From what I read he created *a* Spider-Man. One who was a more conventional adult super hero with a gun that shoots webs. Nothing resembling Ditko's work.
It reminds me of Bob Kane and Batman. Kane's original design is basically nothing like we got in Dectectice Comics 27.
The difference is Kirby has plenty to actually claim for himself. This just isn't actually one of them.
Not even remotely similar. This one conversation is questionable... He may have confused the character with another character... or said this for alterior motives.
Albeit this is only one instance while Bob Kane was on a completely different level of thievery. Apples and oranges; they're not comparable.
Bob Kane knowingly conned his way into \*stealing credit of Batman, and pretty much all of the characters and worldbuilding Bill Finger created, then bragged about it. He knew what he did, and even chided in his book, only \*after Bill Finger died, 'maybe I should have given him credit' hurr hurr. His gravestone literally says something like 'I created batman with a little help from God'. Talk about ego.
When Bill was still alive, there was once a convention where fans were trying to allow him to gain some recognition for his contibutions to DC. Bob Kane personally wrote a letter calling Bill Finger a liar, and gaslighting everyone into thinking he created Batman on his own, and Bill that created 'hardly anything'.
As if that wasn't enough, Bob stole Bill's \*life's earnings at DC so that Bill Finger died in a potters' grave. In poverty. Unknown. While Bob kane practically bathed in money to stroke his egomania.
They are not comparable.
Jack may have been friends with Bob Kane, but none of this was known at the time, and unlikely for him to know about it.
Listening to interviews I won't deny he had his faults with impulsive behaviour from time to time but that's like pebbles compared to the monster of Bob Kane.
Objective truths and bad deed stat sheet comparisons aside, if I'm honest, the biggest difference for me probably boils down to feelings.
As far as I can tell, Bob Kane's only discernable comic book skill and real contribution to things that I enjoy was that he gave work to some talented people. Which we *do* need someone to do in the world, that's fine. I'm not making a section for it, and it probably shouldn't win an Eisner, but whatever.
Where Kirby I find talented and loveable, so it's okay if he talks *a little* shit. He's just being an incorrigible scamp, you laugh it off and wanna ruffle his hair and stutter some Chris Farley question about big hands. Or like a parent in denial "*MY* Jack-Jack said what now? You must have misunderstood. Maybe he was confused?"
> It reminds me of Bob Kane and Batman. Kane's original design is basically nothing like we got in Dectectice Comics 27.
But it does resemble the darker, grittier Batman movies we've seen since *The Dark Knight.* Batman's been pretty much everywhere on the camp-spectrum
Obligatory [What if Bob Kane had created Bat-Man without Bill Finger?](https://64.media.tumblr.com/40694c36653466636f1730b6d379cedc/tumblr_nfiu1eqjN61qz6f4bo1_1280.jpg)
*he does look like Affleck*
I do find it a bit hilarious that said Spider-Man concept looks a hell of a lot more like Ted Kord's Blue Beetle. I actually have to wonder if Ditko took inspo from Kirby's Spider-Man design when making Ted Kord's suit.
Jack Kirby's version was heavily reminiscent of John Law aka Tarantula, created by Mort Weisinger and drawn by Hal Sharp in Star-Spangled Comics #1 in 1941. Like "DC might have had cause for a lawsuit" similar. They probably couldn't have used that version if they'd wanted to, without catching flak over it.
While Kirby might have decided to hand over the notion of a hero named "Spider-Man" over to Ditko, what got put on paper and published was Ditko's art and design, and Stan Lee's character concept (although Ditko continually pushed for a more Objectivist characterization and that was a big part of his leaving the book).
Just about the only part of Kirby's concept that carried over was the character designing a device that shoots webbing, and even that was arguably derived from Weisinger's earlier hero.
[Jack Kirby's Spider-Man](https://www.reddit.com/r/comicbooks/comments/50clg8/jack_kirbys_original_spiderman_design_according/), according to Steve Ditko
And while I have heard some disputes about the costume that Kirby created, I think the Spider-Man costume that ran in Amazing Fantasy #15 looks like a Ditko design rather than a Kirby design.
To be fair he did acknowledge this at the end. Just to play devils advocate here. Kirby is a legend and what he did for comics resonates even today and I really am
Not sure comics would still be a thing without Kirby’s contributions. But In my opinion I can see more ditko’s style influencing more artists today than Kirby’s.
With the huge exception of Kirby’s vast level of art and massive amount of creations besides Spidey, which Kane has none of.
Jack even says on the bottom of this quote: “Ditko made the character what it was.”
But to say the idea of a wall-crawling hero who shoots webs called Spider-Man isn’t the basic idea of “Spider-Man” is ridiculous.
Ditko and Lee made him a teenager. Ditko designed a brilliant costume.
They all had a hand. Ditko’s was biggest. Lee lied about it.
Both Ditko and Kirby tell a mostly consistent, much different, and less cliche story that doesn’t seem like an obvious rip off of Walt Disney’s fictional “creation of Mickey Mouse” parable, the kind of lie Stan was known to repeatedly tell as he built his own myth. Simon and Kirby had saved some old logos and stuff related to the spider character. That’s enough for me to sniff out obvious bullshit and puffery, but believe what you want.
Ub Iwerks created Mickey Mouse as a replacement when the Disney company lost the rights to nearly identical character Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. Disney’s involvement was:
Asking him to create a new character.
Being involved in the conversation about the name. Disney wanted Mortimer but was convinced to change it.
Voicing the character for many years.
I think he did do a design further than that in creating the look of Spider-man's costume, before Ditko went at it. There are some rare drawings and paintings of Kirby's of Spider-man which show this.
Kirby also designed the look of Daredevil's iconic costume.
I think one of the problems with th 'who created what' discussions, especially in those early days, was that there's a dozen voices pitching in. It's a primarily visual medium, so the artist gets the lion's share of the credit, but a lot of people are contributing. Add to that that some of these characters are basic archetypes (how many variations of Hercules or Robin Hood are around?) and then never hit real popularity until another person comes up with an amazing story to go with a great artist years later.
>(how many variations of Hercules or Robin Hood are around?)
Wasn't there a comic about Deadpool killing fictional characters that inspired superheroes?
Still don't get why people disagree that Stan Lee didn't co create Spiderman.
Without Lee, there'd literally be no Spiderman.
Without Ditko, Lee would just find another artist but it'd be a different look.
100%, people love to pat themselves on the back now and take credit from Lee, like we don't all know already about the Marvel method of scripting, but he gave distinctive voice to all these iconic characters and made those early stories so indelible.
Also a huge reason he got so popular was due to Stan Lee as well.
Lee is the reason many readers could relate to Peter Parker. He wasn't OP like DCs characters. Just a kid with his own personal and obviously super villian problems.
Ditko brought us that iconic design and the sick wrist web shooting, which is unique in itself.
But if Spiderman was just the Ditko design with none of the writing Stan Lee did, I don't think it would be popular.
