Karen's report from the San Diego Comic Con

Let me start by saying I hate crowds. I get anxious and a bit aggressive when stuck in a jostling pack of human bodies. It's that old 'fight or flight' instinct which kicks in to high gear when I feel surrounded. So going to the San Diego Comic Con is always a trying experience for me.

However, the rewards typically outweigh the frustration and irritation I feel when swept along by the (literally in many cases) unwashed masses, so I find myself going back, year after year.

This year's con was not graced with the same number of high profile movie previews as was the last two years, but it still had much to offer. A big part of it for me is being able to purchase a lot of back issues from the 60s and 70s, and I had a great time doing just that. The dealers are really feeling squeezed though. I spoke with many of them, and I get the feeling that the con is pricing them out (I was told by one that booth prices are going up $150 next year). There's alot of animosity towards "Hollywood" from the dealers, as they feel they have been shuffled off to the corner of the hall while the big names, like Lucasfilm, Mattel, NBC, Fox, etc, get the best spots in the show. They may be right; I often wonder if the day will come when comics dealers disappear from the con.

I certainly hope not. The convention should be able to keep all of the disparate groups that give it an appeal to so many different people. It's definitely a big enough venue. The view from our hotel balcony shows just half of the center! It must be a couple of football fields long, with the dealers/exhibit area on the first floor, and meeting rooms on the top one. Here's a tip if you ever go to Comic-Con: wear the sturdiest, most comfortable shoes you've got, because you will be doing a lot of walking. And standing. A whole lot of standing.

We got in on preview night and this was the busiest preview night I have ever seen. Typically, it is a lighter crowd, but this crowd was huge; it felt like a Friday or Saturday crowd. The exhibition hall runs the length of the convention center and reminds me of a casino with all the bright lights, displays, and cacophany of sounds. While it was packed, we still were able to get around to a lot of booths.

The term booth is misleading. Some of these areas are really huge. Take the Sideshow Collectibles area for example. They had some really wonderful displays of stuff too expensive for me to buy. A huge banner over their section had pictures of Hellboy and Darth Vader, among others. Similar set-ups were present for both Marvel and DC, as well as Lego, Mattel, all the movie studios, and video game companies. Monitors were everywhere, with ads, previews, demos, and schedules. You are constantly bombarded with information. Preview night is just preparing you for the next four days.

Thursday was the first day of panels. I went to both the DC Nation and Mondo Marvel panels. Although I have always been more of a Marvel fan, every year the DC group makes their panel more fun and more interesting than Marvel. I know Dan Didio is much maligned, and I must admit I feel like DC has dropped the ball the last year or so, but the man comes across in person as genuinely caring about what the fans think. When people expressed dislike of Countdown, he asked them all to tell him what was wrong with it. Then he, and Mike Carlin, explained that they knew some of the problems, and regretted that they hadn't been able to do a better job on some things. You certainly would never hear that on the Marvel panels, which are much more smart-ass about things.

On Friday I attended a couple of interesting panels. One was a spotlight on Jim Starlin, and the other was called "That 70's panel" and had a number of comics creators from the 1970s present. I was excited about the Starlin panel, because I was meeting him later that day to say hi. A couple of months ago I interviewed Jim over the phone for an article on Adam Warlock, which will be published in Back Issue #34. He had been very gracious, insightful, and funny in our interview and I really looked forward to thanking him personally. His panel was moderated by Ron Marz, and covered every aspect of his career. Jim had told me to come see him after his autographing session later that day. I didn't want to take up too much of his time, so we chatted briefly. He was every bit as nice in person as he had been over the phone. Just a great guy.

The 70s panel also included Starlin, as well as Mike Grell, Joe Staton, Mike Barr, Bernie Wrightson, and about halfway through, Len Wein. Mark Evanier moderated. When asked which comics pros who came before them they had respected the most, Jack Kirby's name came up again and again. Asked if there were any problems with any of the "old timers", Starlin mentioned that artist Gil Kane said too many of the younger artists practiced something he called "masturbatory rendering"! But for the most part, the pros who came before them embraced them and mentored them.

Saturday was the huge Heroes TV show panel in the cavernous Hall H. Hall H is the largest room in the convention center. It can seat 6500 people. You'd think there should be no problem getting a seat inside. You'd be wrong. With 100,000 people in attendance, getting into Hall H became a holy quest. The Heroes panel was scheduled for 10:30 am that day. We thought by getting in line at 8 am, we'd be OK. Little did we know how insane some of our fellow convention goers were. When we got over to the con Saturday at 8, at least 2000-3000 people were in line. Some had been there since the previous night! The line snaked back and forth on the side of the hall, then wrapped all the way around the outside, behind the convention center! After a 15 minute walk around the building, we ended up right behind the con loading dock. I was confident we would still get in, but I felt badly for the people who came after us, many of whom were lined up past the convention center, all the way down to the Marriott hotel next door. However, the convention staff did a very good job of managing the line. We did get in, and it was worth it: the whole cast was there, and they brought the next season's first episode! This episode was fantastic; after the second season last year, I wasn't sure if I would be interested in Heroes this year, but they have wiped that thought out of my head. Funniest moment of the panel: when a little kid addressed actor Zachary Quinto, who plays the psychopath Sylar, and enthusiastically yelled, "Sylo! you're the best hero of them all!!"

After that was the Lost panel, which was amusing but (as usual) provided no information on the upcoming season. But Lost was so good last season, I can forgive them for a lack of detail.

My final panel of the con was Saturday night's Legion of Super-Heroes 50th anniversary tribute. We were surprised to see a long line for the panel, but the fans of the Legion are, well, legion. The panel included Paul Levitz, Colleen Doran, Keith Giffen, Mike Grell, Geoff Johns, and Tom and Mary Birnbaum. Although there were no major announcements (Johns saved his Legion on Smallville announcement for Sunday), the Legion love was on full display (although a snarky comment by Giffen about a flustered fan seemed just cruel). Most of the panel was spent on fan questions and adulation. Johns did mention that Duo Damsel would now be Duplicate Damsel, able to make many copies of herself. Hey, it beats just two.

So there you have it. This year's show was a little more low key (at least for me). Admittedly, I was not able to attend a couple of the bigger events, like the Watchmen panel or the surprise Hugh Jackman/Wolverine appearance (thank god for YouTube). But that's one of the truisms of Comic-Con: invariably, events you wish to attend will be held at the same time. But still, the show was fun, exhausting, exciting, and aggravating, all at the same time. Typical Comic Con.

Doug tells: Why We Like John Buscema

I have a confession to make: as a wee lad of 10 (back in 1976), I didn’t appreciate John Buscema. I really didn’t even care for him! Ouch. That hurts to admit.

But really – the first Buscema-drawn issue I recall was Fantastic Four #173, and it followed a very nice run by a young fellow named George Perez. Perez’s art was not only dynamic, but as inked by the ever-influential Joe Sinnott showcased beautiful faces on all of the characters. A fan of Perez’s from his then-recent tenure on my favorite book, The Avengers, Sinnott made him look all the better in the pages of the FF. Credits aside, I was immediately aware that Perez was not the penciller on #173. The differences were subtle, however – perhaps Buscema’s figures were more lithe, his facial expressions more intense. But the art was consistent (due again to Sinnott). Issue #175 ensured in me the accuracy of my belief that this Buscema fellow was no George Perez – inking himself, that “FF” look was gone. The faces became more angular, maybe even drawn. The nice figure-work was there – still lithe, fluid, etc. But the faces preoccupied me. Issue #176 brought Perez back, along with Sinnott – and I became a John Buscema-wary reader…

Boy, was I a dope!

After a hiatus from reading comics whilst in high school, I got back into the hobby circa 1985 while a sophomore in college. Wow – were my eyes opened! Having matured in my comics knowledge as well as tastes, and in possession of a little cash left over from student loans, I began to seek out back issues to further my runs of various titles. My first task was to attempt to amass a complete run of The Avengers, my favorite book. In doing so, I was introduced for the first time to the classic 1960’s Buscema run featuring inks by George Klein, George Bell/Roussos, and Tom Palmer. What rich, wonderful pictures – awe-inspiring in some cases. Fantastic story telling, figure work, and a dynamism not unlike Kirby’s but oh so much more realistic. His treatment of Hercules, Dragon Man, Goliath, the Vision, and Ultron fascinated me. Never had I seen such raw emotion – from anger to angst, in a comic. These pages were reminiscent of art I’d only previously seen from Renaissance masters… high praise indeed.

