Comic Book Plus Forum
Comic And Book Related => Comic Talk => Topic started by: narfstar on February 21, 2009, 10:47:52 AM
-
Thanks Eric for getting something for everyone. Nice selections. Thanks in advance for scanning Fanoman bchat. Given the talent and early start Centaur should have been one of the most major of players. So many of their superheroes are just a little different compared to rest that I guess they did not have the appeal then that they do now. Amazing Man was meant to be their star but was never a breakaway hit. May have been his early lack of a costume and later not much of a costume that kept him out of the limelight. Maybe it was the editing or writing. At least we have the issues that we have now to enjoy.
-
Yoc - Yes, the 4 Most books are "Top Priority" in as much as I want to get them scanned at least before I finish working on Fantoman. My hope is to get everything scanned and uploaded to the site within two weeks. Weekends are never a good time to scan and I have to do other stuff that needs my attention early this week, but hopefully Fantoman will be up before the end of the month, with the other books following shortly after that.
narfstar - Amazing Man was headlining two books at one point, so Centaur had at least one "star" ... maybe not at the same level as Superman or Captain America, but still. My guess would be that a lack of available copies of the comics NOW affects the perception of how popular the characters may have actually been THEN. I don't understand the decision to stop producing stories for Fantom, Masked Marvel and The Arrow at the end of 1940 (yes, Arrow # 3 was published in '41 but that was 10 months after issue 2 hit the stands so that barely counts as far as I'm concerned ... seems more like an after-thought that it got published at all). All three characters were at least half-decently received by the readers or else they wouldn't have eventually been given their own books. Maybe poor distribution or a lack of funds was a major factor in Centaur's demise, but it seems more likely that at some point, the guys in charge of Centaur just didn't know what they were doing. I mean, why wouldn't you take Fantom, Arrow and Masked Marvel and throw them all into one book and see what happens? There also seemed to be a lack of confidence in newer characters, with a lot of heroes towards the end only appearing once or just a handful of times, like Solarman, Sparkler, The Marksman or TNT (not "Todd", but the other one). How did they guage the popularity of a character when they only give them, at best, three months to live or die? That wasn't even long enough to get sales figures back for the first appearance. I don't know, it just seems weird.
-
I agree that AM was their star, which says something. He was not exactly mainstream. There is a unique quality about Centaur that I love. I think it is the same uniqueness that was not as well loved then. I may be way off but given the art talents that they had working for them they should still be around. The Arrow and Fantoman are more mainstream, and got books, but I do not thing they could carry them off in sales figures. They had a fantastic line-up of characters but I do not think they could find one that would really sale a book on his own merits alone. Anthologies were the way to go but they had to have an exceptional headliner. Marvel went through a rotating cast trying to find a headliner for some of its books. With covers prominently displayed, I believe it was the headliner that sold the book while the backups aided in its success.
-
I've always heard that Centaur's biggest problem was bad distribution, and their books just didn't get the newsstand exposure that other publishers did. There does also seem to be some really odd editorial choices going on, but the one that's always baffled me was the decision to make Stars And Stripes basically a clone of Amazing-Man Comics, instead of the more obvious option of an "All-Star" book featuring Aman, Masked Marvel, the Arrow, etc. I can't really think of any other company that published two different titles with nearly the same line-up of features.
-comicsnorth
-
but the one that's always baffled me was the decision to make Stars And Stripes basically a clone of Amazing-Man Comics, instead of the more obvious option of an "All-Star" book featuring Aman, Masked Marvel, the Arrow, etc.
If you look at the last issues of each book, you'll see that, aside from Amazing Man being in both, they didn't have the same line-up even though they did start-out that way. Amazing Man Comics 26 had Aman, Blue Lady, King of Darkness, Nightshade and Electric Ray while Stars & Stripes 6 had Aman, Dr Synthe, Mighty Man & Super-Ann, Minimidget, Shark and Iron Skull. Obviously S&S was given the proven features of "AMC", which kind of makes sense for a company that might not have been doing well financially, while AMC was introducing a new line-up.
I can't really think of any other company that published two different titles with nearly the same line-up of features.
At the time [mid-41], Centaur wasn't truly publishing any of their books on a monthly schedule, and only twice were S&S and AMC both published in the same month, so their sharing features is understandable [in a way] since together they essentially make-up one monthly book ... well, almost monthly.
With covers prominently displayed, I believe it was the headliner that sold the book while the backups aided in its success
That's a good point, narfstar, but I never really saw the covers of any of the Centuar books as being their strongest point. Nedor, Timely, Fox and nearly everyone else seemed to get the idea that a great-looking cover could sell a mediocre book, and all DC had to do was slap Batman or Superman on a cover and they made money. While the Centaur covers are ok to look at, they're not, for the most part, all that spectacular.
-
While it's true that Amazing-Man and Stars & Stripes ending up with fairly different line-ups, in many cases, these features were created by the same artists, making it difficult to understand how putting out two roughly bimonthly titles with most of the same creators, some doing the same characters and some not, was a better business move than putting out one monthly. I doubt any deadlines were saved by running Electric Ray in place of Mighty Man. And if Centaur's distribution was as spotty as I've heard, it must have been aggravating for their readers when continued stories like Mighty Man's battle with the Witch had chapters that ran from one title back to the other, assuming that kids cared about stuff like that back then.
It still seems to me that filling a title like Stars & Stripes with the lead features of their other titles would have made more financial sense than cloning another title and then running a bunch of random tryout features thru both. As much as I enjoy Mighty Man & the Shark, I have to assume that Masked Marvel and the Arrow had to have been better draws, since they did get their own titles, while the Shark only made two cover appearances (and one of those was just a giant version of his hand!), and Mighty Man only one. Admittedly, that one was on Stars & Stripes #2, the first issue of that series, and as near as I can tell, the only "group shot cover" in the Centaur line (Fantoman & Speed Centaur shared a couple sort of split covers, but this was the only "All-Star" type cover I'm aware of here).
Of course, Centaur was rife with odd editorial choices, like sending Zona off to become a super-hero one issue, only to put her never before seen kid brother in that role in the next, and no mention ever made of why Zona's stay in Tibet never seemed to actually happen (most of the features in AMC had tighter continuity than much of what's being published now), or creating a rewritten and redrawn origin for Dash Dartwell for The Arrow #3 instead of merely reprinting the old one, given that Centaur was clearly not shy about running reprints.
At this point, I guess we'll never know what they were really thinking...
-Comicsnorth
-
I think the general rule was to only have a single issue of a given comic on the stands. So if you publish Astounding Man and the Advs of Astounding Man on overlapping bimonthly schedules you get two months of sales on each rather than one month on each.