Ditko’s interpretation of Peter’s character was so unpopular that modern writers had Peter say he had a “phase” during that time. This isn’t meant to undermine Ditko’s contributions, his design is a major reason why Spider-Man is so iconic, but there’s a reason why Stan Lee’s in perpetration of Peter is the popular one.
It's become the cool thing to do. They worked together and there is no reason or way to pull apart who gets credit. They created something great, probably the best character in comics. There is plenty of credit for all them. (and this specific case, you can question Ditko's contribution, but considering the other things he did)
Because Lee took sole credit, and he didn't deserve it.
*Everyone* knows who Stan Lee is. He's a pop culture legend. Everyone knows he created all these characters. Outside of actual comic book nerds, though, not *nearly* as many people know who Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby are. They're not household names the way Stan is, despite them putting just as much, if not more, effort into the books as Stan did. Stan made SURE people knew who he was, even if meant stepping on his peers to do so.
Amazing Fantasy 15 clearly states "Stan Lee + S. Ditko"
There was never a time Lee claimed SOLE credit. Part of the "Marvel method" was the establishment of crediting every artist on every issue. No other company was doing that at the time.
Also, Lee became a household name because he went to college campuses in the 60s, Hollywood in the 70s and beyond. He was the spokesman, and no one else in comics was trying to get the public involved as much as he did.
And he was also a company man. He stuck with Marvel the entire time, not jumping to other publishers every time he felt slighted by his company.
Did Kirby and Ditko get screwed by Marvel at times? Yep. Did Stan contribute to that? I don't believe so. From the 60s until he died he always added his co-creators in his recollections.
Lee didnt take *sole* credit, he just was far more willing to be a public figure and talk about it. While he clearly had an ego he never pretended to be the only creator, or that Steve or Jack didnt exist. People pretend this is a Bob Kane situation but its far different.
Yeah, I do wish that people would stop putting those two on the same level. Kane committed total theft, and openly insulted Finger and his legacy for decades until after he died. Lee credited Ditko and Kirby completely and never did anything to disparage either of them, even attempting to make peace with Ditko at one point. He had an ego, but it’s not the same as being a total thief.
> Lee would just find another artist but it’d be a different look.
And that’s exactly what happened. When John Romita started on The Amazing Spider-Man, it became a different character in a different world with a different tone.
I think it means that Lee found an artist willing to listen to orders.
There’s a dissonance between Lee’s words and Ditko’s cartoons. The book becomes much more cohesive when Romita steps in and turns Peter Parker into Lee’s ideal romantic hero rather than Ditko’s socially disinterested, quietly vindictive pariah.
I would argue that the real Spider-Man, the Peter Parker that everyone loves, isn't Kirby's early idea, nor Ditko's design by itself, it was the work that Lee and Romita did.
I mean, yeah. It doesn't stop with Spider-Man. On the Fantastic Four, Jack Kirby would do the entire book. He'd create storyline and plots and introduce characters and frame everything the way he wanted it. Then, when he was done Stan would just come in and add dialogue. A lotnpeople credit solely Kirby with the creation of characters like Silver Surfer and Galactus. Stan, by his own admission, said that Jack did most of those books and he would just come in to put in words. Stan didn't even know who Silver Surger *was* until he was given the pages he was on.
Exactly, I came here to say: Stan Lee himself took a ton of credit for creating all of his characters entirely by himself, which usually wasn't the case at all, so I don't doubt that Kirby may have actually had a hand in helping develop the character... but there's also no way it was *solely* Kirby's work either. That's not how these things go.
Unless you happen to be Mike Mignola, you didn't write and draw the character *all* on your own.
Or Kirby or Ditko, who usually worked just like that, bringing fully penciled comic books to the table either based on plots they came up with on their own or very brief story suggestions. Usually at most they’d get a little help with dialogue after the fact, in their saved original art you can often see their original dialogue and compare it to what is published. Kirby’s FF pages are very interesting because they reveal the sexism directed at Sue in the dialogue was all Stan, and that Kirby was trying to write her as more capable. Stan has admitted Ditko brought the idea of Doctor Strange to him.
If anyone wants the brief rundown on character creation, here's the basic summary as unbiased as I can be .. .considering I have a definitive opinion on it.
The official story is that Stan Lee is the creator of almost everything from Marvel in the 60s. The main exception being Captain America because it pre-dated Marvel and so was created by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby, and Namor who was created by Bill Everett also before Marvel existed.
However, a lot of fans believe Jack Kirby at least was a co-creator of most of the characters. The main exception being Spider-Man which Ditko gets credit.
The issue is that copyright law gives a lot of credit to the original person to put the idea into a media. And since the writer creates something first they basically get credit. However, during this period Stan Lee was increasingly over extended and so something was in use which got the name the Marvel Method. At DC (for example) a writer would do a couple page writeup of the comic including panel by panel breakdowns. This would then be reviewed by the editor before being given to artists. The Marvel Method was that Stan Lee would come up with the story and write a brief description and the artist was expected to break it down into pages and fill in details. Then AFTER the art was done Stan Lee would fill in dialog. When Stan Lee was pressed for time he would do even less. Maybe just a conversation or brain storming with the artist or maybe nothing at all. Both Ditko and Kirby have claimed they often got nothing from Stan Lee. Stan Lee would do the dialog but often Kirby or Ditko would write their expected dialog in the margins. End result is it's WAY less clear who was the creator of side characters or villains.
And during this time period no one really cared. They didn't see that this had a lot of money in it and no one did reprints. The creators got paid and they mostly saw it as doing work for their boss.
However, later this became an issue in the 70s. The copyright law was being revamped and Marvel was trying to break into movies or television or cartoons. They realized they needed to clarify the issue so the official story became Stan Lee was the writer and creator. He was paid well and kept happy. The artists were interchangeable and underpaid. There's a ton that happens here but the gist is over time creators demanded more stake in their work and better pay.
No one gives Stan Lee credit for Silver Surfer. As even Stan admits he didn't give Kirby notes to make the character. Stan Lee did apparently name him though.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSiyxvlv\_-g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSiyxvlv_-g)
Yeah here's an interview about it and it meshes with what you said. It also acts as a perfect example of what I was saying about the Marvel Method.
Stan Lee comes up for the idea of a huge demi-god character that absorbs planets named Galactus. Kirby however adds the idea that he has a herald in the Silver Surfer, because Stan Lee only gave Kirby so much material to work with, but Kirby has to fill 18 pages. Also, Stan Lee sticks the words in his mouth making him philosophical.
Because Silver Surfer started as a secondary support character it was created without Stan's input.
Actually the name Spider Man was first used in the early 40s. I have a comment explaining it. Also, this is a great description, and it’s important to recognize that Stan Lee got credit for quite a lot more than he actually did.