Incredible Hulk: pencils by Big John, paints by Joe Jusko!

As I moved toward buying up other titles, I came across his first run on the FF. Again, my appreciation for John Buscema grew by leaps and bounds. The Galactus 4-parter that included the Silver Surfer (natch!) and the robot herald Gabriel was a high point – I first owned this arc in the form of Marvel Treasury Edition #21! Thor, some Conan… I found myself now not dismissing Buscema’s art, but embracing it; yea, even seeking it out!

My opinion of him and of his work quickly moved toward a desire to see more and more of it. I sought out reprints, collections, anything that could bring me more examples of not only his superhero career but also of his sword-and-sorcery books. The Man Called Nova, Tarzan – I gobbled up all of this as quickly as I could. Animals, monsters, fantasy city-scapes – was there anything he couldn’t draw?

After working full-time for several years, I began to pursue original pencils done by Buscema and have been fortunate enough to purchase several examples of both his finished art as well as draft work. He was, and should be considered, a leader in his craft. I am now of the opinion that there truly have been few in the history of the comics business who are/were qualified to be called storyteller, artist, and master. Neal Adams, Jack Kirby, and John Buscema. Others may disagree, or add to the list. But for me, Buscema was a creator whose work I could spend just hours looking at, and admiring. And it never stops being that way.

Galactus Trilogy: the Marvels #3 take

In 1994, almost 30 years after the Galactus Trilogy originally saw the light of day in Fantastic Four # 48-50, Kurt Busiek and Alex Ross spun a tale of the Marvel Universe. This was quite a different take, however, than almost anything we’d seen before. This story was approached from the perspective of Phil Sheldon, a journalist/photographer who was witness to the dawn of the “Marvels” – from World War II to his then-present (c. 1974). Busiek and Ross revisited many of the key (and even some of the trivial) moments in Marvel history. But the one event that got the special treatment, where Ross pulled out all of his artistic stops, was the first appearance of Galactus and the Silver Surfer.)

Doug: Kurt did a great job seguing from Attuma’s flooding of New York (Avengers #26) to the appearance of the signs of doom that hearkened to the invasion of Galactus. He also just did a fantastic job of putting as many Marvel moments as he could into the story. Even going from major event to major event was a fun ride, as somewhere there’d be a newspaper headline or a picture on the television or a news flash over the radio announcing some calamity that the long-time Marvel fan would instantly recognize. I’ll tell you, to read Marvels is to re-live a wonderful lifetime of four-color fun!

Karen: I can still recall when “Marvels” first came out, how amazing it looked. I had never seen anything like this before. The art appeared so real, I almost felt as if I was looking at photographs!
Sharon: While I think that Alex Ross is supremely talented, I’d rather look at “typical” comic book art, with its idealized characters and perfect physical proportions. I’m not crazy about looking at heroes/heroines wearing slightly baggy costumes; I want the fantasy! But I will say overall Marvels has an extraordinary concept and is a great read.
Doug: I think Karen remarked that when she first read FF #48 she wasn’t immediately registering that the fire in the sky and the meteor swarm were the doing of the Watcher. I echo that – and as I stated, I don’t think it was until I read Marvels that I firmly grasped the whole idea.

Karen: I think because we are getting the view of the guy on the street, the whole event seems far more frightening than it did in the FF issues.
Doug: Alex obviously treasures this story as one of the most significant events in the history of the Marvel Universe. While his artwork is stunning throughout the four volumes, I just feel like he went all out in this portion of issue #3. There are twelve splash pages or near-splashes during the first contact with Galactus and the Silver Surfer. The large artwork serves to heighten the reader’s excitement and magnify the detail of the scenes.

I also got a kick then and now in Ross’ use of “real” people within the story. Of course there’s newsman John Chancellor as himself, but how about Phil’s colleague Don Knotts, the crowd shot under the large panel when the Torch first engages the Surfer (featuring young versions of Gene Colan and Stan Lee), and of course “Gilligan’s Island”’s own Russell Johnson as Mr. Fantastic. Throughout the rest of the story are shots of the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and many others!

Karen: I got a huge kick out of all the ‘guest appearances’ in the series! It made me look very closely at all the panels. I think my favorites were multiple sightings of Lois Lane and Clark Kent; Robin Williams as Popeye; Denholm Elliot (‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’); and Timothy Dalton as Tony Stark.
Sharon: I really like the use of famous people, but sometimes it didn’t work for me. I have always found Russell Johnson attractive, he was never my idea of Reed…at least, not the conventionally handsome Kirby/Sinnott Reed. Dalton as Stark was spot on, though.

Also, does anyone know if there is a guide or resource detailing whom Ross used as his models? I’ve seen some references (in Mythology and in the Marvels tpb), but nothing comprehensive and I’ve never been able to discover who was used as his model for the Black Widow (glimpsed in chapters three and four) and whether she was based on a friend of Ross’ or a celebrity. Natasha is shown with her short black hair and her long red hair, and you can absolutely see it’s the same person. This is an area in which comic book art typically falls short, since hair and coloring is what is normally used to distinguish characters—at least, back in the Silver Age (known as the Betty and Veronica syndrome).
Doug: While not a New Yorker, I couldn’t help but liken the panels where Phil Sheldon walks through the auto tunnels to scenes of Manhattan in the hours and days after 9/11 (of course, this is on a re-read of this story). Phil’s sense of impending doom, of the need to be with his family, and of his observations of others and their reactions were very eerie in that sense.

Sharon: As a New Yorker who just read Marvels a couple of years ago, these scenes were hard to get through.

Doug: Although there is no dialogue heard by any of the combatants, Ross conveys exactly what is going on. Certainly someone who has read the source material has an advantage over one coming to it for the first time in Marvels, but the power of the art drives this part of this issue.

My favorite panel is Ross’ depiction of Galactus regaining his “balance” in mid-air after being toppled over the side of the Baxter Building. Although Kirby had shown us 28 years earlier, Ross did it better.

Karen: That was one of the best things about re-reading all the material for these reviews. I enjoyed comparing the two versions. Ross’ realism makes the battles much more dramatic.
Sharon: Since it’s told from the ordinary person’s point of view, the feeling is one of utter helplessness. I don’t know if I could take a steady dose of this sort of storytelling.
Doug: So the prime draw of Marvels is the “everyman” aspect of Phil Sheldon’s life and proximity to these gods that live among the denizens of New York City. A witness to history, Sheldon guides us through momentous events with his perspective, his emotion, and his persona. It is a nice ride, and serves to ably augment what Stan and Jack (and others) had done so many years before!

Fantastic Four #50: the Galactus Trilogy, part 3

Fantastic Four #50 (1966) 

Doug: The Surfer seems more in character as this one gets going. His concern for the human race, this universal altruism, seems somewhat more in line with the messiah-like figure Stan will paint him to be in the coming years. One thing I thought was odd about the splash, however, was Galactus’ question to the Surfer about treading on an ant hill. Are we to assume that ants are known throughout the cosmos, or was this perhaps another bit of source material for our earlier discussion on Galactus being seen as a given species sees itself?

The relationship between the Surfer and Galactus seems more than herald/master, although at this point Galactus has not said that he gave Norrin Radd his cosmic powers – he does say (on page 8) that “I regret what I must do! For, of all who live, I have cherished you the most!” It’s left to us to wonder at what point Stan began to work out the Surfer’s origin. He’s certainly evolving as this story paces forward, and of course his personality will be developed even further in the coming issues.

