responsibility”?? Pop culture lexicon status. Stan “The Man”
 
If you’re speaking on character designs, then of course I agree. But if you’re talking about characters at the core and legendary stories that would’ve made those iconic character designs frivolous and left dead in the 60’s...that’s all Stan. “This man, this monster”, “If this be my destiny/The final Chapter”, these are legendary stories that headlined the unsure, mortal psyche of these heroes that Marvel built their fortune off off and it’s 100% Stan writing those. Quotes like “It’s Clobberin Time” and “With great power, comes great responsibility”?? Pop culture lexicon status. Stan “The Man”

90% of the legendary stories are Kirby and Ditko, with some corny Stan Lee dialogue peppered on top.

And yeah, stan hit on come decent catch phrases now and then, and his cornball dialogue was probabaly important to make Kirby and Ditko's plot's and concepts more accecible, but the plots and story line is Ditko, and Kirby, not sure how you could look at the historical record and conclude other wise.

and the fact that Lee told so man bald face lies about this for so long, makes it hard for me to give him any credit.
 
I haven't reached these conclusions lightly.

The essential components of the Marvel universe are in Kirby's earlier work pre Stan,

Kirby pioneered romance comics, created Captain America a super hero, worked on challengers of the unknown, early scientific adventure comics, worked in monster comics and he was also really into mythology, and read tons of pulp scifi space opera stuff.

and you see these elements are pretty clearly combined in the Fantastic Four which essentially serves as the boiler plate template for establishing the tone of marvel comics, KIRBY combined Flawed hero's, soap opera melodrama from Romance Comics, scientific adventuring, and monsters of the week, from challengers of the unknown work, and a dash of mythology and you get the Fantastic Four.


Stan was a great editor and a great judge of talent and quality, he clearly saw this **** was flames, and gave Kirby the freedom to do what he wanted, adding in his cornball dialogue after, which no doubt helped sell it to kids.

The idea that Stan Lee came up with these ideas and gave it to Kirby some employee to draw up for him is completly laughable when you read about these dudes.


Stan should be credited for, keeping everything in new york, and having the stories intersect and having the good sense to stay out of Ditko and Kirby's way./
 
Well obviously, I'm just an *** hole on the internet. But that applies to everyone in this thread and litterally every topic y'all talk about so I don't understand the point you're making.
Well we talk to each other in here

So it really doesn't matter if you're "nice" about it :lol:
Personally I don't thi mm obituarie need to call stan a charlatan and a huckster, while aaccurate is probably innapropriate in the wake of a man's death, but at least do a little research and be clearer about what he's responsible for creating and not.

Casting him as this legendary creative inventor who created all these things is clearly inaccurate.
Read it somewhere recently; (did you say it?); Those who are casual fans and don't know enough comics history overrate Stan, those who are big comics fans and know their history underrate him.

The notion Stan had nothing to do with the concept of the flawed Marvel hero and that it was all Kirby isn't even in Kirby's work pre-Marvel, @ DC, or even on his own when he came back to Marvel but go ahead. I'm sure if you say it enough, you'll believe it enough to repeat with conviction.
Hyperion would be a very interesting character especially if they’re going this route with an Eternals film but I completely agree that there are way better choices of characters deserving of films compared to the Eternals.
I feel every version of the good Hyperion has been rather bland. Some interesting stuff orbiting him but nothing that has made the character worth a spotlight and regardless he has got that in the comics and I've read them and meh.

Then there's the other members except Nighthawk. Man Marvel would literally be wasting time on making DC movies. They can show up as villains, then Supreme Nighthawk, that about it.
 
Well we talk to each other in here

So it really doesn't matter if you're "nice" about it :lol:

Read it somewhere recently; (did you say it?); Those who are casual fans and don't know enough comics history overrate Stan, those who are big comics fans and know their history underrate him.

The notion Stan had nothing to do with the concept of the flawed Marvel hero and that it was all Kirby isn't even in Kirby's work pre-Marvel, @ DC, or even on his own when he came back to Marvel but go ahead. I'm sure if you say it enough, you'll believe it enough to repeat with conviction.
He does deserve credit, in that he saw that what Steve and Kirby was doing was heat rock and told everyone else to replicate the formula. and was he smart to give Ditko the spiderman character after kirby initally developed it.


