For me, it’s Galactus. Now that’s a silver age comic book villain.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
For me, its Galactus. Now thats a silver age comic book villain.
For me, it’s Galactus. Now that’s a silver age comic book villain.
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
what kind of mindset did marvel civilians have to imagine a devourer of worlds as this goober
So true, F4 at its peak had so many great villains.
He looks really stupid. Kek!
Doom is the only cool one.
It amazes me that anons pretend like they don’t have a great rogues gallery. It’s a really good one.
>Doom
>Galactus
>Moleman
>Annihilus
>Blastaar
>Namor
>Psychoman
>Molecule Man
>Super Skrull
Doom and that's it.
Weird way to say you don’t actually read FF
I read the Kirby stuff.
Also Bill Everett's Sub-Mariner.
Galactus is arguably Kirby's best creation.
In an interview he even pointed out that the inspiration of Galactus and the Silver Surfer came from the Bible. Where Galactus was a destroyer god (instead of a creator god) and Silver Surfer was his "fallen angel" trying to thwart his efforts.
Really cool concept if you ask me.
Of course, Galactus was created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. It wasn't until he went to DC in 1970 that Kirby worked alone. Before that, everything he did was with a partner, either Joe Simon or Lee. It's well documented.
Silver Surfer and Galactus have always been high on my list in Marvel. They're both good characters. Surfer has his obvious struggles with guilt and atonement for what he's done. He also struggles with his ideals of freedom vs the power he has to basically save everyone from everything but that robs mortals of their freedom. Galactus is interesting because he's neither good nor evil he just "is." We don't call a lion eating a bison evil. He's not unreasonable and even honorable in most cases. He even has some semblance of guilt for what he has to do.
God please let Disney implode before they get to butcher SS and Galactus.
>God please let Disney implode before they get to butcher SS and Galactus.
I dunno, I'm actually predicting they get surfer and galactus mostly right. Think about it, they can't make two beings that have oppressed and genocided trillions of lives anything but heterosexual white men. They'll always be guilty no matter what they do. They have to be white.
Considering Mao, Galactus could be Chinese. Or remembering WW II, Galactus could be Japanese. Both countries oppressed and killed millions of people. Or maybe Galactus could be Aztec and the Surfer could be Zulu....
sshhh no no. None of that ever happened. Only white man bad.
That's getting really tired. You martyrs need to climb down off your crosses and get back to life.
I'm just telling you how things work. No atrocity carried out by anyone else will ever be acknowledged.
Stop feeling sorry for yourself. Watch some Hong Kong movies to see vile Japanese if you need to.
b***h I'm Korean.
I completely believe you.
You'd probably love Bone Tomahawk.
Is this just another House That Jack Built thing where people overhype the torture scenes as something sickening and yet they're just boring?
I too pretend to be incredibly jaded and blase. It makes me feel cool.
>n-nooooo, I'm scared by made-up gore, please don't laugh at me
It's Cinemaphile, someone like you always turns up.
>Galactus is Maori world eater
>Sliver Surfer is a servile turned rebellious Philippino
could it work?
Filipino, Philippines. I don't know why they're spelled that way, I'm still puzzled by Peking/Beijing.
>I'm still puzzled by Peking/Beijing.
Damn I genuinely never knew those referred to the same place.
As far as I can figure it out, the old school way of writing Chinese symbols as English was arbitrary and didn't make much sense. The new way reportedly is much closer to the way the words are actually pronounced. But "Mao Tse-Tung" is too stuck in my mind to change.
my bad.
Although now that I think of it, portraying the Maori as all-consuming sea-nomads probably isn't kosher in NZ or Australia even if it is historically accurate. Maybe Galactus could be used to help clean up the Tiamat corpse on Earth so that maori galactus wont feel to insulting
I've always wondered if the Aboriginal people of Australia had their own wars and conquests and genocides before the Europeans arrived. It's pretty much human nature.
>they can't make two beings that have oppressed and genocided trillions of lives anything but heterosexual white men
Galactus and Silver Surfer aren't white men, what the frick are you talking about you cretin
pick up a comic book about silver surfer and galactus, read it back to back.
You mean front to back?
If you think Kirby was thinking "I am drawing them with caucasian features to make a statement about white men", then you're nuts.
Of course not. Kirby was being normal and not considering any of that tumblr shit because it didn't exist. But now in the current environment you simply cannot keep the origin stories of Galactus and Silver Surfer and make them anything but white men. It would be like black members of Hydra with their frickin right arms stretched out. Silver Surfer and Galactus' whole bit is their role in the destruction of entire worlds. They will not draw a black face on either of those.
>They will not draw a black face on either of those.
They made a black dude the face of fascist genetic experimentation
>They made a black dude the face of fascist genetic experimentation
That was absolutely not the context of that character in the movie. You're projecting the comic onto the movie and we both know the movie does not follow the comic.
That was the context of the character in the movie you moron. He was a fascist evil scientist trying to make the perfect species. He genocides an race.
Its justice when a black body does genocide.
Anon, there is no use talking to that guy. He's not arguing in good faith, he's just trying to get you worked up for his own amusement.
You're just wallowing in self-pity. There are plenty of non-white bad guys. Stop feeling sorry for yourself and enjoy life.
doesn't it get tiring to play the victim?
See, i think that is where Stan Lee made a serious bad call. Kirby intended for the Surfer to be a non-flesh and blood construct that Galactus created out of pure energy. But Stan went for the whole Norrin Radd suffering thing with his old girlfriend and all that. I would rather have seen the Surfer played as really unemotional and slowly learning about feelings.
I disagree. I think Norrin’s choice and sacrifice really adds to the character, especially in his first solo run where he’s struggling to regain his sense of humanity. Making him a blank slate wouldn’t have allowed him to be such an enduring and compelling character.