-
While it's true that Amazing-Man and Stars & Stripes ending up with fairly different line-ups, in many cases, these features were created by the same artists, making it difficult to understand how putting out two roughly bimonthly titles with most of the same creators, some doing the same characters and some not, was a better business move than putting out one monthly.
If I had to guess (and that's all we really can do at this point), I would imagine that whoever was in-charge at that time (the books went from being published by "Centaur Publications" to "Comic Corporation of America" before S&S was published, so there may have been some sort of a change in ownership towards the end) was trying to rebuild the line by taking AMC's line-up and shifting it over to S&S. I don't see where using the same creators on both titles could be interpreted as a bad decision, especially since, aside from Amazing Man, the two books ended-up with entirely different line-ups of characters. At least going by cover dates, the last two issues of each were published monthly, so whatever the final nail in Centaur's coffin actually was, the books themselves had apparently proven that they could maintain a monthly schedule. Throw-in the sort-of-bi-monthly Man of War/Liberty Scouts and the actually-bi-monthly World Famous Heroes and the company went from a one-book publisher at the start of 1941 to a company that looked like it might have been heading in the right direction with four titles.
I have to assume that Masked Marvel and the Arrow had to have been better draws, since they did get their own titles
I agree that taking those two, throwing Fantoman in as well and creating a new book (as I've already said) would have been a good idea and seems to me to be a no-brainer, but maybe the sales of their books weren't all that great and that's why they disappeared. Maybe none of the creators Centaur had working for them at the end wanted to work on those three characters. Who knows? Whatever the case, taking the features from AMC and essentially turning one decent-selling book into two decent-selling books is just a smart idea (not that I know what the sales figures were, but you get my point, right?). It's not that far removed from what DC and Marvel do with their top stars today. And you never know: If Centaur had not folded when it did, maybe Fantoman, Masked Marvel and Arrow would have been given another shot at some point.
Of course, Centaur was rife with odd editorial choices, like sending Zona off to become a super-hero one issue, only to put her never before seen kid brother in that role in the next
Stuff like that seems more like the fault of the creators working on the stories and not so much the fault of the editor, who may not have even bothered to read the stories before they were published. I look at what happened with Zona as evidence that the writer/artist didn't care about the work they were doing or had very little respect for their readers. "What did we do last issue?" "Who cares? Let's do this!"
most of the features in AMC had tighter continuity than much of what's being published now
That's true, but that seems more of a by-product of having, for the most part, only one talented guy working on a character for years, unlike today where you have Spider-Man, Superman or Batman being handled by a dozen or so people, and some of those creators may not even stick around for six months.
-
I hadn't really considered the matter of shelf life, but that makes a lot of sense--any given issue of either title would get twice as much potential exposure if they alternated. I had only been thinking about the company either not being able to physically assemble an issue every month (thus making the use of the same staff on both seem odd), or being unable to afford to publish every month, which makes alternating bimonthlies unlikely. Certainly, I have no complaints about the use of these particular creators, as I find it amazing that the same guy could come up with such unique characters as Mighty Man, Super Ann, Fire-Man, and Electric Ray.
I also didn't mean to slight Fantoman, as my "ideal" line-up for a "Best of Centaur" series would be Aman, Fantoman, Masked Marvel, Arrow, & Man of War, with Shark & Mighty Man as back-ups, and whatever else happened to turn up. Heck, maybe the Mighty Man feature and Fire-Man could alternate!
-comicsnorth
-
As far as cover features go I would go with Arrow and Fantoman as the most visually appealing. I think Amazing Man is one of the most interesting of their characters but does not have the look. Filchock's Mighty Man is a neat interesting feature and Iron Skull is pretty cool.
-
There are a few histories of Centaur online here guys that might answer some of your questions.
http://www.mightycrusaders.net/mp_yocitrus.htm
-
Great history. I had read it before. Still not definitve why they never gained more popularity
-
Maybe 'cause their stuff wasn't good enough? Or because they didn't publish consistently enough? Or because...ah, what the heck.
-
my "ideal" line-up for a "Best of Centaur" series would be Aman, Fantoman, Masked Marvel, Arrow, & Man of War, with Shark & Mighty Man as back-ups, and whatever else happened to turn up. Heck, maybe the Mighty Man feature and Fire-Man could alternate!
Man, I could play "What If" with Centaur all day long! Yeah, it would have been great to see the characters you mention appear in the same book. It also would have been nice if Centaur had given some other characters more of a chance to prove themselves, such as Air Man, Solarman, Jungle Prince, etc. And I'm a little surprised that Centaur didn't try branching-out into other genres. I may be a superhero fan first and foremost, but even I'm willng to admit that sometimes funny animals and cowboys can outsell my favorite characters.
As far as cover features go I would go with Arrow and Fantoman as the most visually appealing. I think Amazing Man is one of the most interesting of their characters but does not have the look.
Aman isn't a bad-looking character, but I agree that The Arrow and Fantoman look cooler on a cover. Still, it really boils-down to who's drawing the covers, and Centaur didn't really have a good cover artist like Nedor, Timely and a lot of the other companies did. Anybody would look cool if they were drawn by, say, Simon & Kirby or Alex Schomburg.
Great history. I had read it before. Still not definitve why they never gained more popularity
I've read those articles before as well, and still feel that there's a lot of questions left unanswered, such as: What are the details behind the name change from "Centaur Publications" to "Comic Corporation of America"? Was this just a re-organization deal or was Centaur actually sold-off? It seems odd that when that change was made, "Centaur" actually skipped a month of publishing comics (April '41), so I get the impression that there's more to it than meets the eye.
If Hardie had a successful line of crossword puzzle books & magazines, he obviously found a way to distribute those books better than the comics (IF distribution was a major factor in the failure of Centaur). That begs the question of who was distributing the comics, puzzle books and magazines? Was he using a different distributor than he did for the comics, or did the distributor drop the ball with the comic line?
And this is pure speculation on my part, but I have to wonder if dealing so closely with Funnies Inc (who also serviced Timely and Novelty, to name two off the top of my head) to provide the content for their books wasn't a really bad move on Centaur's part. If Timely was throwing money at "FI" to produce more features, would the studio put forth the same effort towards a company that was apparently having financial troubles?
-
I remember reading somewhere, at some time, that Centaur mainly distributed to rural locations, primarily grocery and drug stores in small population centers. The convoluted history of Centaur and Ultem, etc. included the original Cook and Mahon publishers pre-Centaur, who had a connection to the Wheeler-Nicholson era DC Comics. They left to form their own company, which was then sold several times before it became Centaur.
