warlock664 wrote:
Lockjaw wrote:
Don't agree that Kirby was 'phoning it in'

Firstly he was mandated by Marvel to do single issue stories from 94-101. It's hard to do very compelling stories as single issues at that point in FFs history. Romita Sr. & Buscema weren't forced to do single issue stories (I don't think there were ANY from 103 to 125.)

Next Kirby wasn't going to create any new characters for Marvel during that late stage in his tenure, so the villains from that era were Stan Lee ideas. Monocle, 'Creature', android versions of their claasic foes from issue 100, the Maggia etc.

In FF 105-116 you get two issues involving 'Rambows' creature, a negative zone arc, a ,Thing becomes human' arc, a classic Thing vs Hulk battle (that no doubt would be just as classic if Kirby had drawn it), and the 'Overmind epic' ( which arguably is just a Galactus rehash with the 'Dr Doom as an member twist.

I'm not saying the last Kirby volume was better--only that other factors made it fairly weak not having to do with 'phoning it in.'



Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I'd have to agree with the "phoning it in" assessment. How else can you justify the drastic reduction in panels in those late-60s Kirby FFs ? The overuse of four-panel (and fewer) pages in those issues is ridiculous. And regarding your mention of Kirby being unwilling at that point in his tenure to contribute any new concepts or villains ? If that doesn't define "phoning it in" , I don't know what does. And while I'm sure Kirby would've drawn a decent "Thing vs Hulk" battle in #112, I can't imagine it being better than the job handed in by Big John Buscema. I for one am looking forward to this first post-Kirby FF volume, with the new life that was breathed into a stagnating title.

Well then you 'don't know what does' because, your facts are just plain wrong on the fewer panels.............

As for not creating new characters for Marvel to profit on for the next 50 years..........
that is NOT 'phoning it in'---that is a stand he took based on how he felt about his credit or lack of concerning the characters he created/co-created.
If Stan was capable of creating decent chatacters on his own we would have gotten much better than, Monocle, a Creature ftBL rip-off, 'robot versions' of villains, and the 'Nega-Man. image

Banning sub-plots, banning continued stories, & lack of new decent characters is what made the last volume weaker than previous ones.
Kirby's plotting was of good quality during that time--the stories are quite well-plotted and coherent.

As for panel size, the point where Kirby was using the large /fewer panels was FF 81-89--(considered by a lot of folks to be a pretty good era of the FF)--not 94-102 (volume 10) He actually went back to his previous plotting style with issue 90 and continued it till the end of his tenure. I've been a 'panel-counter' for 40 years.

Whetever the defects in FF 94-102---it wasn't too large panels and poorly plotted books.
He was hamstrung by the directive of single issue stories & no sub-plots from 94-101, 108 (originally 102)
The single issue mandate isn't my opinion.......it was clearly spelled out in a Stan Soapbox as being demanded by the fans---which I do not believe was the real reason.

And Kirby might have drawn a 'decent' Hulk/Thing battle???image

Yeah, he was pretty mediocre on hero vs hero battles.


Last Edited By: Lockjaw Sep 19 08 2:07 PM. Edited 2 times.