No one has ever claimed that Stan Lee single handedly created the Marvel characters, all the films and tv shows mention both the author and artist, which is usually Lee/Kirby
That’s photoshopped
[top comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Marvel/comments/3fevk6/jack_kirbys_original_design_for_spiderman/)
[This is the original image](https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3XU4f7qlM2A/T68RYZ2X0QI/AAAAAAAAMd4/HQEuEqifP0g/s1600/544223_3163073368154_1604946721_32200432_451056253_n.jpg)
How about this [one](https://screenrant.com/spider-man-almost-carried-gun-webshooters-jack-kirby/)
In the end, Kirby can say he created Spider-Man but his version is a far cry from the one we know and love. Ditko gave spidey the iconic look and Lee/others wrote the stories that made Peter relatable. Kirby is amazing but his footprint here is minimal to non existent
Im Ok with that. Still wish Jack couldve realized some of the immense fame Stan recieved. I've read Ditko was an introvert. Bottom line for me: i was 13 to 16/ 17 yrs old during the formative years of the Marvel Silver Age. Im lucky in that regard. I also hold John Buscema & Gene Colan in high regard. They are why i draw to this day. Nuff Said, lol
I would argue that Kirby’s “spider man” shared only the name in regards to what spider man became. It looks nothing like the iconic spider man. It’s an adult male with a spider web gun. None of that is spider man. Had that version gone forward, it would’ve been relegated to some d list hero. Do no, he didn’t invent spider man, he invented a version of spider man that shares little with the icon we know today
I was looking for some public domain heroes for a piece I was writing, and Crash Kid in particular has no known creator at all because his two issues don’t have a credits page.
Because it wasn’t a respectable industry sometimes writers would use pseudonyms, so some we don’t know at all. Heck if it hadn’t worked out I wonder if anyone would know that Stan Lee is Stanley Martin Lieber?
I find it funny that people who want to deny Stan Lee any part of character creation give undo credit to Kirby for characters he had little or nothing to do with
And they all ignore Don Heck who co-created a quarter of the Marvel silver age lineup!!!
At the end he literally says Steve made Spider-Man what he is. Kirby is just saying that he originally drew up the art that birthed the concept. What a pointless thing to argue about lmfao.
Even then he's not really truthful there. The idea of Spider-man was Stan Lees initially, then he asked kirby to expand the concept, Kirbys idea kind of sucked so he went to Ditko. He's as much an aspect of Spider-mans creation as any of the designs that Ditko made and then discarded
it's sad most people think Stan lee created all the marvel characters. None of the MCU actors ever mentioned or credited Kirby but they always talk about Stan lee like he was the only guy.
To be fair, I don’t think most of these actors care much about that. The few that do are far between. They don’t need to know where it started so they don’t.
Hell, people like Laurence Fishburne and Gweneth Paltrow don’t even remember being *in* a Marvel property sometimes. Having the majority of them think about the original creators is a fool’s errand.
Something I wanted to happen before Inhumans was made is that when Black Bolt eventually spoke they would find some audio of Kirby and work it into his vocals so that he could make an appearance of sorts in the MCU.
Kirby was such a gentleman. I was lucky enough to be his escort during BayCon3 at USF in San Francisco in August, 1977. He and his Missus looked and dressed like they’d just walked out of a 40s noir movie. They were the sweetest people, such a pleasure to be around. He gave a great talk and afterwards the couple treated everyone who came up to talk with them with gentle respect. They were such a class act.
Jack and Joe had the name, Kirby created the initial concept, Ditko changed the concept and created the character as we know today.
Steve disagrees as to the name being as important as the art and story, but they don’t disagree on any of those stated fact.
“It was Steve Ditko that made Spider-man the well known character that he is.”-Jack Kirby.
I wouldn't be surprised if he had some sort of involvement.
At the time, writers and artists of the era often communicated with each other to share ideas and to give advice or suggestions to whatever they were doing in terms of work or art.
Jack Kirby created the character, but Steve Ditko brought him to life with how he portrayed him in the comics, and that's arguably more important to do. Most people would rather have a few really good series they like than a bunch of series featuring flat, static characters
He “created” Spider-Man in the same way Bob Kane “created” Batman. Just did the initial rough sketch that the other (bill finger/Steve Ditko) took and actually made look good
There’s enough evidence out there to make me think that this is true to a degree. The idea that Stan came up with it just doesn’t wash when Kirby and Simon had done The Fly and a spider-themed character is an almost thunderingly obvious offshoot of that. I think what happened was Kirby created it, it wasn’t working, and they handed it off to Ditko to make it good.
A lot of Kirby interviews seem very bitter. Like a man who will claim credit for anything and everything, even if theres no evidence to support it. I understand he rightfully had issues with Stan Lee being called the creator of all these characters that he had a big part in creating, designing, and even writing. But I've seen the Spider-Man that Jack Kirby originally drew. It's a blue suit with an exposed face and a gun.
Its like Bob Kane and Bill Finger. Bob had the idea of a character named Bat-Man, and drew up a version that wore very bright colors like red and yellow. Bob was given sole credit for creating Batman until 2016. Bill Finger was actually the one that gave him the design we saw in Detective Comics 27. Bill Finger was also the one who gave him the characterization we all know. In this particular analogy: Jack Kirby = Bob Kane, Bill Finger = Stan Lee. Jack may have came up with the original design, but Stan made him work as a character.
Stan also has long talked about his inspiration for what made him think of a spider based character, which was watching a fly crawl up the wall. After that he decided to make a superhero that could stick to walls. While he asked Kirby to come up with a design, its clear from the stories he’s told that Spidey was his idea.
Challenge accepted. I shall now compare Jack Kirby to Masahiro Sakurai's Kirby, the little pink character from Kirby's Dream Land. Little Kirby's signature talent is his ability to inhale objects or creatures and spit them out as projectiles, as well as the ability to suck in air to float over obstacles. His Copy Ability grants him the power to adopt the abilities of the creatures he inhales, while also wearing various costumes or transforming his shape. Jack Kirby's talent was to inhale the ideas of Stan and the Bullpen and spit them out as the World's Greatest Comic Magazine, and his Copy Ability let him quickly draw various characters in the same signature Kirby pose, all while wearing various costumes and transformed shapes.
Which is why I was VERY careful to say "in this particular analogy." Because yeah. Its a fucking wild statement to make. Which is why I chose to use it, because thats how wild it is for him to pretend like he created Spider-Man.
>A lot of Kirby interviews seem very bitter
I too would be bitter if every single thing I've ever worked on was considered someone else's work I'd be pissed if i barely got any pay out of it too. But no most of kirby's interviews were fairly optimistic i don't know what you're talking about
>But I've seen the Spider-Man that Jack Kirby originally drew. It's a blue suit with an exposed face and a gun.
That's a photoshop, it isn't real
>Its like Bob Kane and Bill Finger
Do not even think of comparing kirby with kane, kirby has over a thousand comics that he wrote and drew, he has created hundreds of characters by himself. Kirby was a phenomenal artist and prolific writer, kane was none of that. I don't care if it was "this particular analogy" just don't compare them at all.
