I Wish John Byrne Was Drawing a Marvel Series

[Dusty.]

We all know the fued between writer/artist extraordinaire, John Byrne, and Marvel, particularly Joe Quesada. I think it's silly nonsense, and two grown men like JB and JQ shouldn't be acting like spoiled kids on the playground. They're both better than that.

Byrne at Marvel again would sell. His style is well suited for Marvel characters. I think his writing days are over, and his ego needs to accept that, but his art could have an impact again, I think. It's a classic style rooted in old school, but still modern looking. Guys like Steve Epting and Mike Deodato make a pretty good living drawing in a similar old school fashion, but mixed with modern color enhancements.

I'd only want Byrne to draw one series at a time, though, so he'd take his time and add backgrounds, and try to adapt some newer techniques. His speed would be a blessing. He'd be great on anything Avengers, Iron-Man, Captain America (like a 6 issue WWII mini), Fantastic Four, Hulk, or Wolverine. Wolverine is something I'd love to see him and Claremont get a shot at. Give me some of that over Daniel Way and Steve Dillon.

Would anybody else love to see the prodigal son return home?

[MAK15]

Hear Hear!
yeah, i ilke Byrne, and think that seeing some of his work would be nice again.
maybe in a Legion of monsters story, or possibly some Omega Flight (since he created the Alpha Flight) anything else yall think he'd be good at?

[StoneGold]

Maybe Byrne circa 1990, but not now. His work has gone waaaaaaayyyyyyy downhill. He used to be one of my favorites, but the emphasis is on the words used to be. Although if you took them out, the sentence wouldn't make any sense. Huh.


In any case, the only thing Byrne seems to draw well these days are commissioned pieces of work from his glory days. His sequential stuff has a tendency to stink.

[MAK15]

Maybe Byrne circa 1990, but not now. His work has gone waaaaaaayyyyyyy downhill. He used to be one of my favorites, but the emphasis is on the words used to be. Although if you took them out, the sentence wouldn't make any sense. Huh.


In any case, the only thing Byrne seems to draw well these days are commissioned pieces of work from his glory days. His sequential stuff has a tendency to stink.

is that the reason I felt less and less compelled to read Blood of the Demon?

[StoneGold]

is that the reason I felt less and less compelled to read Blood of the Demon?

Possibly. It didn't help he was writing that also, and his writing ability has deteriorated even worse than his art skills, as far as I am concerned.

[mattbib]

I agree, while I loved Byrne's stuff 10+ years ago, what I've seen since...well, let's just say his IMO style's neither changed nor improved.

[Will.S]

Maybe Byrne circa 1990, but not now. His work has gone waaaaaaayyyyyyy downhill. He used to be one of my favorites, but the emphasis is on the words used to be. Although if you took them out, the sentence wouldn't make any sense. Huh.


In any case, the only thing Byrne seems to draw well these days are commissioned pieces of work from his glory days. His sequential stuff has a tendency to stink.
Damn agreed.

[a-spidey]

didn't like his spider-man chapter one, but there are many marvel series. Maybe there is one for him.

not spider-man ! :D

[Pro]

John Byrne was one of my inspirations when i learned to draw but recently his work has done a nosedive quality wise. It seems like he's not paying attention while drawing, making such basic errors as too many ortoo few fingers, screwing up perspective and anatomy. Pretty sad because i thoroughly admire old style John Byrne.

[Beast]

As much as I love his classic work, I'd have to say no thank you. Not to mention he'd never do it in a million years. Given the contempt he has for Marvel, and always spouting off about how Marvel died years ago. I'm sure X-Men: First Class is another fun stick in his craw. Not to mention read some of his rants at Byrne Robotics.

[streator]

Would anybody else love to see the prodigal son return home?

no, i wouldn't. i don't like his work.

[The Shadow]

Would anybody else love to see the prodigal son return home?

HELL YES!!!!!!!!

His work has vastly improved from what it was 5 years ago.

Blood of the Demon is FANTASTIC and his Superman run was great too.

I would KILL o see Byrne on an Invaders series set in World War 2 with Roger Stern, Roy Thomas (my first choice) or Ed Brubaker as writer.

[The Mirrorball Man]

The only John Byrne project I'd be interested in right now would be Next Men.

[Ogrebear]

I would not mind seeing Byrne on a non-continuity series like Claremont's GeneX (Marvels Answer to DC's Generations- a sorta what if the FF and co did start in 61 onwards) series where he could play with characters he obviously likes but outside the modern books Byrne obviously dislikes.

I would suggest some of his quality deterioration was cos he had no regular book to practice on?

[Pro]

The only John Byrne project I'd be interested in right now would be Next Men.

That was a good solid read and well drawn as well.

[Mikl C]

He seems like a horrible horrible person. I wouldn't want him back drawing anything.

[Cayman]

Not me. His a jerk and he's burned that bridge. Marvel doesn't need him.

[XPac]

Though his best stuff is behind him, I still think his classic style has value.

I wouldn't mind seeing him draw Fantastic Four or one of the Avengers books. Or maybe even She-Hulk.

Won't happen, and I don't feel too bad about that. And I do agree he does kind of sound like a jerk at times. But I still think he's an artist that brings a nice classic feel to his work.

[jam]

I would not mind seeing Byrne on a non-continuity series like Claremont's GeneX (Marvels Answer to DC's Generations- a sorta what if the FF and co did start in 61 onwards)


What's that now? What's "GeneX"? Sounds interesting.

[Mikey Brown]

Yea, hes not a good person. He wants to blame Marvel for everything but X-Men the hidden years and Spider-Man C1 was horrible and really didn't serve any purpose other than to please Byrne. I really liked his work when Nelson DeCastro was inking it on Superman but thats about the only good work hes done since 1995.

[Ernasto]

I really love his work on classic Fantastic Four, Avengers and The Uncanny X-Men, but his 90's work looks like it's been drawn in such a hurry, way too sketchy. Actually, I don't know about any feud between Quesada and Byrne, was actually wondering where old school cats like George Perez and John Byrne up to nowadays. Anyone care to eloborate on the feud and the whereabouts on George Perez?

[Ernasto]

Then again, maybe his 90's and current work wasn't on the same level like his classic 70's & 80's work, but I would rather switch his artwork with the crappy job that Howard Chaykin delivered on the Civil War tie-ins, that was really a waste of my money. Only reason I bought those issues because it had Civil War on them, nothing less. Byrne had to draw those, undercover ;)

[streator]

What's that now? What's "GeneX"? Sounds interesting.

http://www.newsarama.com/marvelnew/Genext/claremont.htm

genext is an upcoming project by claremont. it doesn't have a release date yet.

[DDM]

Anyone care to eloborate on the feud and the whereabouts on George Perez?

George Perez is a DC Comics exclusive currently drawing the relaunched The Brave & The Bold with writer, Mark Waid.

[DDM]

I would like John Byrne to return to Marvel as long as he does not draw any shortcuts like he did throughout the 90's. He needs to stick with only the art though. His plots & stories have a very dated feel to them.

[Dusty.]

I thought Byrne's last work of the Atom series was some of his best in years. Just look at that first double page spread in issue #1 with all of the iconic DC characters.

[The Shadow]

X-Men the hidden years /snip/ was horrible and really didn't serve any purpose

... wow.

That was some of the best X-Men stories at the time, critically praised and loved by the fans. You should, you know, actually read the stuff before you comment on it.

[Citizen V]

We all know the fued between writer/artist extraordinaire, John Byrne, and Marvel, particularly Joe Quesada. I think it's silly nonsense, and two grown men like JB and JQ shