|
 DC Universe [all categories]
 DC Universe Archives
 Marvel Masterworks discussion thread (Page 11)
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! This topic is 16 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Marvel Masterworks discussion thread |
|
profh0011 Member |
posted August 27, 2002 01:43 AM
  
Having dealt with Marvel's haphazard and chaotic reprints going back 30 years, I can honestly say I was excited at the prospect of hardbound consecutive reprints of their best series from the beginning. I was put off by their (at the time) stupid marketing idea of having every Masterworks book have a single numbering (trying to "force" readers to buy every one regardless of series) as it made for confusion when it came time to filing. I'm glad to see they've dropped this lunacy in the last couple years. F.F. MASTERWORKS #1 (is that what they're calling it now?) is a book that, by all reason, should remain IN PRINT for all future generations! Never mind that the later issues "got better"-- the thing was ALREADY amazing fun, and it's really best to start at the beginning. (All the same, I'm sure many fans won't be satisfied until there are at least 10 F.F. Masterworks books at last in print. After Jack Kirby left the book-- well, John Romita was right. Stan SHOULD have cancelled it!) IP: Logged |
|
Steven Utley Member |
posted August 27, 2002 03:59 PM
"Slipshod" is the word that comes oftenest to mind when I perpend Marvel's various reprints. That's a polite term for "half-assed." IP: Logged |
|
profh0011 Member |
posted August 28, 2002 12:29 AM
"Inconsistent" would be another word. The last F.F. MASTERWORKS that came out (the one with FF #51-60) has a couple of stories where the art was SO sharp you'd swear they shot it right off the original art! This was side-by-side with a few stories that looked like 6th-generations stats made with an out-of-focus camera lens. And the rest of the book was somewhere in between-- the "usual" stuff. The other day I was thumbing thru some old MARVEL TREASURY EDITIONS. The first few they must have really wanted them to be impressive, because they didn't look bad. A couple years in, when they were just "knocking them out", reproduction was TERRIBLE!!! Blurred art on every page. The best-looking TREASURIES were the all-new ones (well, that figures, right??) like 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and CAPTAIN AMERICA'S BICENTENNIAL BATTLES (both cover-to-cover Jack Kirby), and, oddly enough, the 1st THOR Treasury with the famous 6-part HERCULES / PLUTO story. I swear the linework in that looked BETTER than I recall it looking in some of the original issues I've bought since-- and this was VINCE COLLETTA inking I'm talking about! (Looking back at several original Marvels from the 60's, it's sad to say their reproduction of art the FIRST time around wasn't always consistent, EITHER! Colletta, as an example, could look very impressive or just plain scratchy from month to month-- and I can't tell if it's HIM, or the PRINTERS behind this!) IP: Logged |
|
Karl40 Member |
posted August 28, 2002 01:17 AM
[b]"Inconsistent" would be another word. The last F.F. MASTERWORKS that came out (the one with FF #51-60) has a couple of stories where the art was SO sharp you'd swear they shot it right off the original art![b] Actually, they did - sorta. Once they decided to go ahead with the book, Brevoort approached art collectors at Comicart-L and Kirby-L looking for originals as a lot of Marvel's film was lost or trashed. I don't know if anyone actually lent any originals, but several collectors made clean copies of the originals in their collection for Marvel to use. Believe it or not, while it doesn't circulate frequently due to questionable provenance, virtually all of the Marvel art (save for interiors from a few keys, and pre-1965 covers) is known to exist in private collections, a fair amount of it in complete stories, and a fair amount of it residing in Europe... Also, believe it or not, Brevoort said Marvel needed the art copies purely as a favor, as Marvel couldn't even afford to give comp copies of the book to the contributors... IP: Logged |
|
Steven Utley Member |
posted August 28, 2002 11:23 AM
Tom Brevoort generally strikes as virtually the only thing that's holding Marvel's reprint line together. IP: Logged |
|
Silver Age Adam Member |
posted September 06, 2002 05:20 PM
I just finished the third Fantastic Four archive. Man was that great stuff! I sure wish they'd consolidate the runs per book instead of releasing them like encyclopedias. Oh who cares, they're wonderful! ------------------ Looking for GL merchandise? Visit www.emeralddawn.com Need a little reality after all this fantasy? Read about some real life heroes who won the Medal of Honor http://www.marinemedals.com/ IP: Logged |
|
profh0011 Member |
posted September 06, 2002 09:41 PM
"Several collectors made clean copies of the originals in their collection for Marvel to use."
