screams in the void said:
ZkinandBonez said:
A while back I found these six pages from an old article about the “Goodwin-years” of Marvel Star Wars. I don’t know what magazine this is from, but I made them into a PDF and figured I’d share it here.
‘Star Wars Under Archie Goodwin’ by Kurt Busiek
Cool article , thank you for sharing . I saw Archie Goodwin signing and talking to fans about this series at the Chicago Comic Con back in early 1995 and he was one hell of a nice guy. I think he had a great handle on the characters , I have to disagree with part of this article though as I thought his first story arc on the water world felt like it could have been an awesome Star Wars movie and it had the sense of grand scale and pacing that are a Star Wars hallmark.
I agree. “Waterworld” is a pretty fun story, and I think it would have made a fun animated movie (a what-if idea I’ve already played with for fun), though back in back in 1978 it was definitely a, for the lack of a better word, oddity. I think nowadays it’s more common to gravitate towards SW stories without the Empire, but back then it probably felt kinda weird. In one of the letters columns someone complained about the lack of Imperials prior to the Siege at Yavin story-line. I guess back then when there was just one movie (or two by the time of the article) fans really just wanted simple Rebellion vs Empire stories like in the movie(s). Nowadays that idea can to some fans border on the mundane. I personally think “The Wheel” story-line is the most interesting and well-balance story. It’s a perfect blend of the new ideas from “waterworld” and the more movie-like ideas of fighting the Empire.
screams in the void said:
And while I like that Infantino had a quirky style that got the essence of the characters in interpretation , I am partial to Walter Simonson or Ron Frenz with Tom Palmer . Goodwin did write some of the best stories though and David Michellinie wrote the penultimate arc between issues 55 and 63 with the Shira Brie /Pariah story arc.
Though I’ve enjoyed pretty much all of the original Marvel SW stories, both plot and art, I’ve personally always gravitated towards the more “cartoonish” art style of Infantino. It just works for me. The Goodwin/Infantino stories almost feel like watching a SW cartoon in comic form. I’m a big fan of Simonson’s work (Thor and Ragnarök especially), but I unfortunately think Tom Palmer’s inking kind of watered down Simonson’s unique style beyond recognition. It’s still good, but it’s not pure-Simonson. It almost looks Al Williamson-esque. If Simonson had been able to ink his own work, like he did on some of the covers, I probably would have loved these stories a lot more. The post-Goodwin stories were great as well, but I always felt that Goodwin was a bit more adventurous and straight-forward. The post-ESB story-lines could get a little complicated at times (for me at least). It really just boils down to preference.
screams in the void said:
One of the things I like most about Goodwin though , and he mentioned this himself in the letters column of one of the issues he wrote, was that he realized Darth Vader was too good a villian to be over used and was more effective when used sparingly so he had more of an impact .This is one thing Current Marvel does not get . While some of it has been ok in my opinion , having a Darth Vader series misses the point.
Depends on which of the two Vader series you’re talking about. The new one has been great in my opinion, but that really hinges on what Darth Vader has become in the post-PT era. Back in the original Marvel years he was through-and-through a villain. And a villain like Vader had to be used sparingly so as to not make him into a goofy Skeletor-type that was constantly out-witted by the good guys.
The new Vader however, is more of a tragic and sympathetic character. Sure, that was present in the 80’s as well, but it’s much more in focus now. And although I’m hardly a great admirer of ROTS, I’ve really enjoyed the new Vader series because it picks up immediately after ep. III. I think it’s fascinating to read a series where you’re rooting for the gradually corruption of a previously good(-ish) person.
But that’s what’s so fascinating to me about comparing the old and the new Marvel series, they have such vastly different starting points. The source material is completely different, despite sharing a few of the same films.
In the end though, the originals, both film and comics, have a simplicity to them that in my opinion just can’t be beat.
screams in the void said:
And back to the article , yeah ,Michellinie’s Tarkin/Death Star story was a bit of a rehash , but it did anticipate the events of ROTJ and the same could be said of TFA. I also enjoyed a lot of the stories written by Jo Duffy with both Ron Frenz and Cynthia Martin prior to them getting their hands tied and the series getting a little wonky the last few issues .
The Tarkin-weapon story was one of the Marvel SW stories I actually owned and read as a kid (buying old comics was both cheaper and more fun than the new ones), and I never had a problem with it. It was a creative solution, and a fair bit more inventive than just building another DS. My only complaint is that they could have spent more time with it. They blow it up a tad too quick and easy. However the “kill Darth Vader” conspiracy was a pretty interesting sub-plot.
I think Duffy’s work should be commended regardless of what one might think about the stories themselves. That she managed to keep SW alive for several years after ROTJ was no small responsibility. (And I guess it was as good a time as any to experiment.) As a side note, I really like her “Silent Drifting” story. Any PT-era story made before the actual prequels, will always be greatly fascinating to me.
