Thursday, September 15, 2011


It’s actually 32 days of blogging in this particular venue, but I
wasn’t keeping track and let my "monthiversary" pass without mention
before today.  I have over 50 followers and over 12,000 page views.
I don’t know if those are good numbers or not. 

The most viewed blogs have been “Return of the Vile Thing” and “Jim
Shooter’s Pants Are on Fire,” each with over 800 views.  You must
like reading about the bad boys. 

Rick Olney is still promoting his almost certainly not gonna happen
comics convention.  After receiving at least one letter from a real
attorney - Olney is notorious for claiming he has an army of legal
beagles at his command - Olney finally removed the names of several
guests who canceled their appearances after learning his history.
He is still claiming that a special Indiana Jones map is going to
be available at his non-event, even though the creator of the map
has pulled out of the show and wants the maps back.  This can only
go from bad to worst for Olney.

Jim Shooter? He’s still tall.  I assume he’s still blogging.  The
esteemed Harlan Ellison called me the other night to remind me of
the secret origin of the “Lurch” insult I directed at Shooter.  It
was what jurors secretly called Shooter after he testified at the
court proceedings in the lawsuit of “Michael Fleisher V. The Comics
Journal and Harlan Ellison,” which probably wasn’t the actual name
of the proceedings, but I don’t feel like looking it up.  Shooter
was supposed to be Fleisher’s killer witness, but the jury didn’t
believe him and, even less helpful to Fleisher’s ridiculous case,
didn’t like him even one small bit. I imagine Shooter’s version of
those events casts him as the Atticus Finch of comics.  The world
inside Shooter’s head has to be so much kinder to him that the one
the rest of us live in.

There is a pile of things to write about on top of my Sainted Wife
Barb’s hope chest.  Mostly we’re hoping to find the key that opens
it while we’re young enough to lift the lid.  But I digress and, as
noted, there are things to write about.


Via my local library, I got and read The Marvels Project: Birth of
the Super Heroes
[$34.99] by Ed Brubaker and Steve Epting.  I had
read a few issues of the eight-issue series previously, but sitting
down with the entire story was far more enjoyable.  The writing was
first rate with believable characterization throughout.  Epting’s
art was dynamic and told the story well.  The changes to previously
established continuity all made sense to me.  The cover gallery and
news stories clipped from The Daily Bugle were neat additions.  I
may have to buy a copy of this one.

ISBN 978-0-7851-4630-8


Not enjoyable for me was Grant Morrison’s Supergods: What Masked
Vigilantes, Miraculous Mutants, and a Sun God from Smallville Can
Teach Us About Being Human
[Spiegel & Grau; $28]. The pretentious
title was the least of my problems with the 13 pages of the book I
managed to read before sending it back to the library.

Morrison seemed dismissive of the inequities and indignities that
were visited on Superman creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, a
not uncommon trait of DC Comics employees.  Then there were a few
minor errors of fact.  But what ultimately ended my reading of this
book was when Morrison gleefully talked about how wonderful it was
that Superman was “set free of his creators.”

Arrogant and dickish in one phrase. Well played, sir. Assuming
that’s what you were going for. 

ISBN 978-1-4000-6912-5


A great many online bloggers and columnists are reviewing each and
every one of DC’s 52 reboots within days of their arrival at their
friendly neighborhood comics shop.  I feel no such urgency.  In the
fullness of time, a buddy of mine will loan me these books.  With
an open mind, I will read them...because I think it would terrific
for the comics industry if DC made a bunch of money off these new
books and a million times more terrific if the writers and artists
working on them were suitable enriched for their work.  But, again,
no sense of urgency to review them...which I’ll probably only do if
they are really good or really bad.

However, it’s been brought to my attention that Omac #1, featuring
the character created by the legendary Jack Kirby, does not have a
creator’s credit for Kirby.  The series is co-written by Dan DiDio
and co-written and drawn by Keith Giffen, who has been known to do
an obvious Kirby imitation.  

I know DiDio didn’t want my creator credit on Black Lightning Year
and actually tried to get away with that to the extent that the
first printing of the first issue lacked that credit. Then he got
my credit wrong for two or three issues, using “Anthony Isabella,”
a name I have never used professionally.  That’s typical behavior
for the woefully untalented DiDio. credit for Jack Kirby?  The King of Comics?  That’s a big
WTF moment if ever there was one.

I wonder if there is anyone working at DC with the stones to call
DiDio on this one. Probably not. Heck, there probably aren’t very
much industry pros not working at DC with the stones to step up and
do the right thing.  Sigh.

I’ll be back tomorrow with more stuff.

© 2011 Tony Isabella


  1. Tony, I also was surprised by the lack of credit for Kirby on OMAC. Seems strange, especially in a book in which they're quite obviously aping Kirby's style.

    I haven't picked up SUPERGODS for the reasons you describe. Much as I enjoy Morrison's work in general, I don't feel comfortable with his recent statements about Siegel and Shuster.

  2. There is a "created by Kirby" credit for the Demon who appears in Demon Knights which came out yesterday. Based on that, I can only hope it's an oversight that will be corrected in future issues.

    On an unrelated topic, Tony, I've been meaning to suggest this for a while...have you thought about setting up an Amazon Affiliates account for links to all the stuff you review and discuss? You'd get a little kickback on anyone who buys stuff through the understanding is that folks who have decent traffic get at least enough to splurge on a couple of free books once in a while.

    Love the blog!

  3. Matt...thanks for the suggestion. I'll be doing that in the near future. I want to keep the blog up and running for a month or so first.

  4. Great Harlan Ellison anecdote, Tony. It reminded me of an Ellison story of my own, which I shared on my site:

    Thanks for bringing up a great memory.

  5. I think you'll find that it's not the first time DC have overlooked Kirby's credit on OMAC. I guess they figure that once they relaunch a title then the original creator credit no longer applies.

    And people complain about Marvel and their reluctance to give Kirby an official credit.

  6. Thanks for pointing out the Kirby credit thing. One of the goals of the Marvel Boycott is to get a Kirby blurb into those books but if DC stops doing it there goes the industry standard.

  7. DC has screwed over just as many creators as Marvel, myself included. That's why I find this Marvel Boycott absurd and further evidence that online fandom is ridiculously biased in favor of DC.