Sharon: Doug, regarding your query about Galactus' awareness of ants, your latter explanation makes sense to me- -I guess we have to assume that each race “interprets” Galactus in terms they can understand.
Karen: What I found most interesting in the confrontation between Galactus and the Surfer is that the Surfer at this point is not totally rebellious – he still addresses Galactus as ‘master’. The Surfer still shows Galactus great respect, and seems to think there is still is a chance of persuading him: ”Master! Say we may leave this world! My heart grieves at battling one with whom I have shared a universe!” Of course that is down the drain by page 4! But it shows how badly the Surfer did not want to end his relationship with Galactus.
Doug: Stan begins to develop Galactus as a tragic villain during the battle with the Silver Surfer. Upon his destruction of the energy casing, Galactus speaks of his role in the universe, tying it to Man’s dominion over the plants and animals. Galactus sees himself at the top of some cosmic food chain. Even the Watcher chimes in that Galactus is neither good nor evil – he is only Galactus!

Karen: The ambiguity surrounding Galactus’ nature was a novel concept and another idea which elevated Marvel comics beyond any comics ever printed at that time. ‘The House of Ideas’ was no lie back then!
Doug: Stan and Jack did a great job of showing the Torch’s state of total exhaustion and feelings of insignificance after his travels. For him to have returned in any state other than this would have been a short-sell. To have seen what Johnny saw, even given the adventures of the FF to this point (which included time travel) would have been mind-boggling, even maddening.

Karen: Yes, another wonderfully drawn scene. Reading these comics was almost like watching a movie, in that it is a visceral experience. Some of those scenes have stuck in my head for decades.
Doug: I love the Watcher’s passive/aggressive role in this story. Sworn not to interfere, he does everything but NOT interfere. His role is critical in driving away Galactus. It’s interesting, given how his origin will play out in the back-up in Silver Surfer #1 in 1968 that he is this involved – Stan and Gene Colan gave the Watcher a very moving backstory.

I did think it was out-of-character for Galactus to resort to attempting to con the Surfer into serving him by doing damage to New York and endangering human lives. That type of game would seem to be way beneath Galactus’ dignity. Of course, what Jack drew, and his liner notes, may not have been what Stan dialogued – who knows?

What do you suppose was the purpose of the Ultimate Nullifier? Do you think it was an invention of Galactus’? Why, then, if his goal was to drain the lifeforce from planets, do you think he was in possession of a weapon which could lay waste to a galaxy?

Karen: As a kid, the Ultimate Nullifier looked a lot like my Dad’s Zippo lighter!
But to answer your question, Doug, perhaps the Big G kept it around as a way to end his existence? He expresses emotions, and it’s not impossible to think he could feel some despair at his destiny. Just a thought.
Doug: I think we get a sense of the true power of the Watcher when even Galactus turns to him and accuses him of obtaining the Ultimate Nullifier for the FF. “Only you had the power… only you had the will!”

What do you make of the Watcher’s comment that he and Galactus are of “races”? Of course, we know that Uatu is not the only Watcher. But, has there ever been mention of Galen’s kin? I have read his origin story long ago in the pages of Thor, but don’t recall off the top of my head the entire storyline.

Karen: I think Steve Englehart and Al Milgrom covered a lot of the Watcher’s backstory in their Captain Marvel series in the late ‘70s. I think other Watchers showed up – can’t recall, but Uatu might have been on trial? Now I will have to dig those books out! As for Galactus/Galen, I think in the Thor stories you mention, we see his people – pretty much humans like us, but scientifically advanced.
Doug: Galactus’ departure seems spectacular, made for the visual it creates – don’t you think if he came to feed that he might be more inclined to conserve energy??

Karen: Another awesome visual. From Stan’s dialogue here, I would bet he was a big fan of the film “The Day the Earth Stood Still”. This final speech is very similar in theme to the final speech of the main character in that film. It’s got that same Cold War-atomic energy fears behind it. But I like it – enough to quote Galactus: “Be ever mindful of your promise of greatness! For it shall one day lift you beyond the stars…or bury you within the ruins of war!! The choice is yours!!”
Doug: I think it’s interesting that we had to wait around 20 years for the Surfer to again span the skies. Again, I think Stan felt he could be some type of super-moral agent, a messiah figure if earthbound. But Steve Englehart freed him much later, and that provided for more cosmic epics.

The final scene between Alicia Masters, the Surfer, and Ben is good – typical love story angst – and is a nice lead toward the Surfer’s next appearance and battle with the Thing.

Karen: My gripe about this issue is that it feels anti-climactic. We resolve the Galactus story by page 13, and then have a bunch of incidents in the next 7 pages that are all set-up for the next issue. It just feels off to me.
Sharon: Again, I have to comment on how beautifully Jack and Joe depicted Alicia. She is miles away from her previously dowdy portrayals. (Never mind how preposterous it is that she made it to the Baxter Building’s roof during a citywide crisis.)

Overall Evaluation - FF 48 - 50
Doug: This is just a fun story. It’s really neat to see these characters who have become such a huge part of not only the FF universe but the larger Marvel Universe blossom throughout the tale. I can understand Stan’s surprise at Jack’s creation of the Silver Surfer, but he really landed on his feet and served to breathe an interesting life into the character. And Galactus – is he not one of the all-time great “villains” ever in comics? Knowing his future in the pages of the Fantastic Four, it’s difficult to judge any of his appearances as sub-par. He is always an exciting character to read about.

Karen: What can I say? These issues make up a cornerstone in the foundation of the Marvel universe. Inventive, dramatic, thrilling – they really deliver!
Sharon: Just like #48, only about half of this issue is devoted to the actual Galactus conflict- - the rest is “human interest”- -Ben’s reaction to Alicia and the Surfer; a glimpse of the soon-to-be Thing impostor; Metro College’s Coach Thorpe (a subplot that was dropped soon after); Sue and Reed discovering the honeymoon is over; Ben’s depression; Johnny going to college; the debut of Wyatt Wingfoot; a snippet of the Inhumans, etc. So while the Galactus saga is commonly referred to as a “trilogy,” (spanning #48-50), it really could have been told in two issues, since half of #48 and #50 are not Galactus-oriented. Jack was obviously responsible for the pacing. I like this technique (having stories flow naturally into one another)… but wonder why Jack chose to tell the story in this manner. Was it just his creative juices urging him to do so? At any rate, this is Jack –and the FF--at their best...and this run of the FF is a major reason (along with Stan’s dialogue) that Marvel comics seemed so much more “realistic” than DC’s did back then.

Fantastic Four # 49: the Galactus Trilogy, part 2

Fantastic Four #49 (1966) 

Doug: The cover of this issue is the most striking of the trilogy. While issue #48’s ominous Watcher cover, with the cast staring off at the approaching Galactus, was a nice starting point (but thoroughly ignoring the fact that the first half of the book was a finishing-up of the Inhumans saga), #49’s cover is just eye-catching. The large head of Galactus, in my opinion rendered better here than in any panel within the magazine, his ray-firing hands, and the gliding Silver Surfer over a terrified and retreating Fantastic Four… the conveyance of action, intensity, and suspense was perfect. The color scheme was interesting, as well.

Sharon: A great cover. It was “swiped” (deliberately, of course) later on for the “What If? The Avengers had fought Galactus (instead of the FF)” story. This featured the Avengers of the Kooky Quartet plus Jan and Hank era (which would have been just about contemporaneous with FF #48-50).
Doug: The first thing I noticed about the book was Galactus’ changed appearance. Gone were the ugly green and red tones, replaced by the more commonly known purple. The brown remained. In addition, his arms and legs were bare – strange for a guy who lives in space and encounters in his travels all sorts of atmospheric conditions.

