Nick(Sgt.)Fury And His Agent(s) of S.H.I.E.L.D.

[Red Oak Kid]

Does anyone remember this 70s reprint series?

http://www.comics.org/covers.lasso?SeriesID=2126

Have these SHIELD stories ever been reprinted anywhere else? I assume these are Kirby/Steranko stories from Strange Tales.

Has there been an Essential Strange Tales yet?

Wish I had bought these back in the day.

[Cei-U!]

Does anyone remember this 70s reprint series?

http://www.comics.org/covers.lasso?SeriesID=2126

I bought one. I saw the new Steranko cover and assumed the series was being revived. I was pissed when I got it home and saw it reprinted stories I already had.


Have these SHIELD stories ever been reprinted anywhere else? I assume these are Kirby/Steranko stories from Strange Tales.

The Steranko stories may be included in that trade collection that came out a couple of years ago but I don't know for sure.


Has there been an Essential Strange Tales yet?

The essentials look to be organized by character(s) rather than titles. There've been Dr. Strange and Human Torch volumes but no SHIELD so far. I'd love to see an Essential Sgt. Fury, even though I have all the early issues but #5.


Wish I had bought these back in the day.

That could be my mantra.

Cei-U!
Ommmm... ommmm...

[Lone Ranger]

I think that this is the TPB to which Kurt is referring:

http://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0785107479/ref=olp_product_details/701-5893257-9537100?ie=UTF8&seller=

I've got it at home - can't recall precisely which stories are in there, but it is the Strange Tales stuff, not the solo series stuff.

[Red Oak Kid]

Amazon says the tpb has 248 pages, so if the ST stories were 11 pages long that would mean there are over 20 stories in this volume. That would probably be all of the ST SHIELDS, I would estimate.

Those 70s reprints are kinda pricey online, which made me wonder if they were the only reprints.

The GCD says the 70s series has pages missing from the stories to make them fit, so they are probably not that good a deal.

[Lone Ranger]

Amazon says the tpb has 248 pages, so if the ST stories were 11 pages long that would mean there are over 20 stories in this volume. That would probably be all of the ST SHIELDS, I would estimate.

Those 70s reprints are kinda pricey online, which made me wonder if they were the only reprints.

The GCD says the 70s series has pages missing from the stories to make them fit, so they are probably not that good a deal.

The TPB does have a lot of stories - I was very happy with it.

I bought it online as part of a TPB collection, so it was a good deal.

[MichikoS]

Does anyone remember this 70s reprint series?

http://www.comics.org/covers.lasso?SeriesID=2126

Have these SHIELD stories ever been reprinted anywhere else? I assume these are Kirby/Steranko stories from Strange Tales. Has there been an Essential Strange Tales yet?

Wish I had bought these back in the day.Though hardly a Steranko completist, I do think Steranko's brief tenure as cover artist for Marvel in 1972-3 resulted in some unsung beauties, including the covers of the first two books in this reprint series, which featured slightly edited Fury stories from ST #146-155. S.H.I.E.L.D. (Nick Fury and his Agents of...) #2 is a new take on his celebrated "flag" motif, used to such great effect as the cover of Strange Tales #167.

Here are three more Steranko covers from the period that I just love:

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i221/elbert_coalwell/texdawson_1.jpg
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i221/elbert_coalwell/shanna_2.jpg
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i221/elbert_coalwell/ff_130.jpg

By the way, if you are interested in seeing every cover Steranko drew for Marvel, go here:

http://www.steranko.comics.org/comics/marvel/steranko.htm

Michi

[Graham Vingoe]

I have both volumes of the colour Shield reprints issued around 1999/2000 by Marvel. Volume 1 does cover al the Strange Tales material and the follow up volume has the Nick Fury, Agent of Shield issues done by Steranko, - 1,2,3 and 5 skipping issue 4, the Thomas/Springer issue.. to my knoweldge nothing after issue 6 has ever been reprinted except in a UK Marvel comic in the 1970's/1980's whose title completely escapes me.

[MDG]

I'm not a big fan of Steranko, but this blows me away (especially for 1969):

http://www.steranko.comics.org/comics/marvel/tower1rejected.htm

Any respect I have for Steranko is from his story-telling/cover design experimentation. Sometimes I feel the actual drawing is a little weak. The Tex Dawson and Shanna covers above would look much better drawn by Kane or Colan from the same layouts.

MDG

[Red Oak Kid]

After a little more research, it seems that the last three issues of the 1968 Fury title were reprints of Kirby's run in ST. Then the 70s Fury reprint picked up the ST stories where the last 1968 (#18) Fury title left off.

Can't seem to find the color reprint Graham refers to. Is this one of those baxter paper deals? I can't find it on the GCD, which is not unusual considering all the variations of Nick/Fury/Agent/SHIELD.

Seems like all of these; Strange Tales stories by Kirby and Steranko, solo Steranko stories in Nick's own title and the remainining stories done by others on the 1968 title would be deserving of an Essential collection, if not a Masterworks.

Or am I stating the obvious?

[Aaron Kashtan]

I'm not a big fan of Steranko, but this blows me away (especially for 1969):

http://www.steranko.comics.org/comics/marvel/tower1rejected.htm

Any respect I have for Steranko is from his story-telling/cover design experimentation. Sometimes I feel the actual drawing is a little weak. The Tex Dawson and Shanna covers above would look much better drawn by Kane or Colan from the same layouts.