Lee gets a lot of shit, but if there’s one thing he was good at it was finding ways to make his heroes compelling and relatable to the audience.
No one cares what your lore says they drew pictures of white men. They could have picked literally any color and physiology for them both but here we are.
> they can't make two beings that have oppressed and genocided trillions of lives anything but heterosexual white men.
Also Darkseid, Thanos, HIGH EVOLUTIONARY, KANG, I don't know why I let you guys get away with that victim mentality bullshit
> Galactus is arguably Kirby's best creation.
> inspired by the bible
How much of what he did wasn't biblically inspired?
Most of it. He read a lot of Popular Science magazines and old pulps. Most of early Marvel was heavily influenced by drive-in sci-fi movies.
eh, Darkseid was more inspired by hitler and the Mafias/Mobsters that Kirby hated with a passion rather than any biblical allusion
True. A lot of the New Gods WAS swipes from the Old Testament.. Isaya/Isaiah, the writing on the wall, all that. But Darkseid was a political figure.
Oddly enough, Joe Simon and Stan Lee were israeli also but there wasn't much Old Testament influence in what they produced. Maybe they weren't particularly religious or they felt comics weren't the right place for it.
I think it's likely that Galactus was inspired by the 1957 movie KRONOS.
Both Lee and Kirby loved those old drive-in sci-fi flicks and you can see the influence all over early Marvel.
What a ripoff...
Everybody steals from everybody else. It's not like any creator has ever worked in a vacuum.
Sometimes I wonder how be a shared universe where Kirby could create without editorial meddling and also meant to be a limited series.
Maybe Thor would die in the Ragnarok that would lead into the New Gods?
Would the Eternals and the Inhumans be the same people?
Could Captain Victory eventually meet the Fantastic Four?
I think Kirby did his best work with a partner, whether Joe Simon or Stan Lee. On his own at DC in 1970, the only title that lasted more than 18 issues was Kamandi. He was very creative but he lacked the human touch in his dialogue and characterizations. He tended to forget subplots and to throw in new characters without developing the ones he already had. And he benefited from having a partner who could keep his art consistent and to rein him in when he went overboard.
In fact I agree with that, he is great on creating concepts, but only shines really bright when having a writer with him.
What I mean by having a "Kirby-only" universe in the sense of 'how would it be if Marvel actually let him make the New Gods after Thor's Ragnarok?' or 'how would it be if DC let him finish the New Gods storyline that would eventually lead to Captain Victory?'.
One of the great disappointments in comics is the way the New Gods ended so abruptly. Come on, Carmine Infantino, give him just another issue or two to wrap things up! Kirby did produce The Hunger Dogs, but that was years later after the momentum was lost and I doubt it reflected his original plan for the finale.
I know how people feel about Stan but I do think he was right when he called Kirby out on his dialogue, saying that Kirby was more interested in the art and using it to tell a story than writing interesting and engaging dialogue. He really needed an editor to clean up/finalize his dialogue. Kirby's strength was his creativity but even the most creative people need to be reigned in sometimes.
Oh, I agree. I love Kirby's art (I could draw many of his pages with stick figures, they're so embedded in my head). But he had weaknesses and shortcomings like any creator. Kirby worship has become embarrassing, in my opinion. Stan's irreverent dialogue and captions were exactly right for the 1960s and humanized Kirby's art. My personal favorite era was the Simon and Kirby work in the late 1940s and early 1950s... BLACK MAGIC, the True crime comics, that stuff.
There’s a reason Lee-influenced characters like Spidey, Thing, Iron Man, Silver Surfer, and Strange were always more popular than Kirby and Ditko’s standalone creations. Lee knew how to let the artists do what they do best, but add onto their creations a more human touch that allowed the characters to be relatable. If Lee has been consistent about anything in his decades of interviews, it’s that heroes work best when you can relate to them somehow, even in an abstract manner.
True words! Lee's dialogue gave the characters recognizable personalities. Especially when compared to DC at the time. You could take an issue of Justice League and swap most of the word balloons from one character to another and never see a difference. But I'd bet you could write out all the dialogue from a Stan-scripted Fantastic Four and be able to tell most of the time which character said what.
I always thought Stan's best scripting was with his teen romance/comedy strips like Patsy Walker. Very natural sounding, sassy and poignant and overly dramatic like real teenagers. His writing on the romance and Western comics was better than his superhero stuff IMO.
>MUH DOOM
I swear to God, doomgays are the most obnoxious homosexuals on this site. I think you are even worse than Batgays could ever be.
>doomgays are the most obnoxious homosexuals on this site. I think you are even worse than Batgays could ever be.
They're both overhyped characters that need to be retired. They need to make a crisis that truly resets these universes. The mantles should be passed down.
I mean Jay Garrick to Bart Allen levels of new characters.
>Bart Allen
*Barry Allen, not the lame child
I would like Batman more if he went to his pulp roots being a detective and fighting mobsters and low-tier criminals instead of being overwanked "Humanity frick yeah, Batman is literally me if I was smart enough to learn thousands of scienitific fields and martial arts, a billionaire and a bodybuilder" character.
I don't like Doom at all.
That's what I mean, if they passed down the mantle to characters with brand new backstories, they'd inevitably be forced to downsize the character before building them up.
For example, a new Batman who has zero connection to Bruce Wayne.
Silence, peasant!
All I want is for someone, anyone to kill this boring homosexual for good. Galactus seems like a good candidate.
Thanos under Starlin was great. The problem is everyone else just makes him a generic conqueror.
Also, it was a comic book still intended mostly for pre-high school boys at that time and watched by the Comics Code to keep it from being too weird or scary. Keeping the villain recognizably human was natural.
He deserves better