I recall the last time I ran into Jim Steranko at a show in Philly, he had a lot of his own original art on display (NOT for sale!) Among them were the mind-blowing 4-page spread from STRANGE TALES #167 (which, strangely enough, was my 1st exposure to Steranko's work back in '68). It seems Marvel would have benefited had they come to terms with him, for instance, to use his original art as the source to print those 2 recent S.H.I.E.L.D. collections. The coloring, while faulty in places, was generally VERY impressive-- but as I looked close, I got the feeling the color was intended to distract attention from how FUZZY the linework was (I have the original comics, I knew the difference). I'm also reminded of a chat at my comic-book store. Someone told me that just before Bill Gaines' company was sold, ALL the original art he'd been stockpiling for DECADES (it was ALWAYS EC's pilicy NEVER to return art) was used to shoot fresh new STATS for the Russ Cochran reprints. The art was then sold off, after all those years. Anyone who's ever seen reprints of MAD or TALES FROM THE CRYPT (2 examples) might agree on the high quality they've always had. On the other hand, anyone see the fairly recent Golden Age reprints Marvel did on CHEAP paper? These looked like they were photographed and reproduced right off original PRINTED comics-- right down to the yellowing paper! Somehow, the line quality on these (once you excuse the often shabby art itself-- heehee) seemed higher than most of the Silver Age Marvel reprints I've seen over time. (Sure would love to see an entire chronological volume of the earliest Bill Everett SUB-MARINERs!!) IP: Logged |
|
gmp Member |
posted September 11, 2002 02:02 AM
Originally posted by NecessaryImpurity ------------------------------------ Marvel really should have rexamined the whole Masterworks program with this thrid dress relaunch. The foremost element in my mind is art reconstruction (or at least shots taken from the first printing, rather than the nth generation reprint). I won't beat that horse anymore, since it involves some huge upfront outlays. ------------------------------------------ I couldn't agree more, and I don't think you're beating a dead horse at all. For my tastes, their art reproduction is so poor, that I can't bring myself to buy the books. -Glenn IP: Logged |
|
Scot1458 Member |
posted September 12, 2002 04:51 PM
I have most of the EC reprints, and they are beautiful! IP: Logged |
|
Scippio Member |
posted September 12, 2002 07:25 PM
Only 2 more Wednesday's left in September, what are the odds that FF v1 actually comes out? I haven't heard a peep from Marvel about them, and the best Joe Q could say at his message boards was that to the best of his knowledge the Masterworks hadn't been canceled. IP: Logged |
|
NecessaryImpurity Member |
posted September 12, 2002 07:51 PM
I can just see their contract with the printer: Reserve X days every month for Masterworks. Then Marvel decides they aren't doing the new books now, so they go to their printer and say "We don't need your services in Aug, Oct, or Dec. Can we have our money back?" The printer says "Nope, a contract is a contract; it's too late for us to find new customers to use that press time". Marvel gets in a snit and decides to stop using that printer. Meanwhile, they need to hunt up another printer (and the available press time), so the whole Masterworks project is on hold for another 6 months while they get organized with the new printer. Any other theories? IP: Logged |
|
Karl40 Member |
posted September 12, 2002 08:28 PM
I think both Breevort and Joe Q. have said that their TPB staff is small, can't be expanded anytime soon, and under pressure to make pretty immediate profits. So, Marvel has apparently postponed producing anything complicated, like Masterworks, or big, like Essentials, in favor of hardcover collections of recent material that are faster & cheaper to produce. I'm afraid the success of hardcovers like Daredevil:Yellow and the Ultimates is pushing the Masterworks and Essentials to the back of the bus... IP: Logged |
|
Scippio Member |
posted September 23, 2002 09:00 AM
At last some real positive news from Joe Q about the Masterworks. On his message board in response to a thread titled "Is the Masterworks line dead?" he replied "The line is far from dead! 2003 will bring more!" This is certainly more encouraging than his previous statement that as far as he knew they hadn't been cancled. So any guesses on how many we will see in 2003? My guess is 4 to 5. IP: Logged |
|
daytripper Member |
posted September 23, 2002 09:25 AM
I wish that Marvel would reprint the Nick Fury Agent of Shield stories from the beginning. In addition to Jack Kirby, we'd get John Severin, John Buscema, Ogden Whitney, and Don Heck; some of those Heck 12 or 13 pagers were excellent. And of course, the Steranko stories. ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
jape Member |
posted September 23, 2002 09:41 AM
Of course, he doesn't say whether it's more reprints of previously available volumes, or genuine additions to the line. Based on Joe's previous comment that the priority is to get all the existing volumes back into print, my guess is the former. sigh... IP: Logged |
|
Scippio Member |
posted September 23, 2002 01:22 PM