Sharon: So the Christmas look is gone, but the brown remains. The colors we commonly refer to as “earth” tones—green and brown—are an odd choice for an interstellar, decidedly non-Earthbound character. The cool purple/blue colors are a much better choice.
Karen: Unfortunately, we still have the giant ‘G’ on his chest. Seriously, that’s so goofy.
Doug: The next thing, and I’ve noted this in prior commentary in regard to (specifically) Don Heck’s rendering of Goliath in the pages of The Avengers, is my lack of satisfaction with large characters who seemingly change size from page to page, if not panel to panel as is the case here. On page 3, panel 1, the Thing is depicted as being approximately as tall as Galactus’ legs are long. However, only two panels later, as Ben lays into a punch to Galactus’ leg, he is not even as tall as the boot. While I prefer to think of Galactus as a true giant, there is a difference in his being 15-feet tall and 40-feet tall! A little consistency, please…

Galactus’ easy handling of the Thing’s and Torch’s attacks is good stuff – building on the feeling of helplessness and hopelessness. I especially liked how he gave Johnny a dose of his own medicine, turning his power (somewhat) back on him. The scene immediately after where Ben and Reed clean up was funny – good stuff, showing Reed’s constant analysis, Johnny’s hotheadedness, and the fact that no matter what, Stan treats them as much like “normal” people as he can.

Sharon: I know this scene was dramatically necessary, but…was there only one bathroom available? Ah, togetherness…
Karen: Yeah, that was a bit…uncomfortable. But I find it funny that Ben says they’re trying to devise a plan, and then that plan pretty much turns out to be Reed and Ben will attack Galactus, and if they don’t survive, it’ll be up to Sue and Johnny! Wow, genius, that’s some plan.
Doug: The entire scene with the Surfer and Alicia Masters was hard for me to read – I just couldn’t put away the fantastic origin story from Silver Surfer #1 (“to be told in another two years, in 1968”). It’s obvious that Stan (as he’s said many times in the past) was blindsided by this new character the Jack had thrust upon him. Even though we can get a sense of the Surfer’s nobility, and of his calmly foreign manner, the things he says to Alicia make it obvious that Stan was writing on the fly. It would be awhile before The Man had Norrin Radd’s personality completely developed origin tale ready to tell.

Sharon: I’m one of those people who prefer the original version we see in #48-50 to Stan’s later concoction. Here, in #48 and 49, emotions, beauty, etc., seem foreign to the Surfer. Yet in his origin story (SS #1) and throughout that entire series, Radd/Surfer is shown to be very emotional. How can this difference be reconciled? (I guess it’s been retconned that somehow he lost his memories/emotions when Radd became the Surfer, right? Very clumsy.) When the Surfer was given his own series, Stan completely changed the concept of the Surfer and from what I’ve read, this disgusted Jack no end. (Let’s not get into how betrayed Jack felt when Stan gave the SS art chores to Buscema.) Stan’s commandeering of this character was the straw that broke the camel’s back and led to Jack “phoning it in” and ultimately leaving Marvel in 1970.
Karen: First off, the coincidence of the Surfer landing on Alicia’s skylight is hard to swallow. Secondly, I think I also prefer this more understated personality for the Surfer. Although I loved the Surfer as a kid, it’s hard for me to read his original series now, as he is so completely over-wrought. Stan turned him into a Jesus stand-in, and he seemed to be having his own little pity-party every issue. The wise, noble alien, stuck on a world of heartless savages. It gets old quick.
Doug: I am unsure of the physics of Galactus’ process to drain a planet of its energy, as related in the Watcher’s display. First off, do Galactus’ heralds only take him to planets with water? That seemed to be the case, although I suppose the Watcher could have been speaking specifically about Earth. Secondly, did you find it odd that the apparatus used to drain the planet was surface-based and not somehow connected to the sphere in which Galactus travels? Where does the energy go? Also, I could not decide if the main device was a ray shooting outward, or a display of some tremendous vacuum-type of suction machine. The end result, regardless, was terror.

Karen: I really enjoyed the sequences which illustrate how Galactus would destroy a planet. It was also interesting to me that earlier in the issue the Watcher says that all the worlds Galactus had previously destroyed were lifeless. So this would be the first time he had actually killed sentient beings – or any beings? Why were the Skrulls so terrified of him then? But I thought the description of the process involved was reasonable – once again, Marvel pseudo-science has just enough logic to it to make the whole thing sound plausible!

However, Galactus does evince some regret over the loss of life. That’s one thing I always liked about him: he was not a villain in the usual sense. As someone (Byrne?) described him later, he was more like a force of nature.

Doug: For a guy who is sworn never to interfere in the affairs of others, the Watcher sure interferes in the affairs of others.

Ben and Reed’s combined attack on Galactus is good, and serves for one of the better visuals of the issue – Galactus seemingly knocked over the edge of the Baxter Building only to hover many hundreds of feet above the streets. In the panel immediately following, as Galactus summons the Punisher, I always think he is flipping the bird!

The Watcher does keep the suspense going, doesn’t he? His commission to Johnny is a good speech.

One has to wonder, if the Punisher is half alive, half robot, why Galactus didn’t just use him for a herald. He is reminiscent of a later herald, the Destroyer.

Karen: I wondered that myself. He sure was a funky looking thing.
Doug: I have a question as to how long the Surfer had served Galactus, and whether or not time has the same meaning across the cosmos as it does for we earthlings? I say that in regard to the Surfer’s issue of conscience after the pleas of Alicia. Had he not encountered intelligent life in the past? Had he never been grounded, as he was after Ben’s punch? And, why did he stay in Alicia’s apartment, instead of returning to the fray? It’s certainly an able plot device, but perhaps creating more trouble than originally intended.

Sharon: I agree. I too found it hard to swallow that this was the first time he had encountered any intelligent life form. And when he says “at last I know—beauty!”- - ummm…Shalla Bal, anyone?
Karen: Maybe I am not remembering correctly ( or just imaging it), but I thought there was a story at one time that indicated that the Big G had clouded the Surfer’s memory, to prevent him from doing exactly what he did here?

Sharon: Jack drew Alicia looking more modern here- -sleeker hair, interesting clothing--and I like the change. In many of her prior appearances, her hair looked old-fashioned and dowdy and her clothing was boring—she usually wore suits like Lois Lane did back then. . But in #49 Alicia’s given a hairdo similar to the Wasp’s at the time. Her interesting ensemble here suits her, since she’s an artist. And Sinnott’s inks really make her look facially beautiful (even more so than in #47, her previous appearance before this issue); what a change from how Chic Stone—or anyone else--had handled Kirby’s faces! And despite my misgivings about the “I know beauty” dialogue, I especially love those panels of her and the Surfer (when she’s in profile). Stunning job by Kirby and Sinnott.

Alicia’s been around since 1962 and in FF #49- -1966- -she finally gets a last name (okay, not as bad as Wanda and Pietro and let’s not get into poor Hawkeye who didn’t even have a first name for several years!) Previously, since her debut in #8, she was always referred to in captions as just Alicia, the Thing’s beloved, or Alicia, the blind sculptress, or something like that. But when the Surfer crashes through her skylight, the caption takes pains to state it is Alicia Masters’ apartment. And obviously, the surnname is intended to evoke her connection to the Puppet Master.

Karen: I thought the art in this issue was outstanding! Ben seemed very expressive, Galactus was powerful, and Johnny’s trip to Galactus’ ship were all very well done.

Fantastic Four # 48: The Galactus Trilogy

Fantastic Four #48 (1966)

Doug: I don’t recall exactly when I read this entire story. I know that as a kid I acquired a fairly decent copy of FF #49 and absolutely loved it. But, as Marvel’s Greatest Comics had moved past this chronology in their reprint scheme, it was not accessible to me in that magazine. I am somewhat puzzled as well that this story never made it into any of the Treasury editions (although the near-equally magnificent Galactus story that took place over FF #’s 120-123 did, and I owned that one), nor the “Origins of Marvel Comics” series of trade paperbacks that were published in the mid-late 1970’s – although the there are no origins to be told in this arc. So, perhaps it wasn’t until the early 1990’s when I actually purchased FF #48 and #50 at the Chicago Comicon that I read the entire trilogy in one sitting. And am I ever glad that I did! )

It’s interesting to me that a story that has become so historically significant actually begins as the ending of the previous arc! And non-stop action at that – these days it’s nice to have resources like the Essentials and the DVD-ROMs, which enable the reader to instantly backtrack and get up to speed on prior events.