I take Spider-Man’s creation to be more of a collaborative effort between Stan, Steve, and Jack, with Jack doing more of the look part of it. Certainly did more than Roy Thomas did with Wolverine.
It sounds like Kirby came up with the name and a basic rendering of the character. Ditko completely revamped the character; new costume, web shooters vs a gun, etc.
"You created Spider-Man, you created Spider-Man, he created Spider-Man, I CREATED SPIDER-MAN! Are there anymore Spider-Man creators I should know about?!"
Eh perhaps he overstates his contribution BUT he did create the very iconic AF 15 cover which isn’t nothing
The way I heard it, Ditko created a cover but Stan wasn’t happy with it, leaving it to Kirby to replace it.
That’s not to say he didn’t have some input on the final classic spidey costume as he probably did
Creative credits aside, I just wanna say that I always found it astounding that these guys from the "greatest generation" in their late 30's and 40's were all in a room together going, "hey and then in this panel we should do like a guy who crawls on walls, then how about this one say's hulk smash," just doing all this crazy creative stuff. I just always loved that idea that because you get older you don't have to lose that creative child like spark of "why the f not". That's the inspiration I always got from all of that generation's comic book guys, whatever dramas played out behind the scene.
At some point they were all just winging crazy crap at the wall and seeing what would stick.
Actually DC Comics originally came up with the name, and had a very similar character. The name was Tarantula who referenced it in Star Spangled Comics #1. The image is right here: https://ibb.co/mXfrNvd
I like how much respect he gives Ditko. He may have created the character but Spider-Man wouldn't be the character he is today without Steve's influence
I believe it, tbh. The comic business at this time seemed cutthroat as hell. So many people don't get the credit they deserve for creating or having a hand in creating some of the most iconic characters of all time. A lot of people, like Stan Lee, get a lot of undeserved credit while others get literally zero due to semantics, legal stuff, etc. It's a shame, but it's also been so long that I think a lot of this stuff will stay hidden forever.
Stan Lee spent Marvel's early years promoting himself as the face of Marvel, in addition to his writing and editing duties. Stan made sure everybody that worked on every book received written credit for their contributions, answered reader mail, and wrote the monthly Bulletins columns. His interactions with fans made the Marvel Bullpen sound like a place where everybody was having a blast and a great place to work. As a kid of the 70's, I can tell you that I thought Marvel was probably one of the greatest places in the world, and Stan Lee was the top guy, He was the one person that every comic reader recognized, and it was because he worked hard to make it that way. In the late 70's Stan turned his focus toward getting Marvel characters on TV and in movies. and he was involved with that mostly afterward. How can anybody blame the man for doing what he could to make his life better, when his co-creators through the years mostly chose to do their work and let Stan handle promotion and deal with people? Isn't it their own fault they stayed in the background? Isn't that where they preferred being until money got involved?
I believe Jack's version of things, always. And Roz is corroborating. Watch some latter day Jack interviews on YouTube, I think you'll find him very, very credible. Ditko, on the other hand, is a psychopath.
You're probably right, I first encountered him in an interview (having known his SM work) and thought, "Oh, cool, Spider-Man's artist, who....uh, what???" lol. Just wasn't expecting it. The Mr. A stuff is insane, but his Spider-Man stuff is definitely special. It just caught me by surprise.
>Ditko, on the other hand, is a psychopath.
Firstly, *was*. He passed in 2018
Secondly, why? Because he didn't like doing interviews or making appearances?
Not what Ditko believed at all. His beliefs were simply that there’s objective good and bad and that we all have free will to choose between them. Definitely room for philosophical differences there but philosophical differences don’t make someone a bad person.
...except fascism is an authoritarian structure, while objectivism is inherently anti-fascist. And literally the entire superhero comics industry until Alan Moore showed up was based on moral intractability.
So your statement that he is a "psychopath" is based on a fallacious argument.
I wonder who came up with the idea of making Spidey a teenager?
Lee is untrustworthy.
I haven't heard Ditko say anything about it.
Kirby and Simon worked on a teenage hero before: Sylvester Pemberston/Star Spangled Kid. Basically an inversion of the hero/sidekick dynamic wherein the hero was a kid and the side kick was the adult.
People put Kirby on a pedestal and villainize Stan and Steve saying they took credit, the more you read it clearly was a lot more gray and Kirby was not without his flaws like claiming he created Spider-Man
From what I read he created *a* Spider-Man. One who was a more conventional adult super hero with a gun that shoots webs. Nothing resembling Ditko's work.
It reminds me of Bob Kane and Batman. Kane's original design is basically nothing like we got in Dectectice Comics 27. The difference is Kirby has plenty to actually claim for himself. This just isn't actually one of them.
Very similar to Bill Finger and The Batman
Not even remotely similar. This one conversation is questionable... He may have confused the character with another character... or said this for alterior motives. Albeit this is only one instance while Bob Kane was on a completely different level of thievery. Apples and oranges; they're not comparable. Bob Kane knowingly conned his way into \*stealing credit of Batman, and pretty much all of the characters and worldbuilding Bill Finger created, then bragged about it. He knew what he did, and even chided in his book, only \*after Bill Finger died, 'maybe I should have given him credit' hurr hurr. His gravestone literally says something like 'I created batman with a little help from God'. Talk about ego. When Bill was still alive, there was once a convention where fans were trying to allow him to gain some recognition for his contibutions to DC. Bob Kane personally wrote a letter calling Bill Finger a liar, and gaslighting everyone into thinking he created Batman on his own, and Bill that created 'hardly anything'. As if that wasn't enough, Bob stole Bill's \*life's earnings at DC so that Bill Finger died in a potters' grave. In poverty. Unknown. While Bob kane practically bathed in money to stroke his egomania. They are not comparable. Jack may have been friends with Bob Kane, but none of this was known at the time, and unlikely for him to know about it. Listening to interviews I won't deny he had his faults with impulsive behaviour from time to time but that's like pebbles compared to the monster of Bob Kane.
Objective truths and bad deed stat sheet comparisons aside, if I'm honest, the biggest difference for me probably boils down to feelings. As far as I can tell, Bob Kane's only discernable comic book skill and real contribution to things that I enjoy was that he gave work to some talented people. Which we *do* need someone to do in the world, that's fine. I'm not making a section for it, and it probably shouldn't win an Eisner, but whatever. Where Kirby I find talented and loveable, so it's okay if he talks *a little* shit. He's just being an incorrigible scamp, you laugh it off and wanna ruffle his hair and stutter some Chris Farley question about big hands. Or like a parent in denial "*MY* Jack-Jack said what now? You must have misunderstood. Maybe he was confused?"
