Stan Lee RIP

[Metallo]

It’s a little late but I felt like saying something for Stan The Man. Not a lot of people know but he did work for DC including some
Superman material. Long before that though his work influenced the entire industry and the way they presented superheroes like Superman.

It really is the end of an era. He was one of the last major links to a bygone age of comics. One of the last (if not the last) major Golden Age creators of note. Lee had a huge hand in launching the Silver Age and helped make Marvel what it is today. Even beyond Marvel what he and others did in the 60s revolutionized the Comic book industry.

So many people have said what needed to be said better than I ever could but like Roddenberry or Henson or Lucas among others Stan played a huge part in shaping my fandom from childhood on with the universe he helped create and populate with so many amazing characters in so many wonderful stories. His impact on pop culture with co creators like Kirby, Ditko, Everett, etc. can never be overstated. We all knew his passing was inevitable and that it would be coming sooner rather than later but part of me still can’t imagine a world without Stans energy.

Hopefully someone keeps his daughter and the other vultures from raping his estate harder than R Kelly on a teenage girl. Lee wasn’t perfect and had his flaws but for the most part he seemed like an OK human being. It’s sad that he’s gone but wonderful that he got to live long enough to see his co-creations reach their potential, enjoy some major success, and be recognized and appreciated by so many fans. Along with a long life you can’t ask for much more than that.

Godspeed Stan and...excelsior!

[crazy_asian_man]

Well said. I was glad to read a bit by Roy Thomas recently that said that he did spend time with Stan just a couple of days before his death, and that he was in good spirits but ready to go.

I know there's the argument to be made about how Ditko and Kirby could have been treated far better if Stan had done something earlier- and how both weren't able to enjoy the fruits of their labor like Lee had- but on the flip side:
Lee was THE persona behind Marvel comics. It's hard to find any real equivalent on the DC side.... I was lucky to have seen Stan in person talking up a storm and witty and sharp as ever a couple of years ago (I didn't see him at the last appearance in town, though)- and his sense of fun and wanting to entertain people he was around (contrast to McFarlane who actually pissed off Stan on stage) in person and in print made you feel like Stan was a father figure whenever reading any of his comics back in the day, particularly through Stan's soapbox.

He will definitely be missed. He definitely leaves a huge void.
I can't think of anyone that could fill his shoes or be a successor. (Maybe if you could blend Kevin Feige and Kevin Smith into one person? But even then..)

[Metallo]

You’re absolutely right. Stan was a one of a kind. DC doesn’t really have an equivalent. Lee was one of it not the most prolific writers/creators of his or any other era. Can’t really think of anyone at DC that even had a hand in creating so many major popular iconic characters. Lee may not have created the greatest hero but between quality and quantity it’s hard to top him.

I’ve never understood why people were so hard on him for the issues with Kirby, Ditko, etc. sure they may have done more than Stan usually let on considering how the Marvel Method worked but he never denied their contribution and always spoke well of their work. He wasn’t a Bob Kane. Stan had a bit of huckster in him but he was also the perfect guy to promote the marvel brand. He was a showman. He did feel comfortable in the spotlight. If Kirby and others had done the same thing to promote the brand and make some money (not the top spot that Stan had but still) he wouldn’t have tried to stop them. Kirby never struck me as a guy who craved the spotlight and for most of Ditkos life he seemed to not only shun it but was more of a recluse.

I can understand why he was ready to go. He’d lived a long full life. Most of his contemporaries were gone. His wife was gone. He was probably tired. Tired of the grind. Tired of people trying to use him and con him. Tired of all the drama surrounding his estate. He was probably at peace with going now.

It was sad to see everything he went through in this last year and part of me is glad he’s free of it. The other part will miss him being around but he had a good run and left a great legacy.

[crazy_asian_man]

Nov 15, 2018 19:42:33 GMT -5 Metallo said:

You’re absolutely right. Stan was a one of a kind. DC doesn’t really have an equivalent. Lee was one of it not the most prolific writers/creators of his or any other era. Can’t really think of anyone at DC that even had a hand in creating so many major popular iconic characters. Lee may not have created the greatest hero but between quality and quantity it’s hard to top him.