Karen: The beginning of this issue, with the end of the Inhumans story, just shows how differently things were done back then. More than anything, it just seems like there is a ton of stuff crammed into each issue. Most of the time, that works for me, although I felt differently with issue 50. The one thing I felt worthy of comment in this finish to the Inhumans story is when Medusa talks about how the Inhumans are still really human, and “One day we shall rejoin the human race – and it is Blackbolt who shall show us the way!” This sounds a lot like some of the rhetoric we heard in the X-Men. This theme of the outsider is one that Stan really liked using.

Sharon: I came across this issue decades ago; I found it among a bunch of old magazines (like Life and Look) a neighbor had discarded. This issue didn’t have a cover, so it was not until recently that I knew what the cover was like—and that the cover featured not the FF and the Inhumans, but the FF and the Watcher…signaling the switch in the story.

I know we’re talking about the Galactus trilogy here, but the Inhumans were such a huge part of this issue for me (and hopefully we’ll discuss the Inhumans saga at another time). I really liked the bleeding of one story into another. In a way this whole arc began back with the return of the Frightful Four back in #38, but #48 represents the first time (I know of) that the first part of an issue was devoted to one crisis…while the rest of the issue focused on another, separate crisis. The Maximus threat, the impenetrable dome, the separation of Johnny and Crystal—this took up many pages of the issue (and was not just filler, obviously)…and then we’re plunged into an entirely different story. Masterful.

I’m not aware of too many Marvel books that did this prior to FF #48, though it kind of reminds me of Avengers #16, which featured one story at the start and then segued into another story (the new team).

Rather than dwell on the end of the Inhumans story, I’ll get right into the new material. I thought Jack did a great job with the slow reveal of the Silver Surfer and Galactus. Making no bones about their names, we nevertheless see the Surfer gradually, at first in a couple of images really too small to be detailed. It’s obvious that he is able to engage in interstellar travel unshielded from the elements. The panel with the Skrulls, showing their disdain and even fear of the Surfer, is an early hook.

Karen: Yes, this was a masterful job of building suspense and apprehension. As always, Kirby is able to put across a feeling of mystery and power. Seeing some of the previous issues, the art just seems a bit off. Joe Sinnott showed up a few issues prior to this one. Sinnott’s inks were like the final piece needed to bring everything together. This is the classic Fantastic Four, in all its majesty.

Doug: The suspense builds as Ben sees two suns in the sky, followed by the sky itself becoming flame. Of course, the reader believes it to be the doing of the Surfer, even though he is off-panel. What a thrill this must have been for the first-time reader – to encounter these great new characters with this layered reveal!

Karen: You know, it’s been a few years since I read this story, and it took me a few minutes to recall that the fire was the Watcher’s doing, not the Surfer’s! So I guess Stan knew what he was doing with that.

Doug: The scene where Johnny is blamed for the pandemonium brought on by the fire in the sky is pretty standard Stan Lee “the public hates their heroes” angst, and Ben’s leap into the fray is good. Interesting, isn’t it, that with all of that was required of this issue – the Inhumans wrap-up, the introduction of two new characters, the Watcher, and the general FF family squabbles, that Jack took the time to spend two pages on Johnny’s and Ben’s “battle”.

I love the FF’s jet cycle. When Toy Biz made the “First Appearance” Thing action figure, the smaller version of that vehicle was a great pack-in.

The first close-up of the Surfer’s face is somewhat ominous – very alien, not necessarily sinister, but I guess determined in his task…

Concerning the scene where Reed is in the lab (what exactly was he going to determine from a scenario with fire in the sky – fire that did not actually burn and did not give off heat?): How in the world did he grow so scruffy in the space of the hour or two since they’d left the street scene?? Seems that Jack wanted the timing one way and Stan dropped the ball on it!

Sharon: Reed’s five o’clock shadow was silly. One of the perils of compressed storytelling? And, just as you state, Doug, probably due to miscommunication between Stan and Jack.

Karen: Yeah, you definitely get the impression that there was some miscommunication between them. I do love some of the details Kirby puts in – like the Thing on the phone to Alicia. As much as I hate smoking, there’s just something quaint about seeing the Thing with an old-school phone, smoking a cigarette! And why not a cigar?

Sharon: Yeah, Jack considered Ben his doppelganger…and Jack smoked cigars…

Doug: And Sue – how superficial is she, bellyaching about being taken to dinner? They just come off the Inhumans adventure where the Great Refuge is encased in a “negative zone” and there’s no telling if or when the Inhumans can be freed, they’ve encountered a sky with two suns and a sky enflamed. And she’s concerned about dinner? In her defense, at some point all of the adventure has to break somewhere for normalcy. Whatever that is when it’s the FF.

Karen: Unfortunately, Sue often came off as a bit self-absorbed and superficial. Really, this characterization of her is not all that different than how Stan wrote the Wasp over in Avengers. I think it is part and parcel of the times, and how men viewed women. She’s incapable of grasping the big picture, she’s only concerned about her needs, or when she’s portrayed more charitably, the needs of her immediate family. It’s odd how at the beginning of that scene, Sue is going on about her needs –wanting attention, going out to dinner – but when she confronts Reed, she suddenly is concerned that he needs to eat and rest. I don’t know if that was a slip up or intentional on Stan’s part.

Sharon: Sue was not depicted as deep thinker back then (neither was Johnny). To be honest, this is the Sue I grew up with, so her present incarnation of her as being so capable and confident and wise is jarring to me.

I guess her behavior here (and the aforementioned Johnny-Ben interlude) was basically Stan’s way of injecting some down to earth “realism” into the story.

Doug: The Watcher’s appearance was a surprise (yes, I saw the big galoot on the cover, but I am speaking more to flipping the page and wham! -- there he was). I’m impressed at times that the art is organized in relation to the advertising pages. I suppose, although I’ve never really paid any attention, that the layout of a book is standard in regards to the one- and two-page ads. Knowing this, it certainly gives the artist an opportunity for drama from page to page.

When the Surfer appears, negotiating the Watcher’s meteor storm, we get an idea of his prowess (this scene is played out even more dynamically by Alex Ross in Marvels), as well as his speed. The panel where he flies upside down is a “wow” moment.

How do you feel about Kirby’s use of photography in his splashes?

Karen: After seeing those collages in the Fantastic Four and Thor, I’ve come to the conclusion that Kirby just didn’t have enough ways to express his creativity! Those collages really vary –some are effective, some aren’t. I would say this one is not so great. It’s just such a mish-mash –I know this was the beginning of psychedelia, but this looks sort of junky.

Sharon: I’m not a fan of this method. I always felt shortchanged. One of the few times I felt it worked was in FF #62, a two page spread, when Reed is in the Negative Zone and Johnny, Crystal, Sue and Ben are watching him on a large screen monitor.

Doug: Galactus’ first appearance is impressive, although I must say the solid purple wins out over this garish display of forest green and red/brown and brown. Wow. Who gets “credit” for this fashion train wreck (as colorists were not credited in this era)? Note, too, that the Big G has pants on in his first public showing.

Karen: As much as I love and revere the early Marvel creations, about the only positive I can say here is, “Nice helmet!” Really, that suit is just so terrible. It got better when they went with the purple and blue, but it just isn’t all that magnificent. Not what you would expect for the world-devourer!

Doug: In the panel immediately before the Galactus appearance, the Watcher makes a comment that “He is whatever he wishes to be – he is Galactus!” I recall reading, most likely in the Official Handbook to the Marvel Universe, that Galactus visually takes the form of whatever race/species/etc. sees him. Also, his height and weight are variable. I don’t know if the Watcher’s comment is the source for this material, but it has seemed to be true since this first appearance in 1966 nonetheless.

Sharon: I think the notion of each species seeing Galactus in its own form was put forth by Bryne (not sure if he originated it or just expanded on it), during Byrne’s run on the FF.

Celestial Madonna - Giant Size Avengers # 4 (conclusion)

Giant-Size Avengers #4 (1974) Nuptials! And plenty of 'em!

Doug: Yuck.
Bad.

Dumb.

Lame conclusion to an otherwise fun story…

Other than that, what else can I say?? Don Heck’s art was atrocious – it is just hard for me to look at his 1970’s work and believe he was the same penciller who brought us the Kooky Quartet. The characters were flat, the motion was stiff and unnatural, and it was just overall bad.