Doesn't really matter if I say it with conviction or not, it's pretty self evidently true, I suggest you take a look at his stuff pre Lee.

The flawed characters are there in Kirby's challengers of the unknown, the soap opera love triangle stuff is there in his Romance comic work all the elements are there he just put it together in Fantastic Four and invented Marvel comics.


and post marvel 1970's Kirby did New Gods, which is flawed but self evidently incredible, there is a clear through line and relationship in the stuff that Kirby created in the way there isn't with stan becuase he was mostly filling in word baloons.
 
Dude just died and folks already tryna tear him down for no reason.
Im just stating the facts, it's unfortunate that Stan wasn't honest about what he created, then the facts sound so harsh,

but unfortunately he chose to tell bald face lies...
 
He does deserve credit, in that he saw that what Steve and Kirby was doing was heat rock and told everyone else to replicate the formula. and was he smart to give Ditko the spiderman character after kirby initally developed it.


Doesn't really matter if I say it with conviction or not, it's pretty self evidently true, I suggest you take a look at his stuff pre Lee.

The flawed characters are there in Kirby's challengers of the unknown, the soap opera love triangle stuff is there in his Romance comic work all the elements are there he just put it together in Fantastic Four and invented Marvel comics.


and post marvel 1970's Kirby did New Gods, which is flawed but self evidently incredible, there is a clear through line and relationship in the stuff that Kirby created in the way there isn't with stan becuase he was mostly filling in word baloons.
I actually have. The art is still Kirby but he really wasn't the best writer/storyteller when it came to plots.

Tend to enjoy Kirby best when he's paired with a writer outside of a few creations/runs.

The New Gods were flawed but not flawed relatable characters that Stan established at Marvel even when he wasn't working with Jack.

New Gods is literally more of Kirby's Chariots of the Gods and some Greek tragedy/epic. It was good but it definitely didn't read as something on par with the Marvel stories that made them Marvel

New Gods is a particularly bad comparison in that sense.

As for Challengers of the Unknown, wish it was good.

I definitely don't look at the legends and take all of their work as great.

You are right about the evidence and facts clearly being present in the old work. Stan's as well.
 
Marvel Released An Official MCU Timeline And Fans Have Already Torn It Apart


Marvel fans were confused last year when Spider-Man: Homecoming claimed to be set eight years after Avengers, a continuity error revealed to be "very incorrect".

As a result, Marvel Studios boss Kevin Feige promised that we would get an official MCU timeline and it seems he's delivered. The new Marvel Studios: The First 10 Years book contains the timeline – solely for the movies, not the TV shows – and clears up that error (via ScreenRant).

It confirms that Homecoming is actually set only four years after the first Avengers movie, while also moving Iron Man a couple of years later to 2010 (it was released in 2008).

However, the official timeline opens up some issues of its own, as it moves Avengers: Infinity War to 2017, even though it's been assumed it was two years after Civil War, and Black Panther has also been shifted to 2017, meaning that Wakanda had to wait a while for the return of its king.

Of course, this could all be changed again when Avengers 4 comes out, as it's expected to feature a time travel plot that could completely mess up the timeline. But for now, this is the official MCU timeline, according to Marvel:

  • 1943-1945: Captain America: The First Avenger
  • 2010: Iron Man
  • 2011: Iron Man 2, The Incredible Hulk, Thor
  • 2012: Avengers, Iron Man 3
  • 2013: Thor: The Dark World
  • 2014: Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Guardians of the Galaxy, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2
  • 2015: Avengers: Age of Ultron, Ant-Man
  • 2016: Captain America: Civil War, Spider-Man: Homecoming
  • 2016 through to 2017: Doctor Strange
  • 2017: Black Panther, Thor: Ragnarok, Avengers: Infinity War

The timeline doesn't include Ant-Man and The Wasp but, given its mid-credits scene takes place at the same time as Infinity War, we can just assume it's set in 2017.
 
I mean Civil War could be late December and he went home January, he probably went to watch some Warriors games cause he looked familiar with Oakland in BP lol
 
Back
Top Bottom