>When working with existing “franchises,” any good writer will return to the source material from time to time, to see if s/he can divine from that work something that might have been missed before. This is true whether the work is good, bad, or indifferent. The best place to start, however, no matter what the context, is not by saying “the creator didn’t get it right.” That’s the worst kind of hubris. I have been pilloried for my work on Superman, Spider-Man, Doom Patrol, and in the early days even FF and X-Men, yet I have never once said the creators of those series/characters “didn’t get it right.” It disgusts me not only to read Gaiman saying this—about Jack Kirby of all people!—but to see the cartwheels people are willing to turn in order to make his words seem other than what they are. Apparently, dissing one of the greatest talents this industry has produced is okay, as long as you’re on the Approved List. Next, how Eisner screwed up the Spirit, and Lee and Ditko on Spider-Man—what the heck were they thinking?? Maybe you should keep in mind, then, that the only person who knows if a creator “got it right” is the creator himself. Unless Kirby told Gaiman he felt he didn’t “get it right” on The Eternals, it’s pretty fucking arrogant of Gaiman to make such a statement. “Kirby didn’t get it right, and I probably won’t either” sound like it should read “I don’t want to do this series.”
>Anyway, what if Superman almost got to fuck Jack Kirby's wife in an alien porn?
He sounds like he's got the right idea. If I was ever hired to write for any established franchises I'd want to constantly go over old source material for what I was writing for. I wouldn't want to follow it religiously as trying to make sense of the rules of any given universe will be all over the place with the multiple writers and extensive lore, but I wouldn't want to abandon tried and true fans who admire the OG, and depending on whether I was doing a retelling or continuation of a story, it'd give a strong foundation to work off of, simply by introducing new players to the story, re-establishing well known players or potentially adding to them without insulting or taking away from the legacy they already have.If I was younger I'd probably make the same arrogant statements as Gaiman though. So on the other hand Jack Kirby labelling Gaiman as arrogant feels kinda salty. Both are gifted writers and talents in their own right with their own ways of going about their projects.
>>147119035The quote in question:>It was kind of the opportunity to create a mythology. In 1602 I re-created everything that had happened in the Marvel Universe because they'd got it right. The Eternals still had that amazing Jack Kirby outpouring of ideas, and there were some amazing things. But he didn't get it right. It's sort of weird and lumpy.>>147119150That's John Byrne, not Jack Kirby.
>>147119080Almost isn't does. You can dance the line just never cross it.
>>147119150I can't pretend I wouldn't have my own personal biases or outright fanboy zeal where I want to do MY story with MY favorite characters but I feel like I'd at least TRY to make it work within the toybox because that's the universe I wanted to play in anyways. Not that I think I'd half ass it or try to damage an assignment I wasn't thrilled about but if you handed me a character or team, say Spider-man or X-men then I'd be writing Spider-man or X-men. At the very least I wouldn't make them a heroine addicted jazz critic who's NOT radioactive.
>>147119035He's not wrong and most of this thread is going to be faggots refusing the admit that.>>147119080Like this faggot. Eat shit.
>>147119080Why did he have such a hate boner for Kirby and his wife again?
>>147119277Okay but he didn't get it rightThe Eternals are the least of Kirby's Modern Gods by farAlso huge balls on Byrne sticking up for Kirby's rights as creator after he was dead, too bad about the bootlicking when he was alive I guess
>>147119035You never see any modern photos of Byrne, it's always just this one and the gun one.
>>147119035>The best place to start, however, no matter what the context, is not by saying “the creator didn’t get it right.” That’s the worst kind of hubris.>Quicksilver and Magneto should be related because they both have white hair>Norman Osborn and Sandman should be related because Steve Ditko gave them the same hair style>Vision shouldn't be capable of emotion and the Avengers shouldn't regard him as a personByrne's own deeds don't agree with his words, he did sometimes think the creators "got it wrong". But he was the one who was wrong>>147119428Byrne was outspoken as a 'loyal company man' when a big creators' rights argument flared up in the industry, Gerber and Kirby made a comic that portrayed Byrne as spineless and dickless, Byrne retaliated by turning a character based on Kirby's wife into a porn star.>>147120042How many modern photos would you expect to see from old comic industry guys who have retired a long time ago, or just burned their bridges with most major publishers? If he's not active on social media there probably aren't modern photos online.
>>147119035Weird, I always thought that was a picture of Mark Waid.IMO Gaiman was right here, Kirby's best work is undisputed, but the Eternals wasn't it. There are some great ideas in there, but they're poorly executed, and the run is frankly pretty boring a lot of the time. The only memorable concept from the run is the Celestials, and the Eternals themselves are probably the least interesting group of gods Kirby ever created.
>>147119035I can't find so many words to describe the difference between respect for another man's vision and obedience to it.
>>147120639He also dumped the Kapatelis family from WW and created division in fans by introducing the similar Sandsmarks. He claimed he didn't want to touch what others had done before and to just introduce his own new toys, but it just made more enmity. And then, he also complicated Donna Troy even more.
>>147119035Meh, sometimes the creator didn't get it right. Saying for example that Lee and Kirby didn't get X-Men "right" doesn't seem like an insult, since the book was never popular until it was completely retooled by different people in 1975.Maybe Gaiman or Feige or whoever were arrogant to think they could make the Eternals popular when Kirby couldn't, but the series flopped in spite of some interesting ideas, so the part of "getting it right" where it doesn't flop was not achieved.
>>147120042
>>147119428>>147120639Sad thing is, Byrne actually loves Kirby so reading that must've really stung.
>>147119035Definitely beats retcons.Also from what I saw back then, Gaiman's Eternals was shit anyways.>>147120042As long as it's not a mugshot, one tragedy less...
>>147122761The difference is the people who retooled the X-men in 75 didn't go out of the way to sabotage the point. They took the hook the work had and reworked that to be more interesting. This is more like saying Kirby and Lee didn't get it right, let's ignore the rest of history and shoot straight to Krakoa.
>>147124203I'm scared to go to Canada.
>>147124691He's right here in the states.
>>147124308His Eternals was better than Kirby's.
>>147124939Maybe if you're gay.
>>147124946I'm straight. What now?
>>147119035What did Gaiman say Kirby 'didn't get right'?
>>147125910see >>147119277Mythology, it seems.
>>147122697In fairness, that's not really the same situation, Perez didn't create Wonder Woman, you can't argue "the creator didn't get it right" about his run. Whether Byrne just didn't care about the supporting cast Perez created for Wonder Woman, or just wanted his own OCs for the potential royalties if they took off, simply replacing them with his own characters is the type of thing that happens sometimes when a new writer takes over a book. It's not the same thing as making changes to Wonder Woman herself and arguing Marston didn't get it right. Sadly, he's far from the first person to mess with Donna Troy and make her too complicated, though he really didn't help her.
Because of the nature of the superhero comics industry, which is parading the rotting corpses of these characters, at times to the original creators' dismay, this sentiment is pretty weak.
>>147119035And?
>>147122761>>147124437No one got X-Men right.
>>147124203Dude really does look like a freak
>>147119452He's not sticking up for Kirby.He's shit talking Gaiman and using Kirby as a prop.
>>147127518>to the original creators' dismayDon't sell the rights then
