Why I can't stand Stan Lee/Marvel Comics

[palitoy]

Kevin Smith was just flat out Pimpin' for DC last year. Made me want to throw up every time I'd see his face on TV. That DC special that was on the CW was an absolute joke. I used to be a huge fan of Kevin Smith until that little fiasco last year.

I used to enjoy listening to him on Stern or Opie and Anthony but a few years ago, I just started catching him lying or being a Hollywood phony. He built his career on being this honest, candid outsider, somewhere along the line that changed. When I watched that DC special he did, he looked like a pod person to me.

I guess he's just playing the game and getting paid now.

[MIB41]

Stan Lee gets too much heck from those who simply resent his big mouth. I think it's horrible.

I mean, as palitoy pointed out, SOMEONE needs to be "that guy" as in "the mouthpiece for any given organization"... and many times that egotism makes fans bridle when the "cooler" "artists" decide a guy like Stan's squeaky wheel is getting too much grease.

Here's my thoughts about Ditko, Kirby, etc:
Stan Lee may or may not have "made their careers" as far as their talent being key to them standing out as artists/writers... but he freakin' made their WHOLE DANG INDUSTRY.

They don't put the "Marvel Mascot" in all those film cameos because he's like the Phillie Phanatic or some charming, dancing beast to rally behind... I mean, he IS that.... but he's so much MORE.

This guy concurrently created the market for the superhero comicbook genre AND bolstered the superhero comicbook genre in a way that no one else ever HAS or ever WILL match. And that should mean something to those quick to judge the man as being simply that "big mouth ego" guy who sis sinisterly taking credit for all things Marvel.

MIB brought up Gene Simmons... also cut from that "big mouth" cloth... however, as much of a FAN of Gene as I am... he's not "that" clever... and KISS is simply KISS ---- and there's only so much blood to be squeezed from that one rock no matter how marketable that one band is.

I use Simmons as an example to contrast against a guy like Stan Lee. Exponentially, I find Stan Lee (compared to Simmons) to be more heroic, pioneering, clever, MORE RESPONSIBLE etc etc in his relative field.... therefore, I think his criticizers are much more unfair, then, say , those that would criticize a "Gene Simmons".

Rock N Roll True Believers!

Well said Huedell. Well said.

[enyawd72]

Stan was always putting the artist's names front and center, even in the 60's, making sure the fans knew who did what. Heck, even the inkers, colorists and letterers! I do think his is the bigger contribution though. Whether it's Lee and Kirby, Lee and Ditko, Lee and Romita...the common denominator is Stan Lee. He was the idea man at the House of Ideas.
Without him, there would've been no Spider-Man, Hulk, or FF for anyone to draw in the first place. No Iron Man, Daredevil, X-Men or Thor.

[Blue Meanie]

Stan Lee gets too much heck from those who simply resent his big mouth. I think it's horrible.

I mean, as palitoy pointed out, SOMEONE needs to be "that guy" as in "the mouthpiece for any given organization"... and many times that egotism makes fans bridle when the "cooler" "artists" decide a guy like Stan's squeaky wheel is getting too much grease.

No...it's when the guy that has the squeaky wheel has absolutely NO INTEGRITY/COMPASSION to help out a supposed friend and co-creator. You mean to tell me that the so called "Squeaky Wheel" couldn't talk to Marvel higher ups and tell them "Hey, you shouldn't be black mailing Jack into signing a statement that would basically stop any future court battles." Did you read the whole article??!!?? Marvel was telling Jack that he basically wouldn't get any art back from the archives unless he signed the agreement. He ended up initially getting 88 PAGES!!! out of THOUSANDS that he did for Marvel and it wasn't until the final settlement that he got that 88 page paltry portion up to 1900 pages out of possible tens of thousands of pages. That's a pretty CRAP thing to stand by and do nothing about if this guy was your friend and co-creator. This even cements the fact more that Stan was only ever about one thing and one thing only...STAN! That's pretty pathetic. To me if you have no integrity or compassion then I personally don't want to know you. You're not my friend and you are not someone I would want to associate with EVER. Ultimately it will be Stan who has to answer the question when his day comes and he's at the pearly gates "Did you do enough to help out the common man?"

This guy concurrently created the market for the superhero comicbook genre AND bolstered the superhero comicbook genre in a way that no one else ever HAS or ever WILL match. And that should mean something to those quick to judge the man as being simply that "big mouth ego" guy who sis sinisterly taking credit for all things Marvel.