But, and this is purely speculation, what if the connection to Wheeler-Nicholson created a problem with Independent News, who eventually took over from Wheeler-Nicholson to create National? This would lock them out (or make them wary of approaching) of one of the biggest comic book distributors to the big city newsstands.
The Wikipedia article on Centaur repeats the claim that the original Cook-Mahon books included materials they got/took from Wheeler-Nicholson in lieu of payment. As shady as early comic publishing was, I can easily imagine a vendetta (or at least the fear of one) when your company was founded on materials that were obtained under questionable circumstances.
and as for Hardy/Hardie -- Charlton made its money on song lyric and puzzle magazines and had their own distribution network. And their comic books were notorious for their spotty distribution throughout the company's entire run. So it's entirely possible that the demand areas for puzzle books and comic books do not intersect very well and the distribution channels that worked well for puzzle books didn't for comic books.
-
The problem I have with Wikipedia is that a lot of the information regarding the lesser-known companies & comics is spotty at best, just plain wrong at worst. Case in point, I remember reading the entry Wiki had for Malibu Comics' Protectors series from 92-94 a few years ago, and it was just filled with all sorts of errors ... and that was a comic that was published not that long ago in an age when information was a little more readily available. I'm not saying that what's there regarding Centaur is wrong, I'ld just need to read that same information somewhere else in order to believe it.
So it's entirely possible that the demand areas for puzzle books and comic books do not intersect very well and the distribution channels that worked well for puzzle books didn't for comic books
That's certainly a valid point to consider.
But, and this is purely speculation, what if the connection to Wheeler-Nicholson created a problem with Independent News, who eventually took over from Wheeler-Nicholson to create National? This would lock them out (or make them wary of approaching) of one of the biggest comic book distributors to the big city newsstands.
Another good thought, but I remember reading (not on Wikipedia, mind you) that Independent News was not above getting involved with other comic companies in order to expand its distribution business, which at the end of the day, is probably where the company made most of its money. Driving other comic publishers out of business by refusing to distribute their books wouldn't help National as much as it would hurt Independent.
... repeats the claim that the original Cook-Mahon books included materials they got/took from Wheeler-Nicholson in lieu of payment. As shady as early comic publishing was, I can easily imagine a vendetta (or at least the fear of one) when your company was founded on materials that were obtained under questionable circumstances.
I don't see it as "questionable circumstances" because William Cook & John Mahon were more than likely owed money they were never going to receive. And since information about "Centaur Comics" in general is so spotty, who knows at what point in time that distribution became a problem. It could very well be that Cook & Mahon had no such problems but merely sold "Comics Magazine Company Inc" a little over a year after they started to get some cash to do other things. If the "bailsproject" is accurate, Mahon became a partner in Funnies Inc and established Elliot Publishing, plus started the idea for "Classics Comics", so the man obviously had a brain in his head.
If I was going to point to a rival publisher that had any part in Centaur's demise, I'ld look no further than Martin Goodman & Timely Comics, who was using Funnies Inc, too. I seem to remember reading in a book or article (again, not Wikipedia) that Goodman would find ways to tie-up FI's artists with trivial corrections to keep them from working on features for competing publishers. Since Centaur relied so heavily on FI to supply the contents of their books, even slight delays could seriously throw things out of whack for a company that could have been getting-by by the skin of their teeth (wow, that's an old expression I never thought I'ld use). Sure I'm just speculating, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.
-
If I was going to point to a rival publisher that had any part in Centaur's demise, I'ld look no further than Martin Goodman & Timely Comics, who was using Funnies Inc, too. I seem to remember reading in a book or article (again, not Wikipedia) that Goodman would find ways to tie-up FI's artists with trivial corrections to keep them from working on features for competing publishers.
Not that I doubt your version of the story at all, but the version I had read suggested that Goodman was running Funnies ragged in hopes that they would sell or otherwise give up ownership to the successful characters Timely published. Either makes just as much sense, really, unless someone has a copy of Timely's contract sitting around (to see if there's an abandonment clause, I mean).
-
the version I had read suggested that Goodman was running Funnies ragged in hopes that they would sell or otherwise give up ownership to the successful characters Timely published
Oh yeah, I've read that, too, but I'm sure that Goodman was smart enough to realize that one action could have multiple consequences. In this case, putting pressure on FI would have the potential result of the shop giving-up ownership of the characters to Timely, and possibly cut into the amount of time FI could focus on features for other publishers or at the very least, tie-up FI's better talent on Timely's characters, leaving the competing publishers with the less-popular artists.
Again, this is just my theory, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility.
-
the version I had read suggested that Goodman was running Funnies ragged in hopes that they would sell or otherwise give up ownership to the successful characters Timely published
Oh yeah, I've read that, too, but I'm sure that Goodman was smart enough to realize that one action could have multiple consequences. In this case, putting pressure on FI would have the potential result of the shop giving-up ownership of the characters to Timely, and possibly cut into the amount of time FI could focus on features for other publishers or at the very least, tie-up FI's better talent on Timely's characters, leaving the competing publishers with the less-popular artists.
History doesn't really support this theory, guys. Simply because: Jacquet continued to provide work for Timely LONG AFTER Everett and Burgos has left the shop and "defected" to Goodman. What seems to make MUCH more sense to Hames and me is that Goodman and Jacquet came to an agreement that Goodman got to own the characters and take Everett and Burgos, BUT Goodman had to agree to a) not raid the Funnies staff any further (no other Funnies, Inc. artist ever went to Timely on staff) AND b) purchase some set amount of work from Funnies for some set time (Jacquet shop work continues throughout WWII at Timely).
Through 1940, Goodman had published only 24 comic books. But, by the end of 1941, that number was over 60 and WWII had just begun. Timely was growing fast and both men were looking at their staffs being called into the war. The last thing either of them wanted was to make their lives even MORE difficult.
Goodman and Jacquet were first and foremost businessmen. Jacquet probably realized that he couldn't stop Everett and Burgos from leaving and Goodman probably realized that he could lay claim to the characters if he really wanted them. But it's likely that neither man wanted to antagonize the other and both knew that they could profit from a mutually acceptable tradeoff. Goodman needed Jacquet to fill his books and Jacquet wanted Goodman's long-term business. Hence, some behind the scenes agreement seems MUCH more fitting than butting heads. If they were adversaries, there is nothing in the books to indicate it. You probably don't have long-term, enduring business relations with your enemies. And Goodman got the same level of artistic talent on his books as did Funnies other clients, so Jacquet didn't appear to be treating Timely any differently than, say, Novelty.
Check the time frame. I always find it helpful.
