Roy Thomas Talks Creating Avengers Villain Ultron and His 50 Years in Comics

[DrGregatron]

Oh yes,Thomas added a LOT to the marvel U.Some awesome stuff he did.Wish his x men had not been canceled. Would have been as good under Sal Bussema.His first comic I beleave, was Jimmy olsen 81, where Olsen has the task to infiltrate a teen gang.He managed to adapt enough of Howards non conan tales into conan comics to launch the title .At marvel,when you add up ALL the conan books, theres over 600 Howard derived comics they produced.Thomas was the one who pushed hard for conan.And While I liked Lee and Engleharts avengers, Thomas gave them a soul.

Right on! Best Avengers run ever!

[Bluebolt1967]

What Marvel and DC consider "continuity" these days is cross-overs. That's their continuity. They think if something is "line-wide" it makes it some sort of automatic continuity.

Continuity is shared history plus consistent characterization, both of which are sorely lacking in modern comics. Writers come in and, like Roy said, "redefine" the character so that they can write their own fan-fictionish versions. Editors should demand that their writers be craftsmen first, able to pick up characters and stories and make them feel consistent and keep their own voices and "artistic" leanings out of way. There are a few writers around now who can do that, but most of them these days put their own egos and ideas ahead of the characters and properties they are working with.

Edit: Great interview! I would love to see more interviews with long-time pros.

A great example of continuity being passed from writer to writer is the first Frank Miller run on Daredevil. He started writing with issue #168 (kids, notice how I was able to site a specific issue number, instead of having to say DD#1 V#8). Roger McKenzie had been writing the title earlier. Even though Miller was a young and up-coming hotshot, when he took over the series, he kept some of the characters from the McKenzie run (like Becky the secretary), continued the love interest/issues with Heather, continued some of the storylines involving the mob, etc but still managed to add some new stuff as well. What we get now is brand new stories, ignoring the recent past, whenever a new writer starts on a comic. There's little reference to what happened in the past and, in my opinion, it weakens the story. Plus it's almost impossible for good new villains to be created in superhero stories because, even if one writer creates a great new concept for a villain, once that writer leaves the series, there is a great chance that the villain will be forgotten and never referred to again.

[Nimopota]

A great example of continuity being passed from writer to writer is the first Frank Miller run on Daredevil. He started writing with issue #168 (kids, notice how I was able to site a specific issue number, instead of having to say DD#1 V#8). Roger McKenzie had been writing the title earlier. Even though Miller was a young and up-coming hotshot, when he took over the series, he kept some of the characters from the McKenzie run (like Becky the secretary), continued the love interest/issues with Heather, continued some of the storylines involving the mob, etc but still managed to add some new stuff as well. What we get now is brand new stories, ignoring the recent past, whenever a new writer starts on a comic. There's little reference to what happened in the past and, in my opinion, it weakens the story. Plus it's almost impossible for good new villains to be created in superhero stories because, even if one writer creates a great new concept for a villain, once that writer leaves the series, there is a great chance that the villain will be forgotten and never referred to again.

Just read these Daredevil issues from #150 up to the point where Miller comes first as a penciller and then as a writer and you couldn't be more right.
There's a true feeling of continuity that doesn't seem to exist anymore. It appears to me that titles were once developed like "brands" -- the X-Men brand, the Fantastic Four brand, etc. -- which is fine to me. Now, the influence and importance of authorship (which can be a great way of developing new forms; one must look towards the movie industry and what the "cinéma d'auteur" did to it) can completely mess up a title, making each volume more different than the one before.

I guess it's always a question of balancing the pros and cons of staying true to a title or adding your own little stardust to it but I don't think it should, in any way, be made while ignoring the past. After all, it's what made these universes Universes in the first place...

(And congrats for the interview, it was a great read!)