Karen: I agree completely about the Heck art. It really does look terrible. It has a stiff, scratchy feeling to it. I recall back at the time this issue came out, there were two artists that I absolutely dreaded finding in a comic: Don Heck and Frank Robbins. I’d pick Heck as the lesser of two evils, but not by much.

Sharon: It’s obvious Heck needed help here so where was the inker? Yes, I know John Tartag/Tartaglione is no Joe Sinnott, but he was no slouch either…he was a veteran who’d inked Steranko on those X-Men issues, for goodness' sake! But here it looks like he put no effort into enhancing the pencils, which looked extremely rough. Heck’s work looks so unfinished here…especially the female faces…it looks like he just did outlines or breakdowns in some places. Some of it is so bad that I can’t believe Marvel let this go to print like this, but(obviously) deadlines had to be met.

Sad, because Heck’s work in the early-mid 60s was quite good, particularly his character faces. But by the 1970s he’d (reportedly) been having personal problems that affected his art, so as mentioned, I think it’s a shame that Marvel didn’t put a more conscientious inker or finishing artist to work here.

Doug: Englehart’s conclusion to the origin of Mantis was, to say the least, a strange resolution to what had been a very enjoyable read. The “parallel lives” of Mantis and Moondragon came at the reader out of left field. Neither was a character with enough history in the Marvel Universe such that this revelation carried any weight or made me care at all (and that’s reading it now, over 30 years after the fact, although I did try to come to the story with a sense of newness).

Karen: The story took a number of turns that didn’t seem right – particularly the whole Dormammu sub-plot. All the attention on Mantis and Moondragon was somewhat tedious. I thought it amusing that Englehart has Thor say to Iron Man, “This day, old friend, it doth seem that e’en the mighty Thor, son of Odin, shall encounter wonders undreamt of in Asgard! While he and the mighty Avengers do naught but observe!” I guess even Englehart realized he had put his stars on the back-burner.

Sharon: Yep, even more additions to the story…why not throw Dormammu into the mix?

Doug: Can you imagine, in an era when mixed-race marriages were still fodder for the Archie Bunkers of the world, publishing a comic book where two human women marry a) a plastic man and b) a tree??? And then Couple #1 talks of going off on a honeymoon to supposedly consummate their marriage, while Couple #2 talks of breeding the perfect child?? Whoa… Englehart must have been “recovering” when he wrote this stuff. It is certainly out there.

Sharon: When you mentioned a “plastic man” I thought of the old Jack Cole hero! I was kind of surprised no one ever questioned the legality of Vision and Wanda’s marriage. And unfortunately, back then it was less controversial for women to marry trees and androids, than it would have been to, say, have Wanda wed T’Challa.

I know we all joke about the tree, but what a wild element for a comic book (it’s “out there”, as you said, Doug). I mean, I’m used to such things in Greek myths, such as Daphne turning into a tree to escape Apollo’s advances. Kudos to Englehart for pushing the envelope. Yeah, maybe he flew too close to the sun ;) , but what he did here was on another level...and kind of poetic. 

Karen: While much of this story seems out there, I have to admit I enjoyed the sense of freedom that Englehart exhibits, to try something new, maybe a bit preposterous, but daring and exciting too. I may be a softy, but I enjoyed the Vision’s proposal to Wanda. Knowing what comes later for these two made it a very bittersweet moment.

Sharon: I love how Wanda refers to herself as the "first girl" Vision ever met- -ummm, what about Jan? Well, no one’s memory is perfect and perhaps Wanda was not really aware of the composition of the team before she—Wanda—rejoined the Avengers. But that’s why she’s a character in a story and not an omniscient narrator.

Doug: Kang’s reappearance was also out of left field. It didn’t seem to fit into the story and was not effective at all in light of how well he’d been handled in the first half of this story.

Karen: The Kang stuff just seemed underwhelming. It didn’t have any of the impact of his previous appearances.

Doug: So, to stop belaboring the point, this issue left me dissatisfied. Period.

Karen: The single biggest obstacle to my enjoyment of this issue was the art. But the story also seemed somewhat scattered. I would agree that it is not nearly as satisfying a read as the issues that preceded it.

OVERALL EVALUATION:

Doug: I really like the Celestial Madonna arc. I love the huge Kang battles, the intrigue of the Kang/Rama-tut/Immortus schizophrenia, the Legion of the Unliving, the origin of the Vision, and the first 2/3 of the origin of Mantis. The writing in the first 90% of the story, while not perfect, is very good. And as I’ve said, the art by Sal Buscema, Joe Staton, and Dave Cockrum is for the most part quite good and very pleasing to the eye. But I think, in recommending this to a friend I would almost feel compelled to tell them something like “don’t judge the story by its ending – it’s better than that!”

Karen: It’s a 70s classic, that has to be accepted as part of the times it came from. For the most part it is quite entertaining, although things tend to bog down towards the end. But it has a level of creativity that is not often seen –then or now.

Sharon: As you’ve both said, very imaginative saga- -so many twists and turns, and an attempt to meld universal and personal truths. Not everything works but you really get a sense of Englehart’s exhilaration, his curiosity, and passion throughout this storyline. He bites off more than he can chew (in my opinion), but there’s rarely a dull moment.

Celestial Madonna - Avengers 135

Avengers #135 (1974)
Gotta love the floating heads, they look very concerned 

Doug: This issue’s cover was a nice bounce-back from my complaints of the previous few issues. However, Tuska’s interiors were a major step down from the fine pencils we’d been treated to in the first eight installments of this tale. Tuska got better as the book went on, but it was still such a departure.

Sharon: See, for me, I had no quibble with Tuska’s work here—and I am not a major fan of his. He’s always seemed serviceable to me, an able storyteller but not a superstar like Adams or Buscema (John). For me Tuska’s art is on a par with the Cockrum work; and I like Tuska’s faces here more than I liked Cockrum’s.

A couple of panels really stand out for me; one is with the young Moondragon (three quarter facial close-up); she looks very childlike and open, not an easy task for a comic book artist (even Neal Adams drew kids with mini-adult faces!). The other panel I really liked is a page later, when the Vision is observing Ultron standing over the Torch’s body. The Vision’s expression, the set of his head, his stance…I really got a sense of the emotions that the Vision must have been experiencing in his role of "captive audience."

I also thought Tuska’s art was effective in the sequence when the newly created Vision still has his Torch memories…very good job.

Karen: The thing that immediately jumped out at me was the “floating Romita heads” on the right hand side of the cover! It seemed like every other book out in the mid 70s had some sort of Romita ‘correction’, whether on the cover or inside. Jim Starlin, who appears to have drawn this cover, was a frequent victim.

Sharon: I liked the beautifully angled sharpness of Mantis’ face and the athletic rendering of Vision’s body.

Doug: Retcon, or merely filling in the gaps? Steve Englehart, in my opinion, does a very good job filling between the panels (so to speak) of many Silver Age stories. While I’ve never been too keen on the whole Ultron Oedipus complex deal with Hank Pym, and then the wanting a son aspect of his relationship to the Vision, I did feel like Englehart handled Ultron well through all of his machinations (no pun intended) with the Thinker, Horton, and the Vision. Of note was the scene when the Vision first sprung to life still possessing the Torch’s personality and memories. That was very cool, and for me enhanced the origin that Roy Thomas had begun several years earlier. If I have a beef with the conclusion to the Vision’s origin, it was when Ultron obtained the device that would make the Vision as he wanted – a recording device that was labeled “Wonder Man’s Brain Patterns”. If that wasn’t a flashback to the 1966 Batman TV show!!

Karen: I don’t consider this a retcon at all. We never actually saw how Ultron created the Vision, so this story does indeed fill in the gaps. I’ve actually always liked Ultron’s Oedipal complex; it gave him more flavor, and made every fight with the team so much more personal.

Sharon: The scene you mention, Doug, about the Vision retaining the Torch’s memories—was very affecting. It was terrifying a minute later when Ultron simply wiped those memories away.