My 2
-
You two cents is like a trillion government dollars Jim
-
I wasn't trying to imply that Goodman and Jacquet were adversaries, rather I merely propose the possibilty that Goodman used his relationship with Funnies Inc to hurt Centaur, a rival company who also used FI to supply the content of their books. I firmly believe that Competition only benefits the consumer, not competing companies. While it may be "heartless & evil" to take advantage of a situation to hurt a competitor's business, it's also the smart thing to do if you want your company to be as successful as it can be. Judging by the history of Timely/Atlas/Marvel Comics, being a "nice guy" was not on the top of Goodman's "to do" list.
Check the time frame. I always find it helpful.
I have done so, and as you state, by the end of '41, Timely's business was booming while Centaur's was on the verge of collapse. I'm only suggesting that Goodman could have been partly responsible for the end of Centaur's books, although I realize that a lot of other factors probably come into play, as well.
-
I wasn't trying to imply that Goodman and Jacquet were adversaries, rather I merely propose the possibilty that Goodman used his relationship with Funnies Inc to hurt Centaur, a rival company who also used FI to supply the content of their books. I firmly believe that Competition only benefits the consumer, not competing companies. While it may be "heartless & evil" to take advantage of a situation to hurt a competitor's business, it's also the smart thing to do if you want your company to be as successful as it can be. Judging by the history of Timely/Atlas/Marvel Comics, being a "nice guy" was not on the top of Goodman's "to do" list.
You're dead right about Goodman, bchat.
Mr. Nice Guy he was NOT. As for whether Goodman considered Centaur more competition because Jacquet was also supplying his comics - who knows? It's possible that any agreement that the two made had an added bonus of strengthening Timely at the expense of Centaur. Goodman was certainly the kind of guy to think that was a big plus! Whether the rise of Timely was a significant factor in the fall of Centaur is an unanswerable question, though. It is more likely that the war, the rise of the patriotic heroes and the stronger business sense of people like Ned Pines, MLJ and Goodman were all contributing factors at one level or another. Beyond that, we're all blowing smoke.
Check the time frame. I always find it helpful.
I have done so, and as you state, by the end of '41, Timely's business was booming while Centaur's was on the verge of collapse. I'm only suggesting that Goodman could have been partly responsible for the end of Centaur's books, although I realize that a lot of other factors probably come into play, as well.
My comment re the "time frame" was in reference to the presence of Jacquet artists at Timely well past the mythical (in my opinion) "feud" between Jacquet and Goodman. I hope someday that the story of Centaur will get fully told. I would sure like to read it!
(|:{>
-
You two cents is like a trillion government dollars Jim
I think I have just been insulted...
(|:{>
-
Meant as a joke that compliment or comment has yet to be determined hopefully the later for all our sakes.
-
Meant as a joke that compliment or comment has yet to be determined hopefully the later for all our sakes.
I did get the joke, narf,
My response was meant to be ironically funny, but I'm worried enough to fear that it might come true. When you're living on your savings, this economy is pretty scary. The only difference between 2
-
When you're living on your savings, this economy is pretty scary. The only difference between 2
-
Earlier in the post (and yes I know this is an older one), someone mentioned about visual appeal of certain characters. Namely; Arrow and Fantom (Fantoman).
I believe that Mini-Midget and Ritty had great looks as well.
Man of War was VERY visually appealing and so to was Fire Man.
Masked Marvel had a good look and appeared (it seems) on a lot of covers.
TNT Todd looked like some kind of Golden Age (Legion) Wildfire.
Blue Lady had a really great look.
Airman and Owl both were visually appealing.
and finally I think that Solarman and Star Spangled Brannor were decent enough lookings as well.
Visually I Amazing Man needs something. But I am not sure what. I personally wouldn't change much of anything as he visually is good looking. I know the remake of him in the "Protectors" comic was hideous (nothing anywhere nearing his better looking haydays).
Though I guess most of the characters that appeared in that god awful "Protectors" series were not that well designed (Though maybe Zardi the Eternal Man looked okay...).
Just my opinions.
G7
-
Given how short lived the company was it is surprising how many fans they now have. I too am a big Centaur fan
-
I tried writing an Amazing Man story or two for Malibu when the Protectors came out. The stories weren't great enough and they weren't accepted. So much for that.
-
darkmark - It might not have been that your stories weren't good enough. RA Jones had longterm plans for the character, and maybe your story conflicted with that. They also planned to do a one-shot or mini-series for Amazing Man, so again, it's possible that your story was "great enough" but simply did not fit within their plans.
Did you ever do anything with the stories (post online, rework into something else)?
Guardian7 - I'm a fan of both the original Centuar characters and Malibu's Protectors. I don't think what Malibu did was "hideous" or "god awful". Anything Malibu did with the original Ferret's costume could only have been an improvement.
-
Bchat - I have all of the Protectors. In my honest opinion they were truely bad comics (bad writing, designs and artwork). Just an opinion (But one shared by many).
I personally saw Ferret as just Wildchild from Alpha Flight (jumping on the Wolverine Craze due to the name... and I dislike that character too - I wish Thunderbird had lived and Wolverine had died in X-Men #96 - I have never liked the character or any of his replicants that have appeared).
Course no less than my feeling Gravestone (Fantom) was just some twisted take on Ghost Rider.
Amazing Man couldn't have looked more hideous. Just the worst looking character in the book.
Which is all sad since I have been into the Centaur Comics (HUGE FAN) since a three span article in a Comics Feature I have from back in the 80s (Yes I still have them).
Though I did not like the series. I did support it (now that is dedication to something I feel could have become worthwhile - Though I wouldn't have held my breath for that particular series).
To each their own I suppose.
Darkmark - So what was the story? was it more of the original flair? or something designed for the umm newer version? (You don't have to give away the entire story in case your saving it for "One Day!"... just a basic idea.
Ideally if I did a comic it would probably feature:
Amazing Man (with Tommy and definitely Zona)
Fantom
Arrow (or the Marksman - though the Arrow would be used in some capacity/possibly solo or a team-up comic)
Blue Lady
Man of War
Fire Man or Blue Fire
Vapo-Man or Electric Ray This would be a hard choice because I like both.
Owl (or possibly Air Man - Though like Arrow, Air Man would be used in some capacity)
Plymo
Super Ann (with Mighty Man somewhere in there)
TNT Todd cause he is cool looking!
Certainly King of Darkness, Shark, Mini-Midget/Ritty, Iron Skull and Solarman, would all make appearences in some way or manner.
The Inner Circle also be a part of it.
Reef Kinkade is an awesome character and I loved his adventures (But there are a lot of characters that were pretty awesome like him - even some of those with only One-Shots).
Agent type stuff using the Inner Circle with Characters like Masked Marvel and Star Spangled Brannor would be way sweet.