Oh, I think that it is pretty much guaranteed that they will be new editions of old volumes. Which is fine by me since I don't have any of the old volumes. IP: Logged |
|
NecessaryImpurity Member |
posted September 30, 2002 05:46 PM
Looking at the Diamond shipping list, once again there are no Masterworks. The "Fantastic Four, V1" is officially late. Anyone surprised? IP: Logged |
|
G. Cornelis McWilliams Member |
posted October 01, 2002 12:07 AM
quote: Marvel seems only interested in putting out hard cover books loaded with current material and lots of pages and some re-re-re-re-re-re-printed material (Giant Size X-Men 94 [b] AGAIN [b/] ? so, they can sell a lot to book stores like Barnes and Nobels and Boarders. IP: Logged |
|
G. Cornelis McWilliams Member |
posted October 01, 2002 12:09 AM
quote: AGAIN I hate when I make stupid mistakes IP: Logged |
|
James Friel Member |
posted October 01, 2002 12:50 AM
Well, swaying the thousands of non-comic book fans shopping in book shops is, after all, a good idea. In fact, it's probably necessary if the medium is to survive, let alone prosper. Fans aren't even close to being enough for a healthy customer base. Still, Marvel's approach strikes me, as usual, as short-sighted and oriented exclusively toward the short-term buck. IP: Logged |
|
profh0011 Member |
posted October 01, 2002 06:32 PM
I say-- SCREW the X-Men! F*** Spider-Man! What the world NEEDS are 10 volumes of FANTASTIC FOUR Masterworks-- all 108 issues by Stan & Jack-- kept in print!!! (A thousand pardons, I just felt the urge to say it...) IP: Logged |
|
Silver Age Adam Member |
posted October 01, 2002 07:23 PM
Right now I'm reading the MM with the FF first encountering the Inhumans. Man, Kirby was on FIRE during this run!! ------------------ Looking for GL merchandise? Visit www.emeralddawn.com Need a little reality after all this fantasy? Read about some real life heroes who won the Medal of Honor http://www.marinemedals.com/ IP: Logged |
|
James Friel Member |
posted October 01, 2002 07:44 PM
He sure was. What an incredible sustained burst of creativity. And so was the FF--I don't think they had any breaktime written into the continuity for about a year there. No sleep,no food--just nonstop globetrotting superheroics. IP: Logged |
|
Silver Age Adam Member |
posted October 01, 2002 08:05 PM
quote: Quite a contrast to today's comic books, huh? I love the raw energy Kirby can generate. Even his zaniest creations just crackle with life. I was impressed with the ideas that came with the early FF too -- Stan and Jack appearing as characters from time to time -- locked out of the wedding of Sue and Reed!! I think that shows how much fun they were having with the stories back then. ------------------ Looking for GL merchandise? Visit www.emeralddawn.com Need a little reality after all this fantasy? Read about some real life heroes who won the Medal of Honor http://www.marinemedals.com/ IP: Logged |
|
profh0011 Member |
posted October 02, 2002 12:32 AM
"I don't think they had any breaktime written into the continuity for about a year there." You know, my best friend used to say that as a kid, he always preferred DCs to Marvels because he could count on reading a complete story, while at Marvel he was always coming into the middle of a story that never ended-- like a a daytime soap-opera. While trying to get my hands on a lot of the old stories over the years, I admit to there being a certain amount of excitement trying to "piece things together" like a jigsaw puzzle-- but let's face it, they weren't designed to be read completely out of sequence in bits here and there! The more I think about it, most of this has to be laid at the feet of Jack Kirby. Once he got on his "roll", he regularly introduced new story elements months before new stories started-- kept elemtns popping up for months on end between the main stories-- and got into the "bad" habit of starting-- or ending-- stories in the MIDDLE of an issue! How many people realize the 1st Galactus story really WASN'T-- or SHOULDN'T have been-- a 3-parter, but a 2-parter? It starts in the middle of FF #48, and ends in the middle of FF #50! All told, isn't it CRIMINAL Marvel wasn't publishing Masterworks books from as early as 1970-on?? How are some of these things to make sense if you can't read a pile of issues in bulk, in sequence? I recall hearing that in late 1969, Stan Lee suddenly stopped writing multi-part stories for awhile, and abruptly switched to complete-in-one-issue stories. (Remember the "Tablet" story in AMAZING SPIDER-MAN that went on for about 10 straight months??) The artists, who'd been doing 3-4 panels per page, didn't change their layouts-- so for the next year or so, it felt like you were only reading half a story! I've only recently read that this was in fact an edict from Martin Goodman. I suppose it made "good business sense"-- but creatively, that was the moment when I felt Marvel, as a line, really went astray. IP: Logged |
This topic is 16 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 All times are ET (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Contact Us | DC Comics
Copyright © 2003 DC Comics
Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
DC COMICS PRIVACY INFORMATION
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47