Englehart is at it again, when he comments that the Vision is a Virgo—Yeah, we get it, Steve…nudge nudge, wink wink.

(Actually, Englehart did his homework here; the Virgo astrological sign spans mid August-mid September, so the “birthday” reference is in synch with the fact that the Vision made his debut in Avengers #57, cover dated October 1968 but on sale a couple of months earlier.)

Doug: Moondragon’s origin, while I cared less simply because I don’t like her, was also well-done.

Karen: The one thing I do like about Moondragon is her origin! I enjoy seeing Englehart weave more ‘cosmic’ threads into this tale. At this point, at least, she doesn’t seem quite so annoying as she would later be.

Sharon: I had no exposure to Moondragon before this storyline. Again, I wondered—why is this person here? What is her connection to the Avengers? I felt like Englehart was tossing in everything but the proverbial kitchen sink.

Celestial Madonna - Avengers 134

Avengers #134 (1974)

Doug: The covers have begun to suffer somewhat as Gil Kane took over those art chores. That, however, is nothing compared to what awaits us in the interiors of the last two issues. Sigh…

Karen: I’ve always thought Kane was very hit or miss. I’d agree that this cover is fairly pedestrian.

Sharon: I liked the way the Torch figure was drawn and I believe it's a reference to a Golden Age Torch image.  Kane imbued it with a nice fluidity. Iron Man’s mask looked distorted.

Doug: I felt the first two pages of this issue were wasted space. I wonder if the story was drawn and looking ahead to the end of both the Vision’s and Mantis’ origins the spacing wasn’t going to come out right so they went back and did the two-page recap.

The Kree/Cotati story continued to move along – no real complaints nor compliments at this time.

Karen: My only complaint is that they didn’t color the Kree correctly! They are shown as pink-skinned, but referred to as blue-skinned. This mistake was seen in the previous issue as well.

The idea of the pacifist Kree was another good one by Englehart. I’m sure the influence of Eastern religion and martial arts was a big factor in this. But it works in this story.

Doug: Wanda continues to creep me out. But I will say, if she’s going to creep me out while kicking Moondragon’s butt, then it’s all good.

Even though my next comment is really about FF Annual #4, I’d like to ask: Don’t you think Reed was callous when Ben asked if they weren’t going to bury the Original Human Torch’s body? I mean, at this point in Marvel continuity Reed and Ben were still considered WWII vets, so they’d have probably admired and been thankful for the Torch’s involvement against the Axis. That, coupled with Reeds’ constant quest for knowledge just screams to me that they should have taken the body with them. But, water under the bridge, I guess.

Karen: Yeah, it always seemed awfully cold of Reed to just leave the Torch’s body unceremoniously stashed in that cave. But then, this is the guy that would later shut down his own son’s brain, so anything goes.

Sharon: I think Reed’s reasoning was that the Torch’s body would not decompose, so why bury him in the ground? But once again Ben shows he’s the most compassionate of the FF.

For me, this issue was all over the place—too many strands of stories, most of which felt forced to me. The only sequence that seemed real to me was the Torch said goodbye to Toro and then went nova: very touching.

Doug: Englehart concludes the issue with a nice cliffhanger.

Celestial Madonna - Avengers 133

Avengers #133 (1974)

Avengers #133

Doug: I’m really unhappy with the use of Wanda by Englehart, dating back to when he was early in his tenure as series scribe. The whole witch-training deal with Agatha Harkness just creeps me out. Ol’ Agatha was always weird in the FF, but she is above and beyond the call to weird-duty here! I just think it’s a stretch to blend witchcraft or sorcery with probability-altering powers.

Karen: I always assumed that giving her true magical abilities was connected to the feminist movement, by empowering Wanda so she would no longer be seen as a weak member of the team. That didn’t bother me too much, as I’m always happy to see more powerful women characters. But she did come off as a bit of a bitch during this time.

Sharon: As I mentioned in an earlier segment, Wanda is not Marvel’s answer to Zatanna. Marvel already had characters who fit that bill, including Dr. Strange, the Enchantress and Agatha Harkness. Yet for some reason—perhaps the reason Karen puts forth--the powers that be felt compelled to jazz up Wanda’s powers and make her more magical and mystical. Big mistake in my opinion. She became just another semi-sorceress instead of a character with a unique power.

Karen: It’s unclear to me really why Englehart felt the need to have the Vision go on his journey alone. Surely the Avengers had more of a connection with him than Mantis!

Doug: Hawkeye’s line about grabbing the staff at the Playboy Club was priceless!

Sharon: The line was funny and in character, but did you catch Englehart’s caption (“The remainder of Hawkeye’s observation is lost—probably fortunately—for posterity—“)? Another example of Englehart’s picaresque approach to the narrative. This style made him stand out.

Doug: Immortus’ comment to himself on page 3, “Five lives have I known…” is causing me some math problems, in light of our discussion earlier as to whether or not Doom was a version of Kang and when that notion might have been dropped. Count: Kang, Rama-tut, Immortus, the Scarlet Centurion, and ??? Doom? I guess that’s who it would have to be.

Karen: I think it would have to be Doom, particularly when you consider that the cover for GS Avengers 2 originally featured Kang, Rama Tut, AND Doom. The whole situation is entirely convoluted.

Sharon: I agree…it’s most likely a reference to Doom.

Doug: You two don’t like Mantis – I can tolerate her, but I just hate Moondragon!

Karen: Honestly, I don’t really like either of them! Particularly when Moondragon convinced Thor to quit the team.

Sharon: I felt Moondragon was shoehorned into this story; all of a sudden she shows up. Perhaps the two of you were familiar with her before this issue (she appeared in other comics around that time from what I gather), but she was a total stranger to me.

Doug: I liked the reference to the Vision’s battle with the Sentinels from Avengers #102. It made it seem like the writers/editors had really put some thought into the resolution of the Vision’s origin, and had been very patient about revealing it.

The biography of the Original Human Torch has never been told better than by Kurt Busiek and Alex Ross in Marvels #0. Buscema and Staton do a nice job of drawing the Torch in more of a Golden Age-style in the flashbacks. He was not drawn this way in the previous issues where Buscema/Staton handled the art chores.

The origin of Mantis began with a nice backstory that to the best of my knowledge had not been told. I enjoyed the foundational information about two of Marvel’s best-known alien races, the Kree and the Skrulls.

Karen: The history of the Kree and Skrulls is worth putting up with more Mantis! I thought this was one of the best things Englehart added to the Marvel universe. Knowing the backstory of these eternal enemies makes their conflicts seem much more interesting. I like that the alien-looking Skrull were the more advanced of the races, and indeed, even gave the Kree the means to become their enemies. He also ties in the Watcher’s blue area on the moon. Rather nicely done.

Doug: The three-way conflict between the Skrulls, Kree, and the Cotati was interesting and made sense. I didn’t feel like there were any holes in the story nor were there any parts that seemed silly. Overall well-done, and evocative of some of DC’s science fiction tales of the Silver Age.

Sharon: I guess I am the odd person out here; I kept asking myself why all this exposition about the Kree, the Cotati, Moondragon, etc.

Celestial Madonna: Giant-Size Avengers 3

Giant-Size Avengers 33 (1974)

Doug: I’d said in an earlier communiqué that I thought Dave Cockrum’s art was really strong in Giant-Size Avengers #2. I’d like to back off that just a bit after reading GS #3, and particularly concerning the splash page. Even as a first-time reader right before Christmas 1974, the way the Vision was depicted seemed a little odd. His legs look skinny and his face is oddly-shaped. But overall, the issue’s art is good, with dynamic poses and well-choreographed battles.

Karen: Doug, I agree, but I put the blame more on the inker, Joe Giella. When you compare this issue to GS Avengers 2, it’s like night and day. I can only see glimpses of Cockrum’s style here – the inks just render it very plain.

Sharon: This splash page always reminds me of Antony and Cleopatra —“I am dying, Egypt, dying!”