Here is a sketch I did of Masked Marvel and an older looking Star Spangled Brannor which I used my fast capture to quickly do some shading stuff with to give a better look of what I was going for (by no means a finished piece - and yes I know Brannor should be Branner and it should be "Star Spangles" Branner).
(http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t225/Samcub/MaskedMarvelStarSpangledBrannor.jpg)
I would love to redraw the Chuck Hardy Stories (Though I think my style just would never measure up to the gorgeous originals and their quirky appeal). I love them and the Land Beneath the Sea.
Lord... I could blither on and on about Centaur!
Cya
G7
-
Nope, never did anything online w/ that. Wasn't too satisfied with it myself. I did reintro A-Man's sidekick and girlfriend from the Golden Age, but I don't think they were too interested in that.
-
For what it's worth, Malibu's Ferret remains my favorite Wolverine knock-off, and considering how many characters that covers, that's quite a compliment. Still, I have a strong affection for the truly wonky Centaur Ferret as well.
One thing I never understood about the Protectors is why Man of War & Amazing-Man both moved their emblems from their chests to their pants when they were "modernized", and why did Aman start wearing a mask, when he didn't seem to be maintaining any kind of secret identity?
-Comicsnorth
-
comicsnorth - I liked Malibu's Ferret well enough, although I found most of the issues fairly weak. I think they were turning a corner with the return of Iron Skull and the introduction of Deathsong in issues 9 & 10, but alas, the line was cancelled at that point. That's not to say that I hate the original Centaur Ferret, but there's no getting around the fact that he was saddled with one of the worst costumes I've ever seen a Golden Age character wear.
Amazing Man was supposed to get his own series from Malibu at one point. I'ld imagine that the issue of his wearing a mask would have been addressed eventually had that materialized.
I thought Man of War's costume looked alright depending on who was drawing it. Some of the artists working for Malibu didn't extend the eagle's tail all the way down into his shorts.
-
You all have better memories than I. I have the Malibu stuff and read it but do remember it.
-
Man of War was probably the closest they got to being right.
The rest... ugh.
I disliked Air Man's feet.
Aman looked hideous.
Blue Lady was absolutely removed from anything resembling her original aspects (which would have been massively more interesting than what they did).
Gravestone...
Ferret... I understand the need to alter him... but I just wish they had not done the standard chip on his shoulder wolverine knock off like they did. just massively unappealing (To me).
The Shark... lol... what was that all about?
Arrow was pretty damn close and I didn't mind the costume (Though I would have prefered his original look or at least something that vaguely resembled it).
The intro of Fury shocked me...
Iron Skull... not so sure about all of that...
The Eye - Whatever... it was a vague creature/aspect anyhow.
All in all I think they could have done better. they tried. I will give them that. I have all the issues and well there is that (At least I did support it... even if I was utterly dissatisfied).
The Issue with Masked Marvel was very distasteful I think (and kinda disrepectful), But then everyone was starting to jump on the "KILL WAGON".
G7
-
With the Protectors, I just felt that really they were just new characters using the old names and in some cases motifs and powers. They were ok but nothing really special. Likewise, the artwork and the storytelling, none of it was really layered or great other than the few Neal Adams influenced Hawbaker covers. I don't mind some tweaking and re-designs, but felt for the most part, they chucked a lot of what made the characters interesting.
Am I the only one that remembers interviews/news in a comics magazine with promo art and that the Protectors were to be MORE than just the Centaur characters, they had redesigns of the Holyoke Catman and Mango's villain the Claw for example?
Been reading a whole lot of Centaur books lately, trying to get decent images of all the characters. There are some strange characters. It's interesting in just how many characters have some kind of gas type power: Amazing Man, Blue Lady, Fire Man, Vapo-man, Mantoka. Even the Sentinel appears and disappears with a bit of flame & smoke and Man of War could transport via explosions. We have TWO modern day Native American heroes in Mantoka and the Red Blaze, and the pioneer hero Ermine whose main thing is to kill marauding Indians. A cross-dressing hero called Cat-man, a flying Eye, and the super powered Speed Centaur. A stretching size changing hero in Mighty Man and his opposite number the permanently shrunken Mini-midget and Ritty with the Midget most often wearing Aquaman's orange and green. Why does the Shark wear a mask?
-
Why does the Shark wear a mask?
Without the mask, he's just some pasty dude running around in his underpants, really, and nobody wants to read about that.
But yeah, one of the things I like most about the Centaur books is that the characters unilaterally look almost like the writers submitted the stories as a joke to see if anybody was paying attention. Even someone as simple as the Masked Marvel just had to be balding.
I'd say they're as weird as they get, but there was the Gernsback book someone posted that made NO sense...
-
Why does the Shark wear a mask?
Obviously to hide from the dolphins and the whales, Ed...
(|:{>
-
I haven't downloaded it yet... but I was curious if it was really the Gods that Craig Carter summoned from his ring... or if it was just some sort of aspect of them (I think there is a difference due to the fact of how they would act - at least by terms of their "True" mythological counterparts).
That was funny by the way JVJ... hiding from the Dolphins and Whales (Maybe when he took the mask off... he was Arthur Curry/Aquaman and just said his Dad was a lighthouse keeper.
The Shark's dad was a bit of a flip character. He kinda cracked me up when he wasn't being bumpkin-headed.
If Craig Carter used his ring... could "Pops" Neptune pop out? Hmm food for thought there.
G7
-
I've read the first Craig Carter story, and Neptune didn't show up in that. I am wondering it Nep or Mars from Man of War turn up in Craig's second and final appearance, which of course is in that legendary Wham Comics #2!
-comicsnorth
-
Guardian: It was more in the original flair and I did a couple versions of it, one as a stand-alone short story and the other, I think, as a two-issue mini. Both dealt with the death of AMan's sidekick Tommy at the hands of a Nazi ally of the Great Question's. (In the first one, AMan used psychic power to distort the Nazi's body into the shape of a swastika, which, of course, killed him.) I figured the Great Question's name was derived from the "great question" of life after death, and the Great Que was obsessed with what happened to the souls of the people he killed. Zona was in the second version, too. So much for that.
-
I've read the first Craig Carter story and he does literally summon the gods or mythological creatures. Zeus comes out of the ring frequently and interacts with Craig. He also rides Pegasus for transportation. The cool thing about him was while he only was shown summoning Greek myths when Craig asks if he could summon Thor, Zeus confirms he could.
