Why aren’t praised creators of the 80s and 90s on big books for the big two?

[KurtW95]

I'm sure Paul is half joking but the artist for that title was fired for sneaking in anti-jewish and anti-christian messages into the comic.

Oh, yeah. But I don’t really understand what that would have to do with hiring old talent. After all, Marvel continues to employ certain people who hold similar views to Syaf. He just hasn’t put it into his work thus far.

[MajorHoy]

I still enjoyed Paul Levitz' writing on Worlds' Finest and Dr. Fate during the New52/DCYou, but how more likely were you to read comments from people bitching about his style and wanting DC to replace him with other (younger?) writers?

[KurtW95]

I still enjoyed Paul Levitz' writing on Worlds' Finest and Dr. Fate during the New52/DCYou, but how more likely were you to read comments from people bitching about his style and wanting DC to replace him with other (younger?) writers?

I wouldn’t trust anybody on Legion but Levitz.

[L.R Johansson]

I wouldn’t trust anybody on Legion but Levitz.

Not a fan of Jim Shooter then, I take it? Many would say he's just as good as Levitz, and has contributed even MORE to the Legion's mythology and lineup.

Now HERE'S a classic creator who probably REALLY can't get work within the industry! He had that one small run on Legion just prior to the New52, but that's pretty much it - some stuff on Dark Horses version of the Gold Key characters as well - but that's really small-potatoes.

In Shooter's case, it really is that a GOOD portion of the people working for both companies, for a good long time, really, really disliked him - he burned many bridges when he was a rather merciless and stern boss - some would say that made his comics better, yes, but there's always the possibility of their being a price to pay...

Interestingly enough, most of the people whom disliked him have probably left the industry, or the big 2, in recent years - possibly with ONE small exception... according to legend, Tom Brevoort and Ralph Macchio were two of the young, untested assistant editors whom received some of the worst brunts of Shooters legendary outbursts back in the 80's - and when Shooter was pushed out of the company, one of them put up a HUGE poster on their office-door - of Shooters face, with the text: "THIS IS THE FACE OF A MADMAN!"

Apparently this poster was up, for close to 25 years, all the way until Marvel moved offices a few years back.


On another note: was Jim Shooter editor-in-chief of Valiant when Joe Quesada got his big break with NINJAK (of all things...)? I think he may already have been forced out of Valiant by then, since I think it may already have been bough by Acclaim at that point in time. Anybody have some knowledge about this?

[PaulBullion]

What does that have to do with anything?

X-Men Gold is only using ideas from the 80s and 90s and it's not working at all.

[KurtW95]

X-Men Gold is only using ideas from the 80s and 90s and it's not working at all.

I think that has more to do with the writing than the ideas. And even though it’s by no means great or above average, it’s still miles better than the pile of horse excrement that is X-Men: Red. People are forcing me to defend X-Men: Gold twice today and it’s quite annoying. All I’m saying is that it’s better than other crappy runs of recent years and that’s an incredibly low bar.

[KurtW95]

Not a fan of Jim Shooter then, I take it? Many would say he's just as good as Levitz, and has contributed even MORE to the Legion's mythology and lineup.

I’m cool with Jim Shooter. But I think he would be more useful in a top position. In an age when people don’t really care about selling comics and there are titles at 8,000 that aren’t being cancelled, I think his no-nonsense way of doing things could turn things around.

[skyvolt2000]

But should that be an issue?

I think the best example would be the Roseanne situation.

I have seen A LOT of folks pretty much bash anyone who had anything to do with that show and claim they feel the SAME way as she does about POC (among other things). No one seems to care about all those behind the scene folks who work in an industry tougher to get into than comics. Folks who just went to WORK despite who the boss is.

So lets say Marvel hires April Winchell, the late Carrie Fisher, Stacie Lipp, Chuck Lorre, Ed Yeager, Norma Safford Vela and JOSS WHELDON. Guess what they ALL wrote for Roseanne.
So if we go by that logic of if you worked with Roseanne-you are just like her. So they would "deserve" to be boycotted and fired.