MDG

Damn. Why on earth did they reject that cover?

[MichikoS]

The Tex Dawson and Shanna covers above would look much better drawn by Kane or Colan from the same layouts.MDGI could not disagree with you more emphatically. Kane's myriad covers during the 1970's are, unfortunately, characterized by a bland, formulaic sameness. There are exceptions, of course, but the majority are not remotely memorable.

It's precisely the combination of stunning layout (design) and crisp, evocative execution (art) that sets Steranko apart from the rest. Even Kane and Colan.

Michi

[MichikoS]

Damn. Why on earth did they reject that cover?Stan Lee didn't cotton to Steranko's experimental effects, especially the reverse (negative) effect. He felt it might alienate Marvel readers, who he felt were completely invested in the Marvel house style of Romita/Buscema.

By the way, you can see how much Frank Miller was influenced by Steranko here.

Steranko's logo design is a little "DC," but it sure beats the crappy original TOWER OF SHADOWS logo.

Lee was very wary of Steranko's innovations, witness the re-drawn head of the Hulk on the Annual #1. It's hard to understand today, but it's clear that Stan's conservatism was a clear-headed business decision to protect the Marvel franchise and keep "the brand" as familiar as possible to readers.

Michi

[InfoBroker]

Lee was very wary of Steranko's innovations, witness the re-drawn head of the Hulk on the Annual #1.

Noppers. That was a comics code directive. It was a major discussion item of the time in a LOT of comic fanzines.

-jb the (even the blood veins were too much for them) ib-

[MichikoS]

Noppers. That was a comics code directive. It was a major discussion item of the time in a LOT of comic fanzines.

-jb the (even the blood veins were too much for them) ib-jb, I don't doubt you for a moment, but this is news to me. Could you steer me in the direction of some authoritative support for the CCA intervening in the matter of the Hulk head re-draw? I'm very curious to know what they found offensive. Too scary, maybe? I would appreciate knowing more.

Michi

[InfoBroker]

I could not disagree with you more emphatically. Kane's myriad covers during the 1970's are, unfortunately, characterized by a bland, formulaic sameness. There are exceptions, of course, but the majority are not remotely memorable.

It's precisely the combination of stunning layout (design) and crisp, evocative execution (art) that sets Steranko apart from the rest. Even Kane and Colan.

Michi

I agree that a major commercial objective of Marvel is to hold to a certain branding, but hey, Steranko's Marvel covers subscribe to that same scope of branding. Except for the Tower of Shadows #1 cover that was rejected, I can't think of any of Jim's covers that don't follow the pattern's of Marvel's cover formulas. A formula that was heavily influenced by the covers of Charles Biro's Daredevil and Crime comics of the golden age.

But to this artist's eyes, Gil Kane's covers are every bit as dynamic, some even more so. Granted there are a heck of lot more of them, and there are some that are not as powerful as the bulk of Jim's, but I don't concur at all that the majority lack for bold layout and crips composition. My point here being, maybe if he wasn't so prolific, a Gil Kane cover would seem just as stylistic and evocative as a Jim Steranko cover.

Marvel's breadth of branding has been and still remains narrow, especially compared to the scope of DC's publishing labels. But I don't blame the artist for understanding and delivering a product that meets the objectives of the editorial department.

-jb the (can think of lots and lots of memorable Gil Kane covers) ib -

[InfoBroker]

jb, I don't doubt you for a moment, but this is news to me. Could you steer me in the direction of some authoritative support for the CCA intervening in the matter of the Hulk head re-draw? I'm very curious to know what they found offensive. Too scary, maybe? I would appreciate knowing more.

Michi

They didn't like the blood vessels protruding on the Hulk. That comes from Steranko himself talking to Martin Greim, editor of the Comic Crusader.

What was odd, or maybe too late to catch, there are house ads in other Marvel comics that show the Steranko version of the cover.

-jb the (blood curdling) ib-

[MDG]

I could not disagree with you more emphatically. Kane's myriad covers during the 1970's are, unfortunately, characterized by a bland, formulaic sameness. There are exceptions, of course, but the majority are not remotely memorable.

It's precisely the combination of stunning layout (design) and crisp, evocative execution (art) that sets Steranko apart from the rest. Even Kane and Colan.
I'm not arguing about his silver age covers.

I was talking about the two covers you showed, which are, to me, pretty much formulaic Marvel 70s covers, and not (my opinion) anything to write home about. The faces, especially on the female characters, are kind've bland/nonexpressive (I'd say the same for his two x-men covers). The feathered shadowing on Shanna looks kind've clunky--the inking of her hair, on the other hand, is dynamite. And unless those are some kind of mutant hyenas, they're not drawn very well.

MDG

[Aaron Kashtan]

And unless those are some kind of mutant hyenas, they're not drawn very well.

Mutant hyenas? That's a laughable idea.

[dan bailey]

Damn. Why on earth did they reject that cover?

Indeed.

Oddly enough, if I didn't know otherwise, the figures' eyes would've probably made me ID the artist as Tom Sutton ...

[DarthAstuart]

i love this steranko cover:

http://www.steranko.comics.org/comics/marvel/uxmen050.jpg

just spooky.

[Agentum]

Yes, the invisible cover, spooky:D

On topic, i like sterankos work, he was diffrent than so many other artists, but he didn't do much comics.

His books about comic history is very intresting, i don't get it why he stoped doing them.