logo Sign In

The original Marvel Star Wars series — Page 12

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Inspired by a wonderful exchange I had with Silverwook a while back (thanks Silver!) I finally tracked down a copy of Marvel’s paperback edition of the TESB adaptation. I had it as a kid back in '81 or so, and had acquired it primarily for the famous ‘original Yoda’ that had been based on a Ralph McQuarrie painting and been Marvel’s only visual reference at the time (and obviously amended for later editions). Of course the book was lost to me over time, so it was super cool to have it again some 38 years later!

The interesting thing while reading (or rereading) this amazing little artifact was just how acutely those feelings came back to me - feelings of a time that predates my having a VHS of TESB where I could memorise every piece of dialogue, a time when the burning questions about Vader and ‘the other’ had not been answered, a time when this comic book was pretty much my only version of the film. I guess it’s like getting your favourite old Led Zeppelin album on vinyl again - no matter how many times you’ve played the CD (or Spotify!) there’s something about experiencing its original format that brings back those feelings in such a vivid way.

I haven’t read this adaptation in quite a while (I do have the regular 6-issue version packed away in a box somewhere) so it is/was quite a trip reliving the different dialogue, the inclusion of such extras as the Wampa subplot, Luke’s lightsaber training with (purple) Yoda, the greater emphasis on the love triangle etc etc. One cool little detail I had completely forgotten was Luke thinking he’d spotted a beacon as he began his descent into the Dagobah swamp - indeed a neat way of explaining how he managed to land in just the right vicinity for Yoda’s entrance!

It also brought back memories of the many times I would do side-by-side comparisons of the Williamson/Garzon artwork with photo stills from the movie (usually TESB bubble-gum cards). Some panels were also clearly derived from McQuarrie paintings, and comparing the artworks was endlessly fascinating to me.

So anyhow, I just thought I’d share this little nostalgic moment with you guys while the tingle was still fresh, and again - thanks to Silverwook for lighting the way.

May the Force…etc

Author
Time

You’re welcome!

I’m surprised there was never a purple variant of the McQuarrie concept Yoda figure Hasbro put out. 😃

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

You’re welcome!

I’m surprised there was never a purple variant of the McQuarrie concept Yoda figure Hasbro put out. 😃

Indeed! I’d cough up the cash for that!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Even though I had the OT on VHS available to me as a kid (the unaltered versions luckily), I still loved the movie adaptation comics. I was lucky to get ahold of the Norwegian ANH TPB from 1978 when I was about 8 years old, and I shortly after managed to track down the re-coloured OT adaptations released in the mid 90’s.

I would actually bring them with me on trips and holidays so that I could always “watch”/read SW wherever I went. Norwegians are quite fond of their “hytte”, which is basically a combination of a cabin and a summer house, and even though they had some modern conveniences, a VCR wasn’t one of them. And since we often spent several weeks in the cabin I’d always bring lots of comics to read, and the OT adaptations was a permanent inclusion.

Star Wars is Surrealism, not Science Fiction (essay)
Original Trilogy Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Beyond the OT Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Amazon link to my novel; Dawn of the Karabu.

Author
Time

I have the treasury edition of The Empire Strikes Back adaptation , to me it is the best way to enjoy it . The colors are much better than in the monthly comic and Al Williamson and Carlos Garzon’s artwork really shines in the large format .

https://screamsinthevoid.deviantart.com/

Author
Time

screams in the void said:

I have the treasury edition of The Empire Strikes Back adaptation , to me it is the best way to enjoy it . The colors are much better than in the monthly comic and Al Williamson and Carlos Garzon’s artwork really shines in the large format .

One of the first Conans I ever read was a treasury edition (lent to me by a High School senior when I was 13). Pretty spectacular format! If I remember correctly it featured the ‘Rogues in the House’ adaptation.

There was an article somewhere explaining how/why the various versions of TESB had different colourists. The paperback I recently re-acquired has some bizarre colour choices ie Lando with a green shirt and red cape!

Author
Time

I would guess they were working off black and white stills as happened with the SW adaptation, so nobody knew what the actual colors were? How else can one explain purple Yoda?

On the flip side of the coin, I vaguely recall some Gold Key Star Trek comics with wrong uniform colors in the mid 70’s, when finding out what the proper colors were should have been as easy a catching a TOS rerun. 😉

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

I would guess they were working off black and white stills as happened with the SW adaptation, so nobody knew what the actual colors were? How else can one explain purple Yoda?