So what Duskman is saying is sometimes folks do get passed over for jobs for something that can hurt them. Even if they did nothing at all. Guilt by association.

For the record here are the resumes of those folks-

If you watched cartoons especially Disney (Recess, Pepper Ann & Goof Troop) you heard April's voice.
Do I even need to say who Carrie Fisher is?
Stacie Lipp-42 episodes of Married With Children were written by HER and you ALWAYS saw her name in the closing credits.
Norma Vela gave you VIP, The Jersey, Davis Rules, Designing Women (final season), Vanishing Son & What I like About You
Ed Yeager-Last man Standing
Chuck Lorre-The Big Bang Theory & 2 And A Half Men
Joss Wheldon-see Carrie Fisher.

[CliffHanger2]

This strikes me as an important point. Some of those creators may not like feeling like they're being wagged by the tail that out grew the dog.

Exactly, ppl get on Byrne for leaving Marvel after they canceled his book that was selling. And it's like that's the cardinal rule of publishing you don't cancel the books that sell. It's basic common sense but I don't think Quesada had any.

[Kees_L]

Why aren’t praised creators of the 80s and 90s on big books for the big two?

Because those artists and creatives delivered work pretty significantly with those companies during the 1980s and 1990s already?

With as of 1992 more and more of such artists or contemporaries finding opportunities to be creating comics away from the Big Two?
During the witnessable shift or decline to advertising in print with the rise of non-printed media both as the internet since the mid-nineties?
Eventhough I've heard creatives and people having lived the 1960s state they thought photography would kill commercial art off way prior.

I'm not an expert but editors catering to getting quality creatives on board isn't happening at the Big Two, as they nowadays seem mostly
focused on redoing existing properties on TV or the big screen.
Mainly because the advertising for print or monopolizing distribution channels won't be bread and butter eversince what, 20 years already?
I'd think it wouldn't be the established legends but new talents publishers should cater to, and in case of the Big Two I hardly feel to see
any such catering altogether, but what do I know.

I would applaud the Big Two for any new titles with new and upcoming talents they could muster, but I don't feel the target audience, if
only since I enjoy buying stuff by those older generation artists, mainly. Especially non-Big-Two-type of stuff. I feel never need to read new
Batman or Spider-Man done by folks who have already thrived at doing those way back when. Do something new or at least what inspires such
artists personally the most. I still read Batman or Spider-Man, like the handful of favorites of those I can pick off a shelf if I feel like a re-read.
Of inspired new non-Big-Two stuff I haven't got everything I need just yet .

[ed2962]

I’m cool with Jim Shooter. But I think he would be more useful in a top position. In an age when people don’t really care about selling comics and there are titles at 8,000 that aren’t being cancelled, I think his no-nonsense way of doing things could turn things around.

Perhaps? I don't doubt Shooter's skills as a writer or editor, but he's very much a guy of his time. You could make the argument that he'd bring the quality of the comics up as long as you're a fan of bronze age storytelling, but would that help sales in the modern age? What he did worked when you could sell comics at the drug store spinner rack and at the dawn of the direct market, but that market is slowly dying.

[numberthirty]

I think that has more to do with the writing than the ideas. And even though it’s by no means great or above average, it’s still miles better than the pile of horse excrement that is X-Men: Red. People are forcing me to defend X-Men: Gold twice today and it’s quite annoying. All I’m saying is that it’s better than other crappy runs of recent years and that’s an incredibly low bar.

Politely disagree.

Even an incredibly gifted writer is going to have a hard time getting anything worthwhile out of the tenth time Al is helping some grumpy lady at the shoe store.

[MajorHoy]

Even an incredibly gifted writer is going to have a hard time getting anything worthwhile out of the tenth time Al is helping some grumpy lady at the shoe store.

And how many years has it been since Married with Children ended its run?

[numberthirty]

And how many years has it been since Married with Children ended its run?

It's a similar example of what you'd be asking a writer to tackle if you gave them elements of the plot that have been retread a few times already.

[MajorHoy]

It's a similar example of what you'd be asking a writer to tackle if you gave them elements of the plot that have been retread a few times already.

Al+ shoe store + retread?