Uhmmmm....NO. There was an industry before Stan's Marvel Universe. I'm not saying that it would have been better or not without Marvel...but there was an industry before it that had superheroes. In fact if it wasn't for Stan AND Jack and Steve Marvel would have been printed by DC. All Jack wanted was a share of something he CO-CREATED and he never got it until after he passed. That is the sad part of the entire story of Jack even leaving Marvel in the first place back in the late 60's early 70's. Again, the whole point of the article was that Jack was being put through hoops of fire before he got ANYTHING. Stan just stood by and Marvel just stood by without doing anything. That's the point of the article. No INTEGRITY and no COMPASSION.

[huedell]

No...it's when the guy that has the squeaky wheel has absolutely NO INTEGRITY/COMPASSION to help out a supposed friend and co-creator. You mean to tell me that the so called "Squeaky Wheel" couldn't talk to Marvel higher ups and tell them "Hey, you shouldn't be black mailing Jack into signing a statement that would basically stop any future court battles." Did you read the whole article??!!?? Marvel was telling Jack that he basically wouldn't get any art back from the archives unless he signed the agreement. He ended up initially getting 88 PAGES!!! out of THOUSANDS that he did for Marvel and it wasn't until the final settlement that he got that 88 page paltry portion up to 1900 pages out of possible tens of thousands of pages. That's a pretty CRAP thing to stand by and do nothing about if this guy was your friend and co-creator. This even cements the fact more that Stan was only ever about one thing and one thing only...STAN! That's pretty pathetic. To me if you have no integrity or compassion then I personally don't want to know you. You're not my friend and you are not someone I would want to associate with EVER. Ultimately it will be Stan who has to answer the question when his day comes and he's at the pearly gates "Did you do enough to help out the common man?"

I don't know what to say. I mean, I believe you have this totally backwards... and, you know me, and I know you. And I know you don't want me to tick off each of your comments with replies that diagram how I see these things almost 180 degrees differently than you do.

I will, however, sum up my thoughts on your first paragraph by saying: Wow. You and the article are quite quite biased against Stan Lee. I've read the big Marvel bio by Sean whatsisname (as well as Stan's own autobio) and, this venom just doesn't seem as justifiable as you guys are diagramming. Stan's a winner. Stan worked for that win. And there's always gonna be the 2nd dogs that will construct their own narrative that you can choose to accept... or.... in my case: NOT accept.

Uhmmmm....NO. There was an industry before Stan's Marvel Universe. I'm not saying that it would have been better or not without Marvel...but there was an industry before it that had superheroes. In fact if it wasn't for Stan AND Jack and Steve Marvel would have been printed by DC. All Jack wanted was a share of something he CO-CREATED and he never got it until after he passed. That is the sad part of the entire story of Jack even leaving Marvel in the first place back in the late 60's early 70's. Again, the whole point of the article was that Jack was being put through hoops of fire before he got ANYTHING. Stan just stood by and Marvel just stood by without doing anything. That's the point of the article. No INTEGRITY and no COMPASSION.

There was an industry before there was Stan Lee?

That's like saying there was a Cola industry before Pepsi. It's irrelevant.

I was making points about how Stan Lee pioneered and reinvented the whole industry... and he DID do that... with just his take on the Fantastic Four's character interaction dynamic ALONE, may I add.

Then you judge the man's integrity and compassion yet again.... this being a guy that kept a light on for the Kirbies and Ditkos and the industry (and the fans) when things were at their darkest. With respect to Kirby and Ditko...THEY didn't run Marvel for their father-in-law.

Lee had EVERBODY'S self-interest in mind, yet took everybody's flak (and apparently still does) THAT'S COMPASSION...

Oh yeah, he got flak from almost all around him, except his loving family (wife and daughter), which, by the way, he was doing all this for when he could have took his workhorse behind anywhere else and gave it a go, but decided against it for many years on end because of the risk to his career and how it affect his family. That's INTEGRITY.

So, Blue Meanie, you can see there's a bit of disparity there regarding how I would judge the man, and how you and the article were judging him. What that means? Who knows.

Excelsior!

[WannabeMego]

Yeah, i by and large agree with that Tom.

Sorry...I was directing my comments at Berto...should have replied with a quote

[Blue Meanie]

Sorry...I was directing my comments at Berto...should have replied with a quote

[huedell]

I'm sorry, but the more I scour over that article, Meanie, I get more and more frustrated myself at the freakin' entitlement issues that artists have (and subsequently their supporters have) in this whole arena.