On the flip side of the coin, I vaguely recall some Gold Key Star Trek comics with wrong uniform colors in the mid 70’s, when finding out what the proper colors were should have been as easy a catching a TOS rerun. 😉

That makes sense - the TESB stuff, not the Star Trek (although I guess colour TVs were quite rare back then). I also love the shots of Vader on the bridge of his Star Destroyer with only that single window visible - clearly the photo reference lacked the later details of the matte painting.

One of my favourite Marvel adaptations was the Close Encounters one, where they had no photographic reference at all and no permission to use actor likenesses! I think it’s pretty amazing what was achieved under those circumstances!

Author
Time

I recall Marvel’s Battlestar Galactica adaptation ran into similar issues. The artists got too close to the actor likenesses somewhere in the middle of the run. They also ran afoul of the differences between the theatrical and tv versions of the pilot, and other last minute changes, like the Cylons being reptilian creatures instead of robots who turned on the flesh and blood Cylons. Baltar was also inexplicably drawn bald in the super sized edition.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

I recall Marvel’s Battlestar Galactica adaptation ran into similar issues. The artists got too close to the actor likenesses somewhere in the middle of the run. They also ran afoul of the differences between the theatrical and tv versions of the pilot, and other last minute changes, like the Cylons being reptilian creatures instead of robots who turned on the flesh and blood Cylons. Baltar was also inexplicably drawn bald in the super sized edition.

Wow, it’s all coming back to me! My brother had the paperback version of that one. I liked it! I think the duress under which these adaptations were created made for much more interesting versions than a direct and accurate adaptation would.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yeah, I’d be interested to know how many Marvel movie adaptations were done without seeing the finished film. Did they all feature scenes that were ultimately cut? Jack Kirby’s version of 2001: A Space Odyssey being the exception as it was done around 1976.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

Yeah, I’d be interested to know how many Marvel movie adaptations were done without seeing the finished film. Did they all feature scenes that were ultimately cut? Jack Kirby’s version of 2001: A Space Odyssey being the exception as it was done around 1976.

An interesting one (for me at least) was the Conan '82 adaptation. It’s vastly different to the finished film, but over the years it has become increasingly evident that it was pretty accurate in terms of the original script. That’s what’s so fascinating to me - it’s almost as if two parallel versions of these movies were being created. A lot of the stuff that seemed so inaccurate in the TESB adaptation has shown up in deleted scenes and script drafts.

ROTJ was probably the most ‘film accurate’ adaptation I was aware of back in the day, but for me it arguably has better dialogue than the movie in a number of places. I see it as a kind of ‘what if ROTJ had been directed by someone else’.

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

SilverWook said:

Yeah, I’d be interested to know how many Marvel movie adaptations were done without seeing the finished film. Did they all feature scenes that were ultimately cut? Jack Kirby’s version of 2001: A Space Odyssey being the exception as it was done around 1976.

An interesting one (for me at least) was the Conan '82 adaptation. It’s vastly different to the finished film, but over the years it has become increasingly evident that it was pretty accurate in terms of the original script. That’s what’s so fascinating to me - it’s almost as if two parallel versions of these movies were being created. A lot of the stuff that seemed so inaccurate in the TESB adaptation has shown up in deleted scenes and script drafts.

ROTJ was probably the most ‘film accurate’ adaptation I was aware of back in the day, but for me it arguably has better dialogue than the movie in a number of places. I see it as a kind of ‘what if ROTJ had been directed by someone else’.

This reminds me of the original Back to the Future novelization

ROTJ Storyboard Reconstruction Project

Author
Time

timdiggerm said:

Shopping Maul said:

SilverWook said:

Yeah, I’d be interested to know how many Marvel movie adaptations were done without seeing the finished film. Did they all feature scenes that were ultimately cut? Jack Kirby’s version of 2001: A Space Odyssey being the exception as it was done around 1976.

An interesting one (for me at least) was the Conan '82 adaptation. It’s vastly different to the finished film, but over the years it has become increasingly evident that it was pretty accurate in terms of the original script. That’s what’s so fascinating to me - it’s almost as if two parallel versions of these movies were being created. A lot of the stuff that seemed so inaccurate in the TESB adaptation has shown up in deleted scenes and script drafts.