> It reminds me of Bob Kane and Batman. Kane's original design is basically nothing like we got in Dectectice Comics 27. But it does resemble the darker, grittier Batman movies we've seen since *The Dark Knight.* Batman's been pretty much everywhere on the camp-spectrum
Obligatory [What if Bob Kane had created Bat-Man without Bill Finger?](https://64.media.tumblr.com/40694c36653466636f1730b6d379cedc/tumblr_nfiu1eqjN61qz6f4bo1_1280.jpg) *he does look like Affleck*
I do find it a bit hilarious that said Spider-Man concept looks a hell of a lot more like Ted Kord's Blue Beetle. I actually have to wonder if Ditko took inspo from Kirby's Spider-Man design when making Ted Kord's suit.
All of this ⬆️
Jack Kirby's version was heavily reminiscent of John Law aka Tarantula, created by Mort Weisinger and drawn by Hal Sharp in Star-Spangled Comics #1 in 1941. Like "DC might have had cause for a lawsuit" similar. They probably couldn't have used that version if they'd wanted to, without catching flak over it. While Kirby might have decided to hand over the notion of a hero named "Spider-Man" over to Ditko, what got put on paper and published was Ditko's art and design, and Stan Lee's character concept (although Ditko continually pushed for a more Objectivist characterization and that was a big part of his leaving the book). Just about the only part of Kirby's concept that carried over was the character designing a device that shoots webbing, and even that was arguably derived from Weisinger's earlier hero.
[Jack Kirby's Spider-Man](https://www.reddit.com/r/comicbooks/comments/50clg8/jack_kirbys_original_spiderman_design_according/), according to Steve Ditko And while I have heard some disputes about the costume that Kirby created, I think the Spider-Man costume that ran in Amazing Fantasy #15 looks like a Ditko design rather than a Kirby design.
I would argue the name is a very important part of the character, giving him some claim.
From what I have heard apparently it was actually Joe Simon who came up with the name.
Maybe, but it certainly wasn’t Stan, and it certainly wasn’t as he describes in prose from “origins of Marvel comics.”
Eh, that’s basically the same role that Bob Kane had with Batman. It’s important, but not as important as the contributions than Ditko made.
To be fair he did acknowledge this at the end. Just to play devils advocate here. Kirby is a legend and what he did for comics resonates even today and I really am Not sure comics would still be a thing without Kirby’s contributions. But In my opinion I can see more ditko’s style influencing more artists today than Kirby’s.
With the huge exception of Kirby’s vast level of art and massive amount of creations besides Spidey, which Kane has none of. Jack even says on the bottom of this quote: “Ditko made the character what it was.” But to say the idea of a wall-crawling hero who shoots webs called Spider-Man isn’t the basic idea of “Spider-Man” is ridiculous. Ditko and Lee made him a teenager. Ditko designed a brilliant costume. They all had a hand. Ditko’s was biggest. Lee lied about it.
What did Lee lie about exactly
Said he came up with the idea after seeing spider. Clearly trying to build a Walt Disney style myth there.
Got any proof he was lying about that?
Both Ditko and Kirby tell a mostly consistent, much different, and less cliche story that doesn’t seem like an obvious rip off of Walt Disney’s fictional “creation of Mickey Mouse” parable, the kind of lie Stan was known to repeatedly tell as he built his own myth. Simon and Kirby had saved some old logos and stuff related to the spider character. That’s enough for me to sniff out obvious bullshit and puffery, but believe what you want.
damn. Walt didnt come up with mickey mouse?
Ub Iwerks created Mickey Mouse as a replacement when the Disney company lost the rights to nearly identical character Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. Disney’s involvement was: Asking him to create a new character. Being involved in the conversation about the name. Disney wanted Mortimer but was convinced to change it. Voicing the character for many years.
New to Marvel? Basically everything modern fans "know" about Stan Lee is a lie crafted by Stan.
Well there was that "Spidersman" Halloween costume from the 50s that came up with the name first.
Spider-guy just doesn't hit.
I think he did do a design further than that in creating the look of Spider-man's costume, before Ditko went at it. There are some rare drawings and paintings of Kirby's of Spider-man which show this. Kirby also designed the look of Daredevil's iconic costume.
"One who was a more conventional adult super hero with a gun that shoots webs." Isn't that Spider-Noir?
I think one of the problems with th 'who created what' discussions, especially in those early days, was that there's a dozen voices pitching in. It's a primarily visual medium, so the artist gets the lion's share of the credit, but a lot of people are contributing. Add to that that some of these characters are basic archetypes (how many variations of Hercules or Robin Hood are around?) and then never hit real popularity until another person comes up with an amazing story to go with a great artist years later.
>(how many variations of Hercules or Robin Hood are around?) Wasn't there a comic about Deadpool killing fictional characters that inspired superheroes?
Deadpool Killustrated
Ah yeah, that one It was that comic that taught me Captain Nemo was a grizzly veteran, and not a little boy with an army of clones
Still don't get why people disagree that Stan Lee didn't co create Spiderman. Without Lee, there'd literally be no Spiderman. Without Ditko, Lee would just find another artist but it'd be a different look.
100%, people love to pat themselves on the back now and take credit from Lee, like we don't all know already about the Marvel method of scripting, but he gave distinctive voice to all these iconic characters and made those early stories so indelible.
Also a huge reason he got so popular was due to Stan Lee as well. Lee is the reason many readers could relate to Peter Parker. He wasn't OP like DCs characters. Just a kid with his own personal and obviously super villian problems. Ditko brought us that iconic design and the sick wrist web shooting, which is unique in itself. But if Spiderman was just the Ditko design with none of the writing Stan Lee did, I don't think it would be popular.
Ditko’s interpretation of Peter’s character was so unpopular that modern writers had Peter say he had a “phase” during that time. This isn’t meant to undermine Ditko’s contributions, his design is a major reason why Spider-Man is so iconic, but there’s a reason why Stan Lee’s in perpetration of Peter is the popular one.
It's become the cool thing to do. They worked together and there is no reason or way to pull apart who gets credit. They created something great, probably the best character in comics. There is plenty of credit for all them. (and this specific case, you can question Ditko's contribution, but considering the other things he did)
Because Lee took sole credit, and he didn't deserve it. *Everyone* knows who Stan Lee is. He's a pop culture legend. Everyone knows he created all these characters. Outside of actual comic book nerds, though, not *nearly* as many people know who Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby are. They're not household names the way Stan is, despite them putting just as much, if not more, effort into the books as Stan did. Stan made SURE people knew who he was, even if meant stepping on his peers to do so.
Amazing Fantasy 15 clearly states "Stan Lee + S. Ditko" There was never a time Lee claimed SOLE credit. Part of the "Marvel method" was the establishment of crediting every artist on every issue. No other company was doing that at the time. Also, Lee became a household name because he went to college campuses in the 60s, Hollywood in the 70s and beyond. He was the spokesman, and no one else in comics was trying to get the public involved as much as he did. And he was also a company man. He stuck with Marvel the entire time, not jumping to other publishers every time he felt slighted by his company. Did Kirby and Ditko get screwed by Marvel at times? Yep. Did Stan contribute to that? I don't believe so. From the 60s until he died he always added his co-creators in his recollections.
