tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post4805218489558889757..comments2024-03-29T08:31:38.748+00:00Comments on Steve Does Comics: Avengers #157. The not quite so dark knight returns.Steve W.http://www.blogger.com/profile/09191442559702617745noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-90402836843511363762017-03-28T04:37:31.518+01:002017-03-28T04:37:31.518+01:00I loved the Legion, and the Superman Family comics...I loved the Legion, and the Superman Family comics in general, in the Silver Age, but I "shudder to think how they would stack up on a modern re-read." Matter-Eater Lad, Comet the Super Horse, Beppo the Super Monkey, and Bouncing Boy did not seem so whacked out when I was eight. <br /><br />They got King Kong right in 1933. The remakes were pretentious bores. TChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13686814973788356726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-53967918070178795882017-03-27T18:55:23.936+01:002017-03-27T18:55:23.936+01:00Ah well, I'm not much up on the Legion, Charli...Ah well, I'm not much up on the Legion, Charlie, so you might well be right there.<br />Agree about old comics v. collected editions, at least were possible. As it happens I'm judging those late 70s Avengers on memories of how they seemed at the time - I shudder to think how they'd stack up on a modern re-read. <br /><br />-seanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-20556152372557036212017-03-27T16:53:50.320+01:002017-03-27T16:53:50.320+01:00Sean, though perhaps simplistic by today's s...Sean, though perhaps simplistic by today's standards's shooters run on the Legion of superheroes that he wrote as a teenager was very enjoyable for me to read when I finally went back and read it. that being said I happened to read it in the comic book format not in an archive version and I tend to think reading the original comics is more profitable experience than just reading the archives if you're able to do that. Thanks!Charlie Horse 47https://www.blogger.com/profile/00906538705798228800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-46322283059221584062017-03-27T14:47:51.590+01:002017-03-27T14:47:51.590+01:00The original 1933 King Kong is still the best desp...The original 1933 King Kong is still the best despite its' primitive special effects. I first saw it on BBC 1 in December 1976 - which means that in two years time we'll be as distant from 1976 as 1976 was from 1933 !!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-57110991707206314182017-03-27T05:20:40.982+01:002017-03-27T05:20:40.982+01:00Those annuals came out in '77, IIRC. I think t...Those annuals came out in '77, IIRC. I think the issue discussed here predates it, maybe by a year, maybe less.<br />I agree that that King Kong remake was a real dud, but it featured a young Jessica Lange, who was a delight to behold.<br /><br />M.P.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-20124810115371786232017-03-27T01:24:58.428+01:002017-03-27T01:24:58.428+01:00Forgot about all that, Steve - I think I missed it...Forgot about all that, Steve - I think I missed it at the time... <br />Mainly I was thinking of Korvac and the Guardians of the Galaxy, and the period when John Byrne was drawing the comic (although having said that, the Gyrich storyline with the government insisting the Falcon had to join the Avengers - political correctness gone mad! - seems somewhat iffy too).<br />Didn't Starlin's annual with Thanos and Warlock come out around the same time as Shooter's early issues? That was pretty good...<br /><br />-sean<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-90471096146601380212017-03-26T23:15:54.524+01:002017-03-26T23:15:54.524+01:00Sean, I remember very little of the Shooter era. I...Sean, I remember very little of the Shooter era. I think my main memories are of that weird Ms Marvel pregnancy storyline and Ultron's Oedipus Complex.Steve W.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09191442559702617745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-73025671126004704012017-03-26T22:11:00.800+01:002017-03-26T22:11:00.800+01:00Thanks for the info, Joe. It's nice to know my...Thanks for the info, Joe. It's nice to know my Ultron/Kang instincts were right all along.Steve W.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09191442559702617745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-78282974286232214852017-03-26T21:48:07.037+01:002017-03-26T21:48:07.037+01:00Strange that wasn't resolved by later writers,...Strange that wasn't resolved by later writers, not least because it doesn't look like Ultron's arm - how come Kurt Busiek never wrote an epic Avengers arc explaining how the Space Phantom was behind it all?<br /><br />Don't know if 157 was some sort of fill-in, or whether Conway got the push (staff plot maybe?) but if I recall correctly Shooter started writing the Avengers with the next issue.<br />Which is just as well as it became the only A-list Marvel superhero comic that was any good in the late 70s (the X_Men being still an obscure off-beat bimonthly). Odd, because Shooter - and David Micheline - never seemed particularly impressive writing anything else.<br /><br />-sean<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6263300365798803459.post-12258210383254153232017-03-26T20:53:00.638+01:002017-03-26T20:53:00.638+01:00I just finished reading the entire run of the Defe...I just finished reading the entire run of the Defenders which I acquired in bargain bins over the last several years. After forty years, I was really expecting to find out who was behind that hand, but no luck. Apparently, it was never revealed in an actual story, just in an Official Handbook entry on Dane Whitman, and Avengers writers have chimed in on this site (http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix2/blackknightstatue.htm) to confirm that it was indeed Ultron all along. joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06694480974293381805noreply@blogger.com