ROTJ was probably the most ‘film accurate’ adaptation I was aware of back in the day, but for me it arguably has better dialogue than the movie in a number of places. I see it as a kind of ‘what if ROTJ had been directed by someone else’.

This reminds me of the original Back to the Future novelization

I’m not very familiar with Back to the Future, but that was a great read! And yes, it’s so fascinating how these things turned out given the circumstances of their creation ie being made to come out in time for (or even before) the movies. Dark Horse re-did the Star Wars adaptation in the 90s and it was completely accurate to the film (of course) and boring as hell IMO!

Author
Time

The only thing worse was their dull muted recoloring of the Marvel originals. The anonymous kid who colorized the black and white Star Wars Weekly issues I once bought at a curio shop could have done better. 😛

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

SilverWook said:

The only thing worse was their dull muted recoloring of the Marvel originals. The anonymous kid who colorized the black and white Star Wars Weekly issues I once bought at a curio shop could have done better. 😛

I actually really liked the recoloured versions, though that might simply be because I had those versions as a kid. However, the colours were quite accurate to the movies and at least they didn’t hide the art in dozens of gimmicky effects like the most recent ones did.

https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/The-original-Marvel-Star-Wars-series/id/58853/page/4#1178669

Although I don’t find recolouring comics to be that necessary (generally speaking), if they should try it again in the future, I think a combination of the 1997 and the 2015 version would be the best choice. At least the 2015 version tried to be colourful, while the 1997 version kept the colouring simple and unobtrusive. Something similar to the Dark Horse Classic Star Wars series would probably work best.

Star Wars is Surrealism, not Science Fiction (essay)
Original Trilogy Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Beyond the OT Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Amazon link to my novel; Dawn of the Karabu.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yeah, special editioning the comic was possibly the dumbest thing they could have done.

Why can’t they just use the original coloring? Did they lose the negatives or something?

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

SilverWook said:

Yeah, special editioning the comic was possibly the dumbest thing they could have done.

Why can’t they just use the original coloring? Did they lose the negatives or something?

Well, it makes sense for for Dark Horse and Marvel to want to modernize these comics, especially since they’re based on famous movies. Most people under a certain age won’t understand why the OT adaptations (or any older comics) has such wacky colours. For people who actually grew up with these comics, or younger fans like me who reads/collects them, its obvious that the old newspaper-print needed vibrant, over-the-top colours, in order to pop out. But on modern glossy paper, or digitally, it can be quite weird and even confusing to some. This effects SW twice as much since there are several movies as reference points.

So as long as Marvel provides the original colours in one form or another (which they do), I don’t hold it against them for wanting to modernize it for newer/younger readers. They could of course just draw new adaptations, but I personally appreciate that they instead choose to reintroduce new readers to the work of Chaykin and Williamson.


And while on the subject of the 1997 SE comics; I just flipped through the ESB SE and noticed that on one page Boba Fett has the exact same colour scheme as Jango in AOTC. I wonder if that’s a coincidence or if someone at Lucasfilm saw this page at some point and figured they’d borrow the same look when designing Jango a few years later.

Star Wars is Surrealism, not Science Fiction (essay)
Original Trilogy Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Beyond the OT Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Amazon link to my novel; Dawn of the Karabu.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

And yet, it’s those vibrant colors many a comic based film tries to emulate. I had reprints of Fantastic Four and Batman when I was a kid, and I appreciate that they didn’t futz with the colors now. Probably because they hadn’t thought of it, or didn’t want to spend money on doing so. Recoloring comics is almost as bad as colorizing black and white movies. At least those films have disclaimers about how they were altered from the original.

And wow, good catch! Was the coloring on 4-LOM always like that? Makes him look like a cyclops rather than an insect headed droid.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

SilverWook said:

And yet, it’s those vibrant colors many a comic based film tries to emulate. I had reprints of Fantastic Four and Batman when I was a kid, and I appreciate that they didn’t futz with the colors now. Probably because they hadn’t thought of it, or didn’t want to spend money on doing so. Recoloring comics is almost as bad as colorizing black and white movies. At least those films have disclaimers about how they were altered from the original.