-
Have to keep in mind that inter-strip continuity wasn't very big back then. Heck, continuity drifted by the wayside just as the strips progressed such as the decade that Iron Skull operates in. Even if Neptune or Mars was used, they probably wouldn't reflect their counterparts in the other strips. Plus, I'm not sure if Pop Neptune was meant to be THE Neptune. The backstory evolved and changed a bit over time. His firs appearance suggests he's supposed to be the Neptune and is the father of all undersea beings, but later it's revealed that the Shark is the son of Neptune and a Mermaid which would be a little incestuous if the first statement is true (although common enough in Greek myths). It also gets revealed that a couple of centuries earlier, Pop Neptune was actually the Shark, so the names become more of job titles than real names. I sometimes wonder if his long life hasn't driven ole Pappy a little bit nuts.
If you are doing a modern series while trying to keep as much of the history possible, characters like Man of War, Craig Carter, Pop Neptune and the nature of the gods is something that eventually has to be addressed and reconciled. Even moreso if you go the SUPERPOWERS route and bring in heroes from other companies that include Vulcan (Ace), Thor (Fox), Hercules (MLJ), Diana (Communale), the god Mars (Fiction), Thesson (Nedor), Atlas (Great). Even Ibis once encountered Loki and called on Thor to handle him.
-
I would never have expected Craig Carter's version of Neptune or Mars to be the same as the ones in the Shark or Man of War, I just thought it would be interesting to see them.
Actually, if Neptune's relationship with that mermaid was incestuous, that would actually strengthen the case for Nep being an Olympian god...it has long bugged me tho that not only did the Shark's mother never put in an appearance, neither did any mermaids or mermen of any kind. Centaur gave us at least two different species of amphibious frog-people (in Chuck Hardy & Reef Kinkaid), but no mer-folk that I've seen.
On at least one occasion, Man of War, who had the powers of all the Olympian gods (or sometimes just the ones with planets named for them) channeled the power of Neptune to breath under water.
-comicsnorth
-
Even though there are or never truely has been any sort of continunity in the pages of the Centaur heroes (This being mainly do to NO CROSSOVERS which connects/knits the fabrics of fictional realities togather)... I still believe there is a case for it.
If only due to the Cover of Stars and Stripes #2. Primarily... because Mini-Midget is sitting on Amazing Man's shoulder which the Atom (E1) would do many times on Superman's (E1) shoulder. WEAK... I know... but M-Midget is seen intereacting with Aman on that cover at the very least.
I still believe there is the smallest likelihood of a connection between Craig Carter's magic ring and the myths of legend (which might include their representitives within the pages of Centaur... or at least eventually would have, if "Centaur" had continued).
G7
-
I think it's unlikely that Centaur would ever have developed any cross-strip crossovers on their own, even if they had lasted longer, as Golden Age crossovers were pretty rare at even the longest running companies. Look at how long Superman & Batman shared the covers of World's Finestbefore they ever teamed up in that title! And as for the mythological characters, DC continues to have multiple conflicting versions of Hercules running around, along with a number of other gods that pop up less frequently. I must confess, I keep thinking about how much fun it would have been if some of the creators who had more than one Centaur character had crossed over their own creations at some point--Red Blaze really should have met Fire-Man, and it would have been fun to have the Owl fly thru a Mighty Man adventure. I'm not really sure what Dash Dartwell could have done for Dr. Synthe, tho...
I still find it odd (as I believe I mentioned somewhere up thread) that Centaur never made the obvious choice of putting out an "all-star" title, with Amazing-Man, Fantoman, the Arrow, Masked Marvel & Man of War, but even if they had, I doubt that a team would have formed in the process--the All-Winners Squad was an obvious development, but didn't happen until after the war, after all.
-Comicsnorth
-
I think it's unlikely that Centaur would ever have developed any cross-strip crossovers on their own, even if they had lasted longer, as Golden Age crossovers were pretty rare at even the longest running companies. Look at how long Superman & Batman shared the covers of World's Finestbefore they ever teamed up in that title! And as for the mythological characters, DC continues to have multiple conflicting versions of Hercules running around, along with a number of other gods that pop up less frequently. I must confess, I keep thinking about how much fun it would have been if some of the creators who had more than one Centaur character had crossed over their own creations at some point--Red Blaze really should have met Fire-Man, and it would have been fun to have the Owl fly thru a Mighty Man adventure. I'm not really sure what Dash Dartwell could have done for Dr. Synthe, tho...
I still find it odd (as I believe I mentioned somewhere up thread) that Centaur never made the obvious choice of putting out an "all-star" title, with Amazing-Man, Fantoman, the Arrow, Masked Marvel & Man of War, but even if they had, I doubt that a team would have formed in the process--the All-Winners Squad was an obvious development, but didn't happen until after the war, after all.
-Comicsnorth
I recall reading somewhere (therefore, I technically have no citation) that continuity primarily developed to make characters more believable. After all, real people (generally) remember what happened to them last week/month/year, so if characters don't, it can ruin the whole willing suspension of disbelief. "Continuity porn" is the obsessive compulsion that everything must fit together - sad, really.
At any rate, even the early JSA "team-ups" generally consisted of them meeting up at the beginning of a mission, then going their separate ways to have a little adventure, then get back together at the end to wrap up the case. I dont' think they were really a "team up" in modern sense.
Anyway, that's the beauty of something like "Project:Superpowers" - you can see all these Golden Agers together, albeit in a modern context.
-
I recall reading somewhere (therefore, I technically have no citation) that continuity primarily developed to make characters more believable.
I think continuity developed simply to get people to buy more comic books. If the story "continued" in the next issue or in a different title, the odds increased that the reader would then buy it. Simple, really. Stan Lee took it to extremes and then the characters began to "remember" what had "happened" last issue. Sadly, those extremes are now the "norm."
(|:{>
-
I think it's unlikely that Centaur would ever have developed any cross-strip crossovers on their own, even if they had lasted longer, as Golden Age crossovers were pretty rare at even the longest running companies. Look at how long Superman & Batman shared the covers of World's Finestbefore they ever teamed up in that title! And as for the mythological characters, DC continues to have multiple conflicting versions of Hercules running around, along with a number of other gods that pop up less frequently. I must confess, I keep thinking about how much fun it would have been if some of the creators who had more than one Centaur character had crossed over their own creations at some point--Red Blaze really should have met Fire-Man, and it would have been fun to have the Owl fly thru a Mighty Man adventure. I'm not really sure what Dash Dartwell could have done for Dr. Synthe, tho...
I still find it odd (as I believe I mentioned somewhere up thread) that Centaur never made the obvious choice of putting out an "all-star" title, with Amazing-Man, Fantoman, the Arrow, Masked Marvel & Man of War, but even if they had, I doubt that a team would have formed in the process--the All-Winners Squad was an obvious development, but didn't happen until after the war, after all.
-Comicsnorth
I recall reading somewhere (therefore, I technically have no citation) that continuity primarily developed to make characters more believable...