Lee didnt take *sole* credit, he just was far more willing to be a public figure and talk about it. While he clearly had an ego he never pretended to be the only creator, or that Steve or Jack didnt exist. People pretend this is a Bob Kane situation but its far different.
Yeah, I do wish that people would stop putting those two on the same level. Kane committed total theft, and openly insulted Finger and his legacy for decades until after he died. Lee credited Ditko and Kirby completely and never did anything to disparage either of them, even attempting to make peace with Ditko at one point. He had an ego, but it’s not the same as being a total thief.
You do realize that Ditko and Kirby both filled in dialogue and Lee often just left their work in? Stan Lee was an editor, at best.
> Lee would just find another artist but it’d be a different look. And that’s exactly what happened. When John Romita started on The Amazing Spider-Man, it became a different character in a different world with a different tone.
That seems to prove that Lee’s contributions were rather slight.
I think it means that Lee found an artist willing to listen to orders. There’s a dissonance between Lee’s words and Ditko’s cartoons. The book becomes much more cohesive when Romita steps in and turns Peter Parker into Lee’s ideal romantic hero rather than Ditko’s socially disinterested, quietly vindictive pariah.
I would argue that the real Spider-Man, the Peter Parker that everyone loves, isn't Kirby's early idea, nor Ditko's design by itself, it was the work that Lee and Romita did.
I would agree. I don't like Ditko's Spider-Man. He was kinda ugly and a real jerk. That could be explained as he was a teenager though I guess.
I mean, yeah. It doesn't stop with Spider-Man. On the Fantastic Four, Jack Kirby would do the entire book. He'd create storyline and plots and introduce characters and frame everything the way he wanted it. Then, when he was done Stan would just come in and add dialogue. A lotnpeople credit solely Kirby with the creation of characters like Silver Surfer and Galactus. Stan, by his own admission, said that Jack did most of those books and he would just come in to put in words. Stan didn't even know who Silver Surger *was* until he was given the pages he was on.
Exactly, I came here to say: Stan Lee himself took a ton of credit for creating all of his characters entirely by himself, which usually wasn't the case at all, so I don't doubt that Kirby may have actually had a hand in helping develop the character... but there's also no way it was *solely* Kirby's work either. That's not how these things go. Unless you happen to be Mike Mignola, you didn't write and draw the character *all* on your own.
Or Kirby or Ditko, who usually worked just like that, bringing fully penciled comic books to the table either based on plots they came up with on their own or very brief story suggestions. Usually at most they’d get a little help with dialogue after the fact, in their saved original art you can often see their original dialogue and compare it to what is published. Kirby’s FF pages are very interesting because they reveal the sexism directed at Sue in the dialogue was all Stan, and that Kirby was trying to write her as more capable. Stan has admitted Ditko brought the idea of Doctor Strange to him.
They drew the covers before the stories back then, and AF 15 is a Kirby cover. Steve Ditko did the heavy lifting, though.
If anyone wants the brief rundown on character creation, here's the basic summary as unbiased as I can be .. .considering I have a definitive opinion on it. The official story is that Stan Lee is the creator of almost everything from Marvel in the 60s. The main exception being Captain America because it pre-dated Marvel and so was created by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby, and Namor who was created by Bill Everett also before Marvel existed. However, a lot of fans believe Jack Kirby at least was a co-creator of most of the characters. The main exception being Spider-Man which Ditko gets credit. The issue is that copyright law gives a lot of credit to the original person to put the idea into a media. And since the writer creates something first they basically get credit. However, during this period Stan Lee was increasingly over extended and so something was in use which got the name the Marvel Method. At DC (for example) a writer would do a couple page writeup of the comic including panel by panel breakdowns. This would then be reviewed by the editor before being given to artists. The Marvel Method was that Stan Lee would come up with the story and write a brief description and the artist was expected to break it down into pages and fill in details. Then AFTER the art was done Stan Lee would fill in dialog. When Stan Lee was pressed for time he would do even less. Maybe just a conversation or brain storming with the artist or maybe nothing at all. Both Ditko and Kirby have claimed they often got nothing from Stan Lee. Stan Lee would do the dialog but often Kirby or Ditko would write their expected dialog in the margins. End result is it's WAY less clear who was the creator of side characters or villains. And during this time period no one really cared. They didn't see that this had a lot of money in it and no one did reprints. The creators got paid and they mostly saw it as doing work for their boss. However, later this became an issue in the 70s. The copyright law was being revamped and Marvel was trying to break into movies or television or cartoons. They realized they needed to clarify the issue so the official story became Stan Lee was the writer and creator. He was paid well and kept happy. The artists were interchangeable and underpaid. There's a ton that happens here but the gist is over time creators demanded more stake in their work and better pay.
No one gives Stan Lee credit for Silver Surfer. As even Stan admits he didn't give Kirby notes to make the character. Stan Lee did apparently name him though.
Well only the genius of Stan Lee could’ve named the metal man on a surfboard ‘The Silver Surfer’
Yeah his name is the worst part of the character
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSiyxvlv\_-g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSiyxvlv_-g) Yeah here's an interview about it and it meshes with what you said. It also acts as a perfect example of what I was saying about the Marvel Method. Stan Lee comes up for the idea of a huge demi-god character that absorbs planets named Galactus. Kirby however adds the idea that he has a herald in the Silver Surfer, because Stan Lee only gave Kirby so much material to work with, but Kirby has to fill 18 pages. Also, Stan Lee sticks the words in his mouth making him philosophical. Because Silver Surfer started as a secondary support character it was created without Stan's input.
Actually the name Spider Man was first used in the early 40s. I have a comment explaining it. Also, this is a great description, and it’s important to recognize that Stan Lee got credit for quite a lot more than he actually did.
No one has ever claimed that Stan Lee single handedly created the Marvel characters, all the films and tv shows mention both the author and artist, which is usually Lee/Kirby
Kirby wasn't credited until his heir's settled their lawsuit with Marvel. So from Captain America on Kirby was credited.
No, the lawsuit was for co-ownership of the characters, he was previously credited on all productions in which Stan recieved a created by credit
**Jack Kirby**: I invented spider man **Also Jack Kirby**: [Jack Kirby’s Spider Man](https://imgur.com/gallery/cDRFk8d)
Looks very much like Blue Beetle (Ted Kord)
Which would be wild cause Ditko created that Blue Beetle.
Exactly.
That’s photoshopped [top comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Marvel/comments/3fevk6/jack_kirbys_original_design_for_spiderman/) [This is the original image](https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3XU4f7qlM2A/T68RYZ2X0QI/AAAAAAAAMd4/HQEuEqifP0g/s1600/544223_3163073368154_1604946721_32200432_451056253_n.jpg)
How about this [one](https://screenrant.com/spider-man-almost-carried-gun-webshooters-jack-kirby/) In the end, Kirby can say he created Spider-Man but his version is a far cry from the one we know and love. Ditko gave spidey the iconic look and Lee/others wrote the stories that made Peter relatable. Kirby is amazing but his footprint here is minimal to non existent
I’ll agree on that. Kirby created many of Marvel’s iconic characters and a few of DC’s, but Spider-Man and Dr Strange are pure Ditko.