I like the idea of a disclaimer, and I think its strange that its not normal in the comic industry to include one. I bought a Marvel “True Believers” reprint of SW #1 a while back and was disappointed to find that it was the 2015 recoloured version. Of course it only cost $1, but it was still annoying, and when the whole gimmick is that they reprint classic comics its strange that they didn’t make it clear it was recoloured. I’ve had similar problems with digital issues from Walter Simonson’s run on Thor. Random issues had the new colours, while the rest were the original 80’s colours. I even thought the new colours were surprisingly well done, but I intended to buy the originals and got something else instead.

Recoloured versions really should be labelled as some kind of “redux” or “special” edition at the very least. Or even, in some cases, as a kind of “director’s cut” as was the case with Batman: The Killing Joke were the original artist decided to recolour it himself. To me recolouring is the same as the SW SE, I don’t mind it existing, but they should be clearly labelled (which unfortunately they rarely are) and the originals should always be made available (which they luckily are most of the time).

SilverWook said:

And wow, good catch! Was the coloring on 4-LOM always like that? Makes him look like a cyclops rather than an insect headed droid.

Assuming that the “restored” colours in the TPB’s are accurate, then it looked similar, but not quite so obvious. The “eyes” didn’t stand out quite so much. The funny thing about this page is that all of the bounty hunters have odd colours, including Bossk who’s green instead of orange. In the rest of the comic everyone has more or less the correct colours.

I’m also wondering if people in 1997 complained about the ANH SE comic being a bit drab colour-wise, because the ESB one is somewhat more vibrant despite still going for more “movie-accurate” colours.

Star Wars is Surrealism, not Science Fiction (essay)
Original Trilogy Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Beyond the OT Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Amazon link to my novel; Dawn of the Karabu.

Author
Time

This is regarding another Lucasfilm Marvel Adaptation that has different or incorrect art from the film.

The Howard the Duck 1986 Movie Adaptation has amazing art from Kyle Baker (one of his first Marvel jobs and he drew it with huge style). The final monster in the film was the huge scorpion looking creature beautifully designed by Phil Tippet. In the comic adaptation, this creature is missing and is replaced by a giant Duck that looks just like Howard but huge and monster sized.

It’s really strange and obviously a place holder of some kind. It makes me wonder how late in the design process they settled on that Scorpion and what Kyle Baker was told to put there. Also from my own memory that adaptation came out a few weeks after the film came out which means they never even went back to correct it knowing it was wrong and let it publish with the incorrect monster at the end.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Thought this was quite funny;

This was an advertisement for the regular SW series in Return of the Jedi #2. It re-purposed Tom Palmer’s cover for SW #70 (“The Stenax Shuffle”) with some added speech bubbles.


I also just found out that the ROTJ miniseries was coloured differently for the TPB. Does anyone know why this was done?
Source

Star Wars is Surrealism, not Science Fiction (essay)
Original Trilogy Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Beyond the OT Documentaries/Making-Ofs (YouTube, Vimeo, etc. finds)
Amazon link to my novel; Dawn of the Karabu.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Interesting that none of those guys look like any of Jabba’s henchmen we know. The guy shooting Luke’s hand would make for a cool action figure though.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ratpack1961 said:

This is regarding another Lucasfilm Marvel Adaptation that has different or incorrect art from the film.

The Howard the Duck 1986 Movie Adaptation has amazing art from Kyle Baker (one of his first Marvel jobs and he drew it with huge style). The final monster in the film was the huge scorpion looking creature beautifully designed by Phil Tippet. In the comic adaptation, this creature is missing and is replaced by a giant Duck that looks just like Howard but huge and monster sized.

It’s really strange and obviously a place holder of some kind. It makes me wonder how late in the design process they settled on that Scorpion and what Kyle Baker was told to put there. Also from my own memory that adaptation came out a few weeks after the film came out which means they never even went back to correct it knowing it was wrong and let it publish with the incorrect monster at the end.

I would love to see an image of that!

Maybe Lucasfilm/Universal didn’t want the reveal of the Dark Overlord spoiled? Much like the ad campagain for the film itself kept Howard mostly hidden. There were even two versions of the music video. The one that ran after the movie was out showed Howard’s face.
Howard fighting a giant version of himself seems more like a situation from the original comics though.
Given the reception of the film at the time, Marvel may simply have written the adaptation off and didn’t care to revise it.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?