Doug: For all the hackles she’s raised, Mantis is trying hard to be liked at the beginning of this installment. I found it touching that she responded in the manner she did to Vizh’s call for Wanda. Her battle with Midnight was exciting, and for me not only showcased her martial arts skills but also her strength. And on page four, wasn’t that a butt cheek visible?? I know you girls just hate her skirt!!

Sharon: I don’t hate the skirt at all; my earlier point was that it just seemed kind of daring for 1973-4 and I was surprised the artists could get this kind of outfit past the Code. (But as I’d mentioned, the Code was kind of passé at this point.) I like her visuals- - the green and yellow are a great combo (like the Vision?), and the design of her costume showcases her strength, grace, and flexibility.

Karen: I wonder where Mantis would rank in the Marvel U as a martial artist? Over at DC, they have this sort of discussion all the time, and it’s pretty obvious now where everyone with fighting skills stands (they’ve really beefed up Black Canary for an example). But I hardly hear any fan talk about Marvel fighters. Hmmm, I sense potential side-bar material here!

Doug: The camaraderie felt by the Frankenstein monster toward the Vision was touching as well. Quite a dichotomy to the way Boris Karloff murdered that little girl in the original motion picture!

Karen: Aw, come on Doug, he didn’t mean to kill her! They just ran out of flowers. (Actually, I prefer the Young Frankenstein version.)

Doug: Yeah, it was very touching the way he waited for the last bubble to come up before he sauntered off… :P

Zemo’s evolution from mind-slave to uppity Seig Heil-er! was good, and added humor to the story. Interactions with Hawkeye in particular were fun, and again showed Clint’s allegiance to Cap.

The scene when Thor comes upon the dead Iron Man really showed the depths of their friendship, and of Thor’s loyalty to the mortals he’d chosen to surround himself with. His rage was real, and not just played up for melodrama. I’ve missed Thor in the Avengers these past many years. Of course, I’ve missed the Avengers, period, but that’s for another time I guess.

Karen: A good scene; I always like seeing the Thunder God get worked up. Maybe the best time was during the Busiek era, when he thought Captain America had been taken over by the Presence – that was a Thor to be reckoned with!

Doug: The NYPD’s communicator was just cutting-edge technology from Stark Electronics in 1974!!

The scene with Libra was interesting, given that I know how this will turn out in #133. The scene with Wanda barking at Jarvis was so out-of-character. Wanda was really written as a hard-to-like character by Englehart!

Sharon: Sure, but as we’ve noted before, she’s lacking guidance by Pietro and the Vision at this point—she’s on her own for the first time.

Karen: Libra –oh god, what a horrible outfit. The robe and hood was preferable to this skivvies and t-shirt monstrosity.

Sharon: I didn’t mind his pared down costume here; he looks athletic. Though since he’s sporting bare legs (at least, as colored in the tpb) his boots look too much like knee socks…

Doug: Just a note – the coloring in my tpb is really off for this issue, as Wonder Man’s goggles and the Torch’s costume are both orange instead of red. Pretty poor quality control.

Thor’s assault on Kang is furious and unyielding. Wonder Man’s retaliation is equally brutal; the half-splash of Thor and Wonder Man going toe-to-toe is good.

Hawkeye’s screen time in the control room just shows why he was a winner at life and the Swordsman had been a consummate loser. Possessing basically the same skills (or skill level), Hawkeye goes about his business with confidence and a take-charge manner. The Swordsman would have been filled with so much self-doubt.

Karen: Hawkeye has that ‘never give up’ spirit that I think endears him to so many of us. I like to think he got a lot of that from being around Cap. It’s fun to compare his more mature personality on display here with the abrasive a-hole that we saw in his early Avengers days.

Doug: The Torch’s revelation, coming a few years after Neal Adams had spilled the beans when Ant-Man journeyed inside the Vision, was still a surprised to many, I’m sure. What do you think? Do you like this version of the story, or Byrne’s revision?

Karen: When I originally read this, I had never heard of the idea that the Vision had been the Torch, although I was aware of the scene in Avengers 93. I still like this origin for Vizh – and you know I despise what Byrne did. The character never recovered from Byrne’s destruction of him. After that, he was never held in the same regard by the writers (and maybe the fans as well).

Sharon: I don’t think many readers at the time knew of Adams’ idea (that the Vision and original Human Torch were one and the same); Marvel tried to keep this idea under wraps. The only slip up occurred (as we’ve discussed previously (over at the Avengers Assembled forums) when future Marvel staff member Duffy Vohland (then an intern) submitted a “gag” letter that was published in Avengers #115. In the letter Vohland mentions the Neal Adams Gallery interview in which Neal told of his idea that the Vision was really the original Human Torch. This letter was not supposed to be published but it somehow slipped through. But this was the only mention in print (that I know of) of Adams’ Vision-Torch idea- -Marvel really wanted to keep this idea secret.

Now, I always wondered why this concept was pursued so wholeheartedly. I buy the Wonder Man connection, which led to many effective and poignant stories. The relationship to Simon (and by extension, to the Grim Reaper) should have been enough. But why also insist that a new creation (Vision) is really an older hero? This connection always seemed tacked on and forced to me. I understand it was said to be part of Immortus’ plan (retroactively), but why would Marvel editorial think this was a good idea in the first place? Wasn’t the Vision captivating enough on his own—did he really need to be associated to an older android hero?

Doug: It’s interesting that Wonder Man was plucked from the timestream before he’d reformed, which was just before his death. He is simply vicious in his attacks, especially on the wounded Vision. Question about the Vision’s face after this particular battle – it’s bruised and swollen and there is some fluid at the corner of his mouth. Why do you suppose this is? I have read that his body was basically a synthetic human form. But, I don’t recall ever seeing him eat or drink – after all, being solar-powered, what would be the point? So, if he didn’t eat or drink, I would assume that he never had to expel waste of any sort. (I know we got into some of the other points of his physiology in one of the Vision threads on the AA! boards…) Since bruises are caused by pooled blood, and welts by trauma to soft tissue and blood rushing to the area, why would his face look like this? I would guess that there was some fluid coursing through his body, but to me it would seem more like anti-freeze, lubricants, etc. Hmmm…

Karen: It’s always been my assumption that as a synthetic man, Vizh has organs, tissues and fluids that mimic a biological human. So while it is unusual for us to see him banged up this way, I wouldn’t put it out of the realm of possibility. I did find it interesting that we are never shown the Vision’s badly injured arm – “suspended by a thread” – but again, that’s one of the differences between that era and today.

Sharon: Didn’t the Vision’s arm also become badly injured or destroyed in the first Vision-Scarlet Witch series? And only Inhuman science could restore his arm?

Karen: I don’t really get how Immortus was able to revert Zemo to protoplasm. Reverting him to a fetus, or a cluster of cells, OK, that makes sense because he would be regressing him down his own timeline. But protoplasm would suggest to me he is regressing him evolutionarily. Then again, maybe I am just thinking about this a little too much.

Doug: OK, I said above that Englehart (Thomas’ dialogue in this issue) was trying to make Mantis more sympathetic, and then she just cold-heartedly gives an “Oh, well!” to the Vision of all people after being asked about Iron Man. Go figure.

Karen: Yes, Mantis seemed very aloof at the end. The only thing I can think of was that she was purposely trying to not show emotion – although again, I don’t know why she was written that way.

Sharon: She’d never seemed that close to Iron Man, so I found this in character. I think the scene was meant to show that the Vision (who rebukes her here) and Mantis aren’t always in synch.

Doug: Did it seem to you like Immortus’ revelation that he was an alternative form of Kang was just tossed in at the end?

Karen: I was just waiting for Jarvis to announce that he, too, was Kang.
Seriously though, where the hell does Immortus fit in on the Kang Express? After Kang, I believe, but then why is he so wishy-washy all the time? It might almost be a case of Englehart being too clever for his won good.

Doug: And, hasn’t Nathaniel Richards been linked to Kang, if not another facet of him altogether?
The story ends well, and does a nice job of wrapping up this portion of the Celestial Madonna arc. Cockrum’s art on the last few pages is some of the best of the issue.
That Kang will not be around for the rest of the ride is unfortunate; but his return only nine months later led to another very good story (and another great Thor/Kang tussle!!).