I’ve never understood why people were so hard on him for the issues with Kirby, Ditko, etc. sure they may have done more than Stan usually let on considering how the Marvel Method worked but he never denied their contribution and always spoke well of their work. He wasn’t a Bob Kane. Stan had a bit of huckster in him but he was also the perfect guy to promote the marvel brand. He was a showman. He did feel comfortable in the spotlight. If Kirby and others had done the same thing to promote the brand and make some money (not the top spot that Stan had but still) he wouldn’t have tried to stop them. Kirby never struck me as a guy who craved the spotlight and for most of Ditkos life he seemed to not only shun it but was more of a recluse.

I can understand why he was ready to go. He’d lived a long full life. Most of his contemporaries were gone. His wife was gone. He was probably tired. Tired of the grind. Tired of people trying to use him and con him. Tired of all the drama surrounding his estate. He was probably at peace with going now.

It was sad to see everything he went through in this last year and part of me is glad he’s free of it. The other part will miss him being around but he had a good run and left a great legacy.

The most famous names I can think of on the DC side stayed hidden for the most part.
With Stan Lee as both a creator and behind the scenes management- you have a few names that were famous either in front or behind the scenes, but not both.... and even so, no-one with the scale of what Lee achieved.

Kirby has his legend, but sadly his writing wasn't quite on the level of his concepts and art- plus, he was never in the position to be the core creator of a whole comics line outside of Marvel, like Stan had.'

If Kirby had been told he could have had the same position at DC as Lee had at Marvel, it would have been interesting... but thankfully even if Kirby never got the money, he has the eternal respect of all the comic artists that know he was the co-father of most of Marvel and sole creator of his Fourth World at DC.

[Metallo]

Kirby could come up with great concepts but like you said he wasn’t a writer. Plotter yes but writer? Not really. Kirby was never suited for that job as a promoter. I think you need a writer to be “that guy” because they can explain and express those more complicated concepts to the public. DC has had plenty of people to take center stage to promote the brand going all the way back to Jenette Kahn but not a creator and no one with that kind of showmanship.

Bob Kane was a showman and his ego relished that spotlight and fame more than Lee ever did but he wasn’t as talented or as prolific as Stan was. He couldn’t claim the entire DC universe as his creation (though he’d try if he thought he could get away with it). But Kane was never an editor or publisher so once again he’s not even close to what Lee represented for Marvel.

[crazy_asian_man]

Nov 16, 2018 15:48:41 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Kirby could come up with great concepts but like you said he wasn’t a writer. Plotter yes but writer? Not really. Kirby was never suited for that job as a promoter. I think you need a writer to be “that guy” because they can explain and express those more complicated concepts to the public. DC has had plenty of people to take center stage to promote the brand going all the way back to Jenette Kahn but not a creator and no one with that kind of showmanship.

Bob Kane was a showman and his ego relished that spotlight and fame more than Lee ever did but he wasn’t as talented or as prolific as Stan was. He couldn’t claim the entire DC universe as his creation (though he’d try if he thought he could get away with it). But Kane was never an editor or publisher so once again he’s not even close to what Lee represented for Marvel.

What's odd is how Lee's superhero creations after the golden age (?) didn't really set off sparks like the ones he did for Marvel in the beginning.... whereas Kirby's work after Marvel with the "New Gods" and "Eternals" are getting a second life through the movies.

In any case- I guess we should just be thankful for the Lee/Kirby creations. Really two giants at the top of their game.

[Metallo]

It’s because of the Marvel Method. The artists had more input than normal and guys like Kirby and Ditko were creative forces. Stan was a very good writer especially for that era but I think the times started passing him by buy the 70s. To be fair most creators of his era didn’t have a continuing groundswell of creativity after the 60s or 70s and even guys after that weren’t continuing to create iconic characters for decades. It just got to that point that it was harder and harder to come up with something that stuck. How many great ideas did Wolfman and Wein come up with after 1990. I think most creators have a really potent period and after they’re tapped out of ideas it gets harder to produce new ideas.

But like I said by the 70s when characters like Punisher and Wolverine were coming along they made Stan’s stuff look more tame. He co created characters with problems but not characters that dark or violent. Stan wasnt a product of that era of exploitation films and more violent films and more provocative films. That was the stuff younger guys were drawing from.