Oh, yeah, it can be found here:
http://enterthestory.com/realtime_continuity.html
-
Prize Comics #24 was a very early example of a mega-crossover story.
And a fun read too. It's on the site. http://tinyurl.com/ygk8cvx
-
well I don't get the reference to "Continunity Porn"... but I don't feel it is a bad thing. A longer better story is not so bad (this is not saying - I LOVE MEGA-CROSSOVERS). A few intercompany crossings does no harm and instead of having to make up a character like Amazing Man (similar in powers let's say) to appear in something like Air Man... they could just use in-house creations. Two issues is not a bad thing (it is when they start crossing into ALL the books for one story that it becomes a bit of a pain). But nothing wrong with a Guest star.
As far as Dr Synthe and Dash Dartwell... where is the difference between a team up with the two of them... and a team up between Superman and Batman? One is extrordinarily powerful and the other isn't. (Dr Synthe and the Eye might have been an interesting team-up - even though of the Centaur line... Dr Synthe is the one I least like).
JSA: Even though those heroes all teamed up and went their separate ways in most cases to solve portions/pieces of the adventure... in the end usually several of them help bring down the bad guy/menace/whatever... They did that in the Evil Star adventure I have.
Ummm and there was Continunity in Amazing Man. The situation between Aman and the Great Question shows that. Introducing Zona's brother is another... Nika... etc.
Mighty Man's continued overly long running battle with the Witch is a clear cut case of continunity (or his weirdly obsessive pursuit of Super-Ann).
I believe that there is always the possiblity that had Centaur continued that maybe they might have developed the formula first or possibly used it more often "HAD" they continued.
I think they could have done it just to "boost" sales and draw in others to "other" comics (If they had thought of it at the time).
You can't say that just because everyone else followed the same formula that had a company stayed around it might "not" have come up with the concept first... You just never know. Frankly I feel they were well on their way to doing that.
Just my opinion.
G7
-
well I don't get the reference to "Continunity Porn"... but I don't feel it isn't a bad thing. A longer better story is not ...
G7
I mean like: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main.ContinuityPorn
-
I think continuity developed simply to get people to buy more comic books. If the story "continued" in the next issue or in a different title, the odds increased that the reader would then buy it. Simple, really. Stan Lee took it to extremes and then the characters began to "remember" what had "happened" last issue. Sadly, those extremes are now the "norm."
That's exactly it, of course. Continuity just refers to the property of being continuous, in fictiion the idea that what you read before is informing what you're reading now. It didn't "develop" and nobody "created" it; it's just a tool that can be applied in a variety of ways to varying extents.
The problem is partly, as Jim points out, the idea that there's no longer a single "story," but rather an unending succession of small chapters of a "big picture" that never ends. It has also turned comics into an Easter egg hunt on the lawn of Purgatory, where entire titles seem to exist just so the writer can make a pun based on a forty year old comic.
But more importantly to my sensibilities, there's also the problem that "continuity" has crossed over into what I'd call "syncretism," the idea that EVERYTHING that has come before must directly affect what's happening right this very second, so in mythological style, we have an endless array of reboots and reimaginings to find the "definitive" version of the character or to excuse ignoring all the millions of little details from previous writers, pencillers, editors, and publishers.
(In the back of my mind, there's a fictional ideal that anybody writing for a character would be required to read all prior appearances. They don't need to refer to them or even remember them, but they do need to have been exposed to what has happened before.)
In the Golden Age, I don't think that many of these issues came up, because the business wasn't mature enough to track recurring readers. What sense does it make to refer to something that happened a year ago when there aren't any back-issue bins and you don't know if any of your current readers had any clue the strip existed a year ago? Once you have letter columns and people asking about other books, you now have a better idea of your audience's range and can be more liberal with mixing things up. Note that the insane leveraging of continuity started really happening as the letter columns were marginalized and then discarded--the creators no longer have a barometer of audience sentiment and get their information from syncophant reviewers.
As to Centaur forming a Golden Age team...it's possible, but unlikely as a long-term thing. Yoc pointed out one case where it looks like a good idea, at Prize. Harvey also had a big team-up that basically fizzled (shunted to the text pages). Fawcett had the Crime Crusaders Club that lasted for...you guessed it, a single story. Lev Gleason launched Daredevil's series with the "Daredevil versus Hitler" set of team-ups, never to be mentioned again. There's also an Uncle Sam story, a kind of fairy tale where many other Quality heroes can be seen in a quick cameo.
I don't know why it failed to catch on at any of those companies, but managed to be big at DC, considering that the team aspect happened at DC essentially by accident.
That's not to say that it wouldn't have happened, but I'm not sure that the market was interested, else the Crime Crushers and America's Stars would be better remembered. It may well be that people were just buying All-Star because it had all the popular second-tier characters, rather than because of the JSA prologue and epilogue. Anybody have any thoughts on that?
-
I tend to think the JSA as a team was the draw based on the cover emphasis as a team. Remember how important the cover was at the time. Until comic fandom took off and continuity became big in the sixties the cover was the draw.
-
Ah, but is it because of the TEAM, or because there were just a lot of characters on the cover? As mentioned, World's Finest had the shared covers without crossovers, so there's a potential distinction to be made.
Contrast this with, for example, Quality, and their single-character covers with the bunch of insets.
I ask so pedantically because I almost wonder if the JSA made any difference to the All-Star sales. It almost seems, given the lack of teams at other companies, that the JSA might have just been Gardner Fox amusing himself rather than his readers.
-
Okay... After seeing the "Continunity Porn" article I can see where it came from... Though I feel the language seems nothing more than shock value and something else could have been used in place of the word "porn". The things people will do to garner attention really shouldn't surprise me in this day and age (LORD... I never thought I would actually utter words like that... I certainly am starting to show I am a 65 baby! LOL).
Frankly... John C answered it all. He didn't even have to get all elaborate like he did (Though it was wonderfully wrote). I think this excerpt from JohnC says it all...
JOHN C QUOTE
(In the Golden Age) What sense does it make to refer to something that happened a year ago when there aren't any back-issue bins and you don't know if any of your current readers had any clue the strip existed a year ago? Once you have letter columns and people asking about other books, you now have a better idea of your audience's range and can be more liberal with mixing things up.
Far as a team goes.
I think it was just a natural progression amoungst the most popular of characters (For sales at the very least - "More bang for your buck").
I can't say for absolute certain that Centaur would have done it. But it does seem they had basically started some "Ball rolling" things that are the comic industry.
