ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 14425
Aug 6 11 11:17 AM
Golden Age
richard63 wrote:Matthew McCallum wrote:richard63 wrote: It's also ironic that you complain about credit, when you've been signing your name to the work of others with your alleged "restorations".Look for the HRK below the comics code symbol.Is this a work product done for a DC collection of some sort? Nah. He was doing this kind of thing for that Silver Age Index site, and now for his blog. Tracing over some of the blacks to make them blacker (not to mention inconsistent with the rest of the cover image) warrants "artistic" credit, evidently.
Matthew McCallum wrote:richard63 wrote: It's also ironic that you complain about credit, when you've been signing your name to the work of others with your alleged "restorations".Look for the HRK below the comics code symbol.Is this a work product done for a DC collection of some sort?
richard63 wrote: It's also ironic that you complain about credit, when you've been signing your name to the work of others with your alleged "restorations".Look for the HRK below the comics code symbol.
Posts: 4692
Aug 6 11 11:38 AM
Aug 6 11 11:58 AM
Posts: 2776
Aug 6 11 12:23 PM
sfcityduck wrote: ...if anything, I think it is Billy's analysis which is weak on the significance of the form of disposition.
sfcityduck wrote: Contrary to what Billy implies, application of the "instance and expense" test does not depend on whether Jack previously sued Marvel, what his employment relationship or contract was with DC (which Billy is speculating, I think incorrectly, was analogous to what he got from Marvel), whether he could have leveraged a better deal, etc.
kirbyfanatic wrote: Evanier says that Kirby tried and tried to negotiate with Marvel prior to his leaving the company in 1970. So it's plainly incorrect for anyone to say that Kirby simply left Marvel in a huff without so much as a goodbye.
Posts: 1816
Aug 6 11 2:03 PM
Aug 6 11 2:06 PM
Aug 6 11 3:27 PM
kirbyfanatic wrote: What I recall reading is that in fact there was no discussion, that Kirby was offered a contract on a take it or leave it basis. So, if Marvel wasn't willing to negotiate anything, the wiser course was to leave Marvel.Allen Smith
Posts: 5411
Aug 6 11 3:30 PM
Aug 6 11 3:34 PM
kirbyfanatic wrote: And, another what if thought, what would Kirby have done had he remained at Marvel?
kirbyfanatic wrote: ...it was time for him to move on creatively ignoring the financial considerations.
Posts: 11308
Aug 6 11 4:08 PM
Aug 6 11 4:48 PM
AussieStu wrote:... it is so sad that you feel uncomfortable, lets all do our best to make you comfortable again because that is why we are all here
Aug 6 11 6:34 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote: kirbyfanatic wrote: And, another what if thought, what would Kirby have done had he remained at Marvel?Oh, I don't know..."The New Gods," "Forever People," "Mister Miracle," "OMAC," "Kamandi," "Demon," "Machine Man," "Devil Dinosaur," etc. kirbyfanatic wrote: ...it was time for him to move on creatively ignoring the financial considerations.His moving on was about financial considerations. Marvel never stopped his creativity. He felt he wasn't being adequately compensated for it!
Aug 6 11 7:21 PM
kirbyfanatic wrote: I don't think Kirby would have created those characters just for Stan Lee to take them over. Of course Marvel didn't stop his creativity, he did it himself when it finally hit him that he was giving away some great characters and concepts for nothing. Allen Smith
Aug 6 11 10:39 PM
Posts: 14376
Aug 6 11 10:42 PM
Registered Member
profh0011 wrote:Steve Bissette has some of the most fascinating things to say that I've read in many months on this topic.http://www.bleedingcool.com/?p=94419
Posts: 6185
Aug 6 11 11:44 PM
Aug 6 11 11:54 PM
Aug 7 11 12:38 PM
Aug 7 11 12:59 PM
Aug 7 11 1:31 PM
Share This