vapspwi wrote:
deejayway wrote:

Now if we look at Marvel's most significant, money-generating properties, I think it safe to say that almost everyone would agree that Jack made a significant contribution to:

The X-Men (ditto; Magneto, the Sentinels)

Surely Claremont/Cockrum/Byrne should get more credit than Stan and Jack for making the X-Men a success.  The book was a low-to-mid-level title under Stan and Jack, and eventually got cancelled in its original form despite solid work from Thomas and Adams.  It's the Claremont/Cockrum/Byrne (with an initial assist from Wein) X-Men that became a mega-success at the movies, on TV, and in toy stores and such.  Stan and Jack's work contributed about as much to the success of the X-Men as did the guy that invented the staple - should he get a cut, as well?
  
You're right of course but there's still no denying that Kirby made a significant contribution to what turned out to be a valuable property. Yes Thomas & Adams and Claremont & Byrne produced considerably better work on the X-Men than Stan & Jack but the fact is that if they hadn't created the original premise, there never would've been an X-Men.

Probably legally the Kirby's don't have a leg to stand on but that's not the point AFAIC. It's a matter of decency. And people can cite as many examples as they like of the working Joe getting shafted, that doesn't diminish one iota the injustice done to Kirby and his heirs.
It's almost as if people who have been subjected to similar injustice to Kirby, begrudge him getting a fair shake.
If injustice is endemic, do we all just throw up our hands in the air and say "well it happens to everyone so we just have to accept it"?
No. If we did, there would never be any progress.

Last Edited By: deejayway Mar 20 10 1:00 PM. Edited 1 times.