DC Omnibus thread - Page 18

**wktf** · 12-09-2017, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by risingstar

When Kirby decided to do it all (i.e., write and draw), it appeared to have this "now or never" aspect to it. People can say what they want about the often argued unwarranted credit Stan Lee gets for creating Marvel, but he was a phenomenal storyteller. I'm not implying you're saying otherwise. I'm merely pointing out that you're certainly not the only one who found that Kirby's writing left something to be desired. However, it seemed clear at this stage of his career that he was fed up having to share. One can only imagine the greater impact his work at DC would have had if he had someone help him present his incredible narratives in a more pleasant and easier-to-read fashion.

I completely agree. Stan was a phenomenal storyteller and his ability to infuse a unique “voice” for all Marvel’s characters, as well as for Marvel as a brand, is 50% of the reason for Marvel’s dominance in pop culture. Kirby (primarily, along with Ditko, Wally Wood, and others) owning the other 50%. Kirby’s ability to imagine worlds, characters, stories and universes was and is just unparalleled. But, again to your point, he did need Stan to help him bring all of this imagination to life on the page. If he’d had someone like that for his DC work it would have been even more mind blowing than it it now, and the dialogue and convoluted and, at times, confusing plot lines would have made more sense and been less difficult/painful. His lone work on Challengers of the Unknown is wonderful, especially with Wood’s inking. But the scope and scale is nowhere near his much later attempts at DC. Yet again to your point, he was so angry about his lack of creative credit at Marvel that, beyond Mike Royer’s inking, he just did not want to share creative credit with anyone else. He wanted complete creative control and direction. Who could blame a creative powerhouse like Kirby for wanting to be untethered like that? But the result was that it just didn’t work well, like his work on Black Panther and Cap when he returned to Marvel. He needed a partner to hone and help direct his vision and to carry the voices for his creations.

Mister H · 12-09-2017, 06:16 PM

Hmmm, starting to re-think the Fourh World omnibus now.

**wktf** · 12-09-2017, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister H

Hmmm, starting to re-think the Fourh World omnibus now.

http://www.cheapgraphicnovels.com/ja...mnibus-hc.html

Mister H · 12-09-2017, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wktf

http://www.cheapgraphicnovels.com/ja...mnibus-hc.html

I seem to agree with your opinions when it comes to omnibus books. Would you get this one?

mmk123 · 12-10-2017, 12:58 AM

In Stock Trades actually has the Fourth World omnibus for $75.

https://www.instocktrades.com/TP/DC/...S-HC/JUN170377

I am considering getting this though I kind of wish DC would have done two volumes of this. A 1500 page book is a little hard to read laying down in bed.

jadekite22 · 12-10-2017, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mmk123

In Stock Trades actually has the Fourth World omnibus for $75.

https://www.instocktrades.com/TP/DC/...S-HC/JUN170377

I am considering getting this though I kind of wish DC would have done two volumes of this. A 1500 page book is a little hard to read laying down in bed.

I was about to reassure you that the awesome Simonson Orion omni worked fine at it's comparable size. But no. It's literally half the length.

I have the original four HCs. I would say, if the New Gods omni causes the aftermarket value to drop a bit, I'd opt for those, same as I would recommended the DC Archives over the omnis in several cases. I can't quite convert to digital, so portability is still a priority despite my large omnibus collection.

**wktf** · 12-10-2017, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister H

I seem to agree with your opinions when it comes to omnibus books. Would you get this one?

You know, I’m just not sure. I wouldn’t get it to read it, having read enough of Kirby’s writer/artist work to know that reading this would frustrate me. But, then, I’d end up reading it for the magnum opus that it is, suffering through the writing, and for the reference material it provides for everything in the DCU that comes after it.

All that said, ultimately, I don’t think I’ll be getting it.

jadekite22 · 12-10-2017, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wktf

I completely agree. Stan was a phenomenal storyteller and his ability to infuse a unique “voice” for all Marvel’s characters, as well as for Marvel as a brand, is 50% of the reason for Marvel’s dominance in pop culture. Kirby (primarily, along with Ditko, Wally Wood, and others) owning the other 50%. Kirby’s ability to imagine worlds, characters, stories and universes was and is just unparalleled. But, again to your point, he did need Stan to help him bring all of this imagination to life on the page. If he’d had someone like that for his DC work it would have been even more mind blowing than it it now, and the dialogue and convoluted and, at times, confusing plot lines would have made more sense and been less difficult/painful. His lone work on Challengers of the Unknown is wonderful, especially with Wood’s inking. But the scope and scale is nowhere near his much later attempts at DC. Yet again to your point, he was so angry about his lack of creative credit at Marvel that, beyond Mike Royer’s inking, he just did not want to share creative credit with anyone else. He wanted complete creative control and direction. Who could blame a creative powerhouse like Kirby for wanting to be untethered like that? But the result was that it just didn’t work well, like his work on Black Panther and Cap when he returned to Marvel. He needed a partner to hone and help direct his vision and to carry the voices for his creations.

I don't know that I agree Stan was a phenomenal storyteller as much as he was a phenomenal salesman, which is more to your point about making Kirby's ideas digestible if not amazingly relatable in the face of such wacky concepts. The Marvel method is what gave the artists, like Kirby, complete creative control from the storytelling aspect (I.e. sequencing, composition and all the visual elements that make the comic readable.) Still, as much as the "House of Ideas" moniker belongs to Kirby and Everett among others, Stan is still deservedly the most identifiable brand element of the Marvel universe. Spider-Man is the most popular hero maybe after Batman due to his writing mainly. I'd also attribute the appeal if Thor and the Avengers as a team more to Lee. Fantastic Four, for example, almost works in spite of him though, IMO.

**wktf** · 12-10-2017, 11:15 AM

All depends on how you’re defining “storyteller,” I suppose. For example, Kirby may well have developed the plot and story flow which is why he’s called a writer for Marvel. But the Marvel Method meant Stan actually wrote/scripted the story captions and dialogue. That’s writing, telling the story, storytelling. Hence my point about creating characters’ and Marvel’s voices, as well as story scripting. Not that Kirby also doesn’t deserve credit for creating plot and story flow. But the scripting was Stan.

And oh, yes, certainly Stan also was a tremendous salesman!

protector2814 · 12-10-2017, 11:28 AM

I will give Kirby high praise for his writing on Kamandi. For some reason, the klunkiness of the writing (which Kirby did a good portion of), combined with the 60's, ruined-world art & the start/stop grinding of the story, which I believe was intentional, was very good for 50 or so bi-monthly issues.

If you're gonna buy a Kirby, DC omnibus, buy Kamandi.