I do, however, have empathy.... empathy enough to agree that there should be compromise out of compassion for those "poor souls" who have to suffer the reality of the business world in that there is a freakin' FOOD CHAIN and that there's always a bigger fish who you'll look to and say "Those fortunate devils.... making more money than I ever could dream of off of something that I created....and AGREED to signing away on by working for a company."

That stinks... but that's life. And no one is a slave without their consent. There was no liberty or death hollering on this subject til years later, after the ball got rolling.... that financially lucrative ball.

Yet there were still settlements and compromises made all the time in those "middle years" to keep the peace and to address good PR and political moves for a corporation.

Things continued to fall more in favor of the artists/creators.

Although DC could have stood up to Neal Adams et al and fought to the death over not over-compensating Seigel & Shuster, they relented because DC did not want to live with that bad PR and those that would go on about it ad-infinitum, bad PR that, frankly SOUNDS good to many people "Those guys created Superman and aren't millionaires!!!! The man has betrayed us once again!"

But, after closer inspection this attitude doesn't take into account the corporation's role in making the creation a success... the corporation's risk.... the corporation's investment....

I call DC's eventual "caving-in", DC's compromising with Adams, Seigel & Shuster etc and setting a series of precedences that have reshaped the industry's work ownership standards COMPASSIONATE (an industry reshaping that, as always, Stan Lee just ambled along with, no muss, no fuss, always the steady workhorse).

This is how the linked "Kirby Week" article ends:

There’s a famous anecdote told by James Romberger, the artist of the graphic novel Seven Miles a Second. In the 1980s, Romberger met Kirby at a convention and showed him some of his work. “Kid, you’re one of the best,” The King said, looking over the portfolio. “Don’t do comics. Comics will break your heart.”

Heart-breaking prose, right?

"Give up." "Life sucks, kid." Stan's pretty practical... he'd probably echo those statements.

Well, with all respect to the article's writer, to Kirby, and to all that encompass comicbook fandom, and what comicbooks represent,
Here's an excerpt from William Goldman's "Princess Bride" screenplay, utilized to address directly Kirby's “Don’t do comics. Comics will break your heart.” in words most of you are familiar with, and therefore (hopefully) can understand ...

Man in Black: Once word leaks out that a pirate has gone soft, people begin to disobey you, and then it's nothing but work, work, work all the time.
Buttercup: You mock my pain!
Man in Black: Life is pain, Highness! Anyone who says differently is selling something.

Okay?

The way that people vilify Stan Lee (and to some extent Marvel) is understandable... but only to a point.

I mean...

Who makes the rules?

Where does it end?

What is "fair" treatment?

Those kinds of questions are the ones at stake... ones that I consider very seriously... and ones that I personally feel too many others do NOT. Maybe I'm just a plain ol' jerk for having this POV. I don't think there's a definitive answer to THAT either.

Regardless, that's why I'll always pipe up when the ol' "Stan Lee is a soulless SOB/Kirby was ripped off" bit is wheeled out by comicbook fans... I feel its my duty to give this view an opposing voice.... but it's nothing "personal" to the extent that I can't see the other side of the argument.

Rock on.

[Blue Meanie]

With the way Disney is going to destroy everything in the Marvel Universe as we used to know it I guess I should take my brothers advice and just enjoy the stories that Stan and Jack brought to life TOGETHER. That, and enjoy the Kirby and Ditko Documentaries on You Tube until I can find the DVD's.

[palitoy]

the Kirby and Ditko Documentaries on You Tube until I can find the DVD's

LINKS?

[Blue Meanie]

It's been posted before...here it is again courtesy of my big bro Tom:

[MRP]

If you want Kirby mateirla on youtube, check out https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7A...6JWinw2i7kL0eg

it's the chanel for the Jack Irby Museum and Research center.

And if you want to have some fun, here's a link to a classic episode of To Tell the Truth featuring Stan Lee...

https://youtu.be/WrlPOCcUVK0

https://youtu.be/WrlPOCcUVK0

here's a direct link to part one of the 5 part Kirby documentary...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM4HqngYqO8

and a link to Kirby's cameo in an episode of the Incredible Hulk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ0Ge839jC4

and a clip of Kirby on Entertainment Tonight circa 1982...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-BTa_lQ6uQ

-M

[Blue Meanie]

This is part 1 of the Jonathan Ross BBC special on Steve Ditko:

[MRP]

On a classic comics forum I have been a part of for a long time, a new member joined and posted a letter he got from Steve Ditko when he wrote to him last year. You can see the letter here...

http://www.classiccomics.org/post/170537/thread

-M

[Blue Meanie]

Oh, and I love this little bit with Alan Moore: