brad@umcp-cs.UUCP (05/29/84)
Here's a few comments from Marv Wolfman on the last batch of articles: --b**2 Interesting. Can't believe people still have the "which is better DC or Marvel?" argument going. Both companies are pretty much the same...good books and bad books. A book published by Marvel doesn't mean it's better than the same book published by DC, but some people assume that because Stan was such a damn good salesman. That he was also such a damn good writer is insignificant -- he created characters to last. However, can anyone truly say on a one to one basis that all DC's are worse than all Marvels or all DC's are better? Or Marvel's just because they are published by Marvel makes them better than DC? The argument is dumb. A good book is a good book, period. You may like the Marvel style of self-congratulations and flamboyance--which I proudly did for many years and would again if I worked there--or you can prefer the DC style of just going out here and telling the story with no additions (sometimes, admittedly, no excitement, either), but on a one-to-one basis there really ain't much of a difference, not when half the talent has move back and forth so regularly. Thanks to whomever for the comments on my Action story about Seigel and Shuster. It was about time somebody did it and I'm a huge fan of their Supes in particular. If the story as drawn as slightly closer to the story as plotted it may have been even better. As it is it's one of the few jobs I can no longer read because although it works on an emotional level much of the plot was left out in the drawing--which, by the way, was gorgeous...it just didn't tell the story. I'd work with Gil most anytime because the art's so good, but I also pull out my hair when I realize half the plot is missing. Oh well, sometimes you take the good with the bad. And he can be real good. Bye. Marv