I just think it is a forgone conclusion that they would have, Maybe not first... but there is no reason to think that the possibility didn't exist - It is an irrelevant subject I suppose because it never happened. I just believe hypothetically it was possibly they may have been one of the first. With the line up that Comicsnorth mentioned: Aman, Fantom, Arrow, Masked Marvel, Man of War, along with the likely female character (cause they need a secertary), My bet are on Blue Lady (Though the potential for Iron Skull or Mini-Midget/Ritty were also there I feel).
Again... all hypothetical. But there it is.
G7
-
I don't agree that Centaur would have eventually created a team at some point simply because if they were ever going to do it, especially to boost sales, they would have done so before they ceased publishing comics altogether. That's not to say that I don't think team-ups would never have happened had they continued, but I don't get the impression that Joseph Hardie paid all that much attention to what the other companies were doing to the point where The JSA would have influenced Hardie to try the same thing with his characters. Even if Centaur did create a team for their heroes, I doubt it would have included Fantoman, Masked Marvel or The Arrow, since the publisher had abandoned all three characters by 1941.
-
Okay... After seeing the "Continunity Porn" article I can see where it came from... Though I feel the language seems nothing more than shock value and something else could have been used in place of the word "porn". The things people will do to garner attention really shouldn't surprise me in this day and age (LORD... I never thought I would actually utter words like that... I certainly am starting to show I am a 65 baby! LOL).
G7
Well, it is a "derogatory" term and people often view porn as "derogatory" so I think that was the intent.
Are you 65 years old, or born in 1965?
Anyway, continuity is like anything else - good in moderation, but when it gets anally obsessive, no thanks.
-
Okay... After seeing the "Continunity Porn" article I can see where it came from... Though I feel the language seems nothing more than shock value and something else could have been used in place of the word "porn".
It appears to have become an Internet idiom. I hear frequent references to "food porn," for example, to describe the way food shows and magazines focus (insanely, if you ask me) on the presentation over the recipes.
It's probably unrelated to this:
http://furnitureporn.com/
Which I promise won't get anybody into trouble.
-
As for the failure of other companies to follow up on the Justice Society, it could well be that they remembered what happened to Master Man, Wonder Man, etc. and preferred to not risk being then next target of DC's lawyers. Still, it's a shame that the Prize story wasn't expanded to book length--imho, it had the potential to hold its own with any of the golden age All-Star stuff!
-comicsnorth
-
Not only did DC have one team but they followed it up with The 7 Soldier. So it would seem they believed the team concept was selling All Star
-
Of course, the fact that only DC really followed up on All-Star kind of backs up my "fear of lawsuits" theory.
Getting back to the continuity concept for a bit, I tend to look at as more a matter of the writer building "standing sets" and adding supporting characters--look at the number of super-hero strips that failed to develop such things as a regular police contact, like Commissioner Gordon. Centaur didn't seem to develop any recurring characters other than sidekicks and lady friends for the heroes, save for a couple of arch-foes like the Great Question and the Conqueror.
-comicsnorth
-
Roygiv
Oct 19 1965... 44... not 65... lol
Yeah DC did have both the JSA and Seven Soldiers. Great teams both.
Never was huge on western looking chara... until I discovered Vigilante and eventually the Texas Twister (Which truely is a great name).
Bchat
I only feel they may have had the Centaur line continued. Would have been a natural progression I feel and they may have ended up copying the JSA thing (only with their Superman/Aman in it).
All boils down to a matter of opinion is all *Wink!*
G7
-
I see what you mean about continuity. Not so much just story line. Even in books it is the characterization that keeps me coming back for more. I think of the Dragon Riders of Pern series. I had "friends" to revisit. Development of supporting characters could have helped build successes.
-
In re: teams, if Centaur had tried something like that, most likely it would have been in the form of text stories. Both Timely and Harvey teamed their characters up in text pieces long before (and much more often than) they did in stories. Prize and Harvey only assembled their heroes as guest stars in a story apiece. Fawcett had crossover cameos like mad, and occasional guest starring roles (Captain Marvel and Spy Smasher, Spy Smasher and Captain Midnight, etc.), as well as the Marvel Family, which was a no-brainer. Lev Gleason, to the best of my knowledge, never crossed over characters. MLJ did the occasional crossover, mostly with Shield / Wizard. Curtis at least crossed the Twister into other stories as an intro bit. We can think of others, possibly, but I doubt Centaur would ever have gone the JSA route. They were too fly-by-night.
-
In re: teams, if Centaur had tried something like that, most likely it would have been in the form of text stories. Both Timely and Harvey teamed their characters up in text pieces long before (and much more often than) they did in stories. Prize and Harvey only assembled their heroes as guest stars in a story apiece. Fawcett had crossover cameos like mad, and occasional guest starring roles (Captain Marvel and Spy Smasher, Spy Smasher and Captain Midnight, etc.), as well as the Marvel Family, which was a no-brainer. Lev Gleason, to the best of my knowledge, never crossed over characters. MLJ did the occasional crossover, mostly with Shield / Wizard. Curtis at least crossed the Twister into other stories as an intro bit. We can think of others, possibly, but I doubt Centaur would ever have gone the JSA route. They were too fly-by-night.
I think 'Daredevil versus Hitler' was about was as close to a team up as Lev Gleason ever got.
B.
-
You skunked me! I forgot all about that one.
-
You skunked me! I forgot all about that one.
::lol:: ;D I'm just older than I let on DM.
B. :D
-
In re: teams, if Centaur had tried something like that, most likely it would have been in the form of text stories. ... but I doubt Centaur would ever have gone the JSA route. They were too fly-by-night.
I don't think of Centaur as a "fly-by-night" company, but I do get the impression that Hardie wasn't the type of guy that was telling Funnies Inc & the various creators what he wanted them to do in regards to stories & characters.
-
Part of the problem is that, while we have some kind of documentation for the behind the scenes/editorial thinking for companies like DC/AA, Marvel/Timely, and Archie/MLJ, we have almost no clues as to just what was going on at Centaur. A number of sources have described the various Centaur features as "coming in over the transom" (altho imho, that's a better description for the "editorial style" of Marvel's Mysticor Daring), but as far as we know, it was entirely up to Martin Filchock if he turned in a Mighty Man story or the Electric Ray on any given issue. It does seem like something big shifted editorially when Stars & Stripes was spun out from Amazing-Man, as that was the point that Iron Skull shifted from a version of the 1970s that looked just like 1939 to what was then the present day, and soon turned into an actual costumed hero, while the "Zona with Powers" concept was thrown out the window in favor of Tommy appearing out of thin air. Meanwhile, Super-Ann & Blue Lady seem to have been created to make up for the loss of "Amazing-Zona". At least some of these moves had to have been on purpose, since there were so many of them at once!
-comicsnorth