The word back in the day (to the point that even I heard it, and I hadn’t broken in yet) was that Gene Colan would give so much space to the early scenes in a story that he’d have to cram the endings into too-little space. This is the second-to-last page of an issue, and that...
…seems to be what’s going on here, but it’s a very un-Colanesque layout overall — it looks like two different layout ideas.
So I’m kinda wondering if Colan drew too many pages, and that cape-shape was perhaps not a silhouette at first, but they had to crop the bottom of the...
…page and fit two panels from a different page in, and then have Chris write a summary to bridge the missing material.
Would looked better if Orzechowski was still lettering it, in any case.
If Colan did just hit Claremont with “Here’s empty space, summarize the story climax, I’m not drawing it,” then that might be why Chris left the book a few issues later.
Could be why Colan did too. Though he left Marvel entirely soon thereafter, due to disputes with Jim Shooter.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I saw a couple people arguing that if you raise the age for gun ownership you have to raise the age for all other legal markers of adulthood, or it's not fair.
I say thee nay,
As we've worked it out, it's very helpful that people can be licensed to drive years before they're licensed to drink; it's very helpful that way.
There also seems to be (don't ask me to cite it) evidence that a later age for gun ownership results in fewer killing sprees.
Whereas being able to vote at 18 doesn't result in crazed voting sprees. And starting military service three years before you could privately own a gun might also be helpful.
A staggered introduction of adulthood seems to be a good idea.
Bob called me, and asked me if I was up for the project. I was hugely flattered, and told Bob that I had no time (this was very true), but for the chance to work with Carlos, I would make time.
Then we had to actually come up with a story!
We originally started with a different concept, and wound up shifting over to the Avengers Forever idea (which was originally set to be a subplot in the main Avengers book, and was retooled into its own story with the helpful advice of Mark Waid).
Secrets of the Comics Revealed, Maybe: After this issue came out, the editor, Denny O'Neil told me that it had seen a nice bump in sales, that we'd gotten considerably more mail on it than other issues in recent memory, that the mail was extremely positive, and I should never...
...do anything like it again. He said this with a sort of reserved smirk, and it confused me enormously.
For a long time I thought what he meant was that despite it doing well, he didn't like it because it was funny, and that's not what he wanted for the book. This may have...
Just saw, on another social-media site, a comics creator who was venting about the character in KING CONAN getting a different name. He was absolutely furious that Marvel would “buckle” to the forces of “cancel culture.”
And I’m thinking, wait, what the hell difference does...
…it make if the character has a different name? Does it alter the character in any significant way? Does it change the concept, the story? Does it do anything except not accidentally offend some of the audience?
No. So what’s the problem?
Why would anyone get _that_ mad about a simple fix to something that barely affects the story or character?
One of the people fervently agreeing with him said comics should come with labels saying that if you’re going to complain, don’t buy it.