[crazy_asian_man]

Nov 25, 2018 16:37:00 GMT -5 Metallo said:

It’s because of the Marvel Method. The artists had more input than normal and guys like Kirby and Ditko were creative forces. Stan was a very good writer especially for that era but I think the times started passing him by buy the 70s. To be fair most creators of his era didn’t have a continuing groundswell of creativity after the 60s or 70s and even guys after that weren’t continuing to create iconic characters for decades. It just got to that point that it was harder and harder to come up with something that stuck. How many great ideas did Wolfman and Wein come up with after 1990. I think most creators have a really potent period and after they’re tapped out of ideas it gets harder to produce new ideas.

But like I said by the 70s when characters like Punisher and Wolverine were coming along they made Stan’s stuff look more tame. He co created characters with problems but not characters that dark or violent. Stan wasnt a product of that era of exploitation films and more violent films and more provocative films. That was the stuff younger guys were drawing from.

That's a great point.

I do think that there are times that writers and artists have their 'peak' and then their decay (unless they fight it - look at Stallone!).

I agree that things got a bit darker with the popularity of the Punisher and Wolverine- but then again, even the Fantastic Four got a bit darker from their start- perhaps just consciously/ subconsciously things change with the times?

But jumping back to another point you made- Lee came from a certain time, (much like Kirby and, well- probably much like all of us)- and probably had a certain set of aesthetics that he stayed within.

I think directors also (good or bad) follow this- for example, I'd never expect anything too 'unfamily-friendly' or 'edgy' from Ron Howard, but then again, under Ron Howard, I'd always expect a good -enough story that's complete and comprehensible.

On the converse side, from DePalma, I'd never expect anything too family-friendly or conventional.

Anyhow- whether by necessity or not= having Lee be there co-creating so many books at that time made him a legend.

For those who grew up with his works and then went into the industry to try to recreate that magic--- mixed results.

While it's painful to think about the artists and writers who didn't get a chance to share in the profits or fame they might have deserved, it is nice to think that Lee was able to see (and enjoy) his creations get the gigantic big screen treatment that they deserved.

Bob Kane I know lived to see most of the Batman films- but sad that he didn't get a chance to see Nolan's Batman Begins' reboot....( still, he had it better than poor Bill Finger. ). But, I digress.

[Metallo]

I remember Kane at the time praising Schumachers films and before that he loved that the Burton films weren’t the 60s show so I think he went wherever the wind blew. Even though he had a hand in creating Batman I feel like other people had a much better handle on what truly made Batman tick compared to Kane. Lee on the other had truly understood his characters at their core.

But yeah with Lee I think the times passed him by and I think he knew it too. That’s why he stepped down as editor and had moved out for LA to try to make movie deals by 1980 or so. I think he knew fresher younger talent had their finger on the pulse. It happens to everyone. Frank Miller was THE guy back then but now he comes off as having no idea what the audience wants. I think he’s just putting out stuff he likes.

You have so many creators who lay the foundation by creating a character but then there are other people who define them. I think that’s true of many of Lees creations like The X-men, Daredevil, and others. Then you look at other characters that Lee didn’t creat but that he contributed to massively like Captain America. The man from another time fish out of water aspect is a huge part of Cap now and that was what Lee added.

Other characters like Fury were defined to me by Steranko. The same is true for dc characters like Batman and Superman. Most comic book characters are interesting because they are constantly evolving and sometimes defining traits are added decades later. I think that’s why you can’t really give credit to any one person. They’re such a long term group effort.

[crazy_asian_man]

Nov 28, 2018 21:18:34 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I remember Kane at the time praising Schumachers films and before that he loved that the Burton films weren’t the 60s show so I think he went wherever the wind blew. Even though he had a hand in creating Batman I feel like other people had a much better handle on what truly made Batman tick compared to Kane. Lee on the other had truly understood his characters at their core.

But yeah with Lee I think the times passed him by and I think he knew it too. That’s why he stepped down as editor and had moved out for LA to try to make movie deals by 1980 or so. I think he knew fresher younger talent had their finger on the pulse. It happens to everyone. Frank Miller was THE guy back then but now he comes off as having no idea what the audience wants. I think he’s just putting out stuff he likes.