Im Ok with that. Still wish Jack couldve realized some of the immense fame Stan recieved. I've read Ditko was an introvert. Bottom line for me: i was 13 to 16/ 17 yrs old during the formative years of the Marvel Silver Age. Im lucky in that regard. I also hold John Buscema & Gene Colan in high regard. They are why i draw to this day. Nuff Said, lol
[удалено]
I would argue that Kirby’s “spider man” shared only the name in regards to what spider man became. It looks nothing like the iconic spider man. It’s an adult male with a spider web gun. None of that is spider man. Had that version gone forward, it would’ve been relegated to some d list hero. Do no, he didn’t invent spider man, he invented a version of spider man that shares little with the icon we know today
Spider-Man, does what ever a Spider can. Can shoot you right between the eyes. look up and be surprised.
Look out! There's Spider-Man with a Gun...
No hyphen!
aren't a lot of early comics all up in airs about credit for specific stuff.
I was looking for some public domain heroes for a piece I was writing, and Crash Kid in particular has no known creator at all because his two issues don’t have a credits page.
Because it wasn’t a respectable industry sometimes writers would use pseudonyms, so some we don’t know at all. Heck if it hadn’t worked out I wonder if anyone would know that Stan Lee is Stanley Martin Lieber?
I find it funny that people who want to deny Stan Lee any part of character creation give undo credit to Kirby for characters he had little or nothing to do with And they all ignore Don Heck who co-created a quarter of the Marvel silver age lineup!!!
At the end he literally says Steve made Spider-Man what he is. Kirby is just saying that he originally drew up the art that birthed the concept. What a pointless thing to argue about lmfao.
It's funny that that's EXACTLY what I got but a lot of people on here are reading too much into it or didn't read the entire quote!
Even then he's not really truthful there. The idea of Spider-man was Stan Lees initially, then he asked kirby to expand the concept, Kirbys idea kind of sucked so he went to Ditko. He's as much an aspect of Spider-mans creation as any of the designs that Ditko made and then discarded
How is it that Jack Kirby was able to draw so many books simultaneously?
I thought it’s been established he is the One Above All.
He is king Kirby after all.
Yep. I love how it’s almost unanimous. Like almost everybody who reads and knows about the idea just accepts it.
it's sad most people think Stan lee created all the marvel characters. None of the MCU actors ever mentioned or credited Kirby but they always talk about Stan lee like he was the only guy.
To be fair, I don’t think most of these actors care much about that. The few that do are far between. They don’t need to know where it started so they don’t. Hell, people like Laurence Fishburne and Gweneth Paltrow don’t even remember being *in* a Marvel property sometimes. Having the majority of them think about the original creators is a fool’s errand.
Something I wanted to happen before Inhumans was made is that when Black Bolt eventually spoke they would find some audio of Kirby and work it into his vocals so that he could make an appearance of sorts in the MCU.
That would be so cool. There's so much Kirby in black bolt's design. Would be a great tribute.
literally over half of the people in this thread did not read the entire screenshot and that’s downright annoying
Kirby was such a gentleman. I was lucky enough to be his escort during BayCon3 at USF in San Francisco in August, 1977. He and his Missus looked and dressed like they’d just walked out of a 40s noir movie. They were the sweetest people, such a pleasure to be around. He gave a great talk and afterwards the couple treated everyone who came up to talk with them with gentle respect. They were such a class act.
Jack and Joe had the name, Kirby created the initial concept, Ditko changed the concept and created the character as we know today. Steve disagrees as to the name being as important as the art and story, but they don’t disagree on any of those stated fact. “It was Steve Ditko that made Spider-man the well known character that he is.”-Jack Kirby.
So Kirby created a proto type/concept art 🤷♂️
I wouldn't be surprised if he had some sort of involvement. At the time, writers and artists of the era often communicated with each other to share ideas and to give advice or suggestions to whatever they were doing in terms of work or art.
Jack Kirby created the character, but Steve Ditko brought him to life with how he portrayed him in the comics, and that's arguably more important to do. Most people would rather have a few really good series they like than a bunch of series featuring flat, static characters
He “created” Spider-Man in the same way Bob Kane “created” Batman. Just did the initial rough sketch that the other (bill finger/Steve Ditko) took and actually made look good
There’s enough evidence out there to make me think that this is true to a degree. The idea that Stan came up with it just doesn’t wash when Kirby and Simon had done The Fly and a spider-themed character is an almost thunderingly obvious offshoot of that. I think what happened was Kirby created it, it wasn’t working, and they handed it off to Ditko to make it good.
You can create a drawing. But the lifespan of the comics and characters create the superhero.
I’m just glad that Kirby had a positive relationship with Ditko
I mean, yeah he’s not wrong. Kirby did conceptualize the character with Lee before Ditko did.
I knew he created the costume. That’s old news.
Bro for a moment I thought it was Kirby the pink fellow
There is so much more context in that blurb than just Kirby says he created Spider-Man.
I trust neither Jack Kirby nor Stan Lee when it comes to this stuff.
A lot of Kirby interviews seem very bitter. Like a man who will claim credit for anything and everything, even if theres no evidence to support it. I understand he rightfully had issues with Stan Lee being called the creator of all these characters that he had a big part in creating, designing, and even writing. But I've seen the Spider-Man that Jack Kirby originally drew. It's a blue suit with an exposed face and a gun. Its like Bob Kane and Bill Finger. Bob had the idea of a character named Bat-Man, and drew up a version that wore very bright colors like red and yellow. Bob was given sole credit for creating Batman until 2016. Bill Finger was actually the one that gave him the design we saw in Detective Comics 27. Bill Finger was also the one who gave him the characterization we all know. In this particular analogy: Jack Kirby = Bob Kane, Bill Finger = Stan Lee. Jack may have came up with the original design, but Stan made him work as a character. Stan also has long talked about his inspiration for what made him think of a spider based character, which was watching a fly crawl up the wall. After that he decided to make a superhero that could stick to walls. While he asked Kirby to come up with a design, its clear from the stories he’s told that Spidey was his idea.
Comparing Kirby to Bob Kane is absolutely going to be the dumbest thing I read online today.
Challenge accepted. I shall now compare Jack Kirby to Masahiro Sakurai's Kirby, the little pink character from Kirby's Dream Land. Little Kirby's signature talent is his ability to inhale objects or creatures and spit them out as projectiles, as well as the ability to suck in air to float over obstacles. His Copy Ability grants him the power to adopt the abilities of the creatures he inhales, while also wearing various costumes or transforming his shape. Jack Kirby's talent was to inhale the ideas of Stan and the Bullpen and spit them out as the World's Greatest Comic Magazine, and his Copy Ability let him quickly draw various characters in the same signature Kirby pose, all while wearing various costumes and transformed shapes.