You have so many creators why pay the foundation by creating a character but then there are other people who define them. I think that’s true of many of Lees creations like The X-men, Daredevil, and others. Then you look at other characters that Lee didn’t creat but that he contributed too massively like Captain America. The man from another time fish out of water aspect is a huge part of Cap and that was what Lee added.

Other characters like Fury were defined to me by Steranko. The same is true for dc characters like Batman and Superman. Most comic book characters are interesting isn’t that they are constantly evolving and sometimes defining traits are added decades later. I think that’s why you can’t rewlly give credit to any one person. They’re such a long term group effort.

Well said! I can't add any more to that.
I know a lot of indie/amateur creators that struggle like crazy to get in, but spin their wheels trying to figure out how to 'figure out what everyone wants NOW' but to me it's a lost cause- I think when creations worked, it wasn't a guarantee- but that whoever created it had to put out stuff he/she personally liked to begin with.

With DC/Marvel, I agree that any creator who worked on an established character is just adding to a legacy- and building on what was there before.

As examples, as great as Neal Adams and Miller might be- nobody seems to love their self-created works as much as the work they did on pre-existing characters in both companies.

On a side note, with so many writers and artists having contributed for years on a lot of these properties- and with giant budget superhero film franchises so fragile (Not talking about the MCU)- I get annoyed as heck when any filmmaker who has a chance to pick the best of the best material and bring it to life, only to run it into the ground. (Example: much of Watchmen).

[Metallo]

I think you have great writers and great creators or idea men. Some are one or the other. Rarely is someone both. Even when it does happen it isn’t always sustainable. Everyone runs out of inspiration from time to time or gets a block or loses touch wit the times.

So much has been done and the inspirational ideas have been mined so much that it’s harder for creators now to come up with new characters that stick. At best we usually get legacy characters based on previous characters or derivative characters like Supergirl or She Hulk or Red Hulk. A slant on previous characters.

I think the best way to come up with something is to go as far back as you can go the original source of inspiration and out a new spin on it because nothing is original. It’s all been done. It’s what all these guys did. Superman takes from Hercules and Sampson and Achilles as well as John Carter and Flash Gordon and Doc Savage. It’s all mixed together in a fresh way with some new twists that aren’t as obvious.

[crazy_asian_man]

Dec 1, 2018 14:37:18 GMT -5 Metallo said:

I think you have great writers and great creators or idea men. Some are one or the other. Rarely is someone both. Even when it does happen it isn’t always sustainable. Everyone runs out of inspiration from time to time or gets a block or loses touch wit the times.

So much has been done and the inspirational ideas have been mined so much that it’s harder for creators now to come up with new characters that stick. At best we usually get legacy characters based on previous characters or derivative characters like Supergirl or She Hulk or Red Hulk. A slant on previous characters.

I think the best way to come up with something is to go as far back as you can go the original source of inspiration and out a new spin on it because nothing is original. It’s all been done. It’s what all these guys did. Superman takes from Hercules and Sampson and Achilles as well as John Carter and Flash Gordon and Doc Savage. It’s all mixed together in a fresh way with some new twists that aren’t as obvious.

The only way I can think of that might sustain itself in the long run for comics might be similar to how Feige seems to run the MCU: in that it seems to have its eye on the long game.

As you mentioned before, I think- when Captain America: 1st Avenger disappointed- it might have been easy to dump it out (like WB seemed like it did with SR)- but instead Feige seemed to stick to his guns in thinking of a longterm strategy for the films.

With comics- I really think perhaps taking a risk and NOT having a reboot for 20 years - but instead have a real timeline for the characters in the DC universe to age, then pass things on to their children- or grandchildren and move forward- would make fans more, not less invested.... though probably HIGHLY impractical and probably wouldn't work business-wise. (Creatively, though, can you imagine if there was 'ONE' canon timeline for all DC/Marvel characters that had to be generational and not be able to reboot itself for a couple of decades? I think it either be a total disaster or something fresh and innovattive, making stories count more, and not less...)