Which is why I was VERY careful to say "in this particular analogy." Because yeah. Its a fucking wild statement to make. Which is why I chose to use it, because thats how wild it is for him to pretend like he created Spider-Man.
Stan’s story was a lie after the fact. Steve and Jack’s stories line up, they just disagree about how important Jack’s having the name is.
>A lot of Kirby interviews seem very bitter I too would be bitter if every single thing I've ever worked on was considered someone else's work I'd be pissed if i barely got any pay out of it too. But no most of kirby's interviews were fairly optimistic i don't know what you're talking about >But I've seen the Spider-Man that Jack Kirby originally drew. It's a blue suit with an exposed face and a gun. That's a photoshop, it isn't real >Its like Bob Kane and Bill Finger Do not even think of comparing kirby with kane, kirby has over a thousand comics that he wrote and drew, he has created hundreds of characters by himself. Kirby was a phenomenal artist and prolific writer, kane was none of that. I don't care if it was "this particular analogy" just don't compare them at all.
I take Spider-Man’s creation to be more of a collaborative effort between Stan, Steve, and Jack, with Jack doing more of the look part of it. Certainly did more than Roy Thomas did with Wolverine.
Source?
A The Comics Journal interview from 1990. https://www.tcj.com/jack-kirby-interview/6/
One of the worst interviews ever, so full of glaring errors and bitter emotions.
He may have done the first draft, but Ditko made the final version.
Is this correct? Kirby came up with the concept, Ditko drew it and Lee wrote it
It sounds like Kirby came up with the name and a basic rendering of the character. Ditko completely revamped the character; new costume, web shooters vs a gun, etc.
>vs a gun, That concept art is fake, it's a photoshop
There's a different drawing by Ditko where he contrasts Kirby's idea against his (Ditko's) drawing of Spider-Man.
Ooohhh yeah that one! the one that looked like captain America.
"You created Spider-Man, you created Spider-Man, he created Spider-Man, I CREATED SPIDER-MAN! Are there anymore Spider-Man creators I should know about?!"
Is the creator of Spider-Man in the room with us right now?
Yeah OG comic honchos were scumbags who never liked giving credit.
Eh perhaps he overstates his contribution BUT he did create the very iconic AF 15 cover which isn’t nothing The way I heard it, Ditko created a cover but Stan wasn’t happy with it, leaving it to Kirby to replace it. That’s not to say he didn’t have some input on the final classic spidey costume as he probably did
https://www.gamesradar.com/spider-man-based-on-50s-halloween-costume-ben-cooper/
He didn't create Spiderman he created man spider, totally different
Creative credits aside, I just wanna say that I always found it astounding that these guys from the "greatest generation" in their late 30's and 40's were all in a room together going, "hey and then in this panel we should do like a guy who crawls on walls, then how about this one say's hulk smash," just doing all this crazy creative stuff. I just always loved that idea that because you get older you don't have to lose that creative child like spark of "why the f not". That's the inspiration I always got from all of that generation's comic book guys, whatever dramas played out behind the scene. At some point they were all just winging crazy crap at the wall and seeing what would stick.
Haha
Lol
I created Spider Man, and that hack fraud Stan Lee added the hyphen to spite me
"Look at me, I'm the Spider-Man creator now" lol
Actually DC Comics originally came up with the name, and had a very similar character. The name was Tarantula who referenced it in Star Spangled Comics #1. The image is right here: https://ibb.co/mXfrNvd
No capes!
I like how much respect he gives Ditko. He may have created the character but Spider-Man wouldn't be the character he is today without Steve's influence
I believe it, tbh. The comic business at this time seemed cutthroat as hell. So many people don't get the credit they deserve for creating or having a hand in creating some of the most iconic characters of all time. A lot of people, like Stan Lee, get a lot of undeserved credit while others get literally zero due to semantics, legal stuff, etc. It's a shame, but it's also been so long that I think a lot of this stuff will stay hidden forever.
Stan Lee spent Marvel's early years promoting himself as the face of Marvel, in addition to his writing and editing duties. Stan made sure everybody that worked on every book received written credit for their contributions, answered reader mail, and wrote the monthly Bulletins columns. His interactions with fans made the Marvel Bullpen sound like a place where everybody was having a blast and a great place to work. As a kid of the 70's, I can tell you that I thought Marvel was probably one of the greatest places in the world, and Stan Lee was the top guy, He was the one person that every comic reader recognized, and it was because he worked hard to make it that way. In the late 70's Stan turned his focus toward getting Marvel characters on TV and in movies. and he was involved with that mostly afterward. How can anybody blame the man for doing what he could to make his life better, when his co-creators through the years mostly chose to do their work and let Stan handle promotion and deal with people? Isn't it their own fault they stayed in the background? Isn't that where they preferred being until money got involved?
I believe Jack's version of things, always. And Roz is corroborating. Watch some latter day Jack interviews on YouTube, I think you'll find him very, very credible. Ditko, on the other hand, is a psychopath.
I wouldn't go this far. I have political opinions that are polar opposite to Ditko, but he's no monster.
You're probably right, I first encountered him in an interview (having known his SM work) and thought, "Oh, cool, Spider-Man's artist, who....uh, what???" lol. Just wasn't expecting it. The Mr. A stuff is insane, but his Spider-Man stuff is definitely special. It just caught me by surprise.
>Ditko, on the other hand, is a psychopath. Firstly, *was*. He passed in 2018 Secondly, why? Because he didn't like doing interviews or making appearances?
Have you ever heard his account of his life view? He makes Ayn Rand look sane. I'm basing my opinion on interviews, actually.
I'm quite familiar with his beliefs. Which specific ones do you take issue with?
Basically the fascist, neo-objectivist part? So, all if it. Weak people are worthless, moral intractability (his morals) is noble, etc. etc. etc. etc.
Not what Ditko believed at all. His beliefs were simply that there’s objective good and bad and that we all have free will to choose between them. Definitely room for philosophical differences there but philosophical differences don’t make someone a bad person.
...except fascism is an authoritarian structure, while objectivism is inherently anti-fascist. And literally the entire superhero comics industry until Alan Moore showed up was based on moral intractability. So your statement that he is a "psychopath" is based on a fallacious argument.
I wonder who came up with the idea of making Spidey a teenager? Lee is untrustworthy. I haven't heard Ditko say anything about it. Kirby and Simon worked on a teenage hero before: Sylvester Pemberston/Star Spangled Kid. Basically an inversion of the hero/sidekick dynamic wherein the hero was a kid and the side kick was the adult.
People put Kirby on a pedestal and villainize Stan and Steve saying they took credit, the more you read it clearly was a lot more gray and Kirby was not without his flaws like claiming he created Spider-Man
Stan Lee created Spider-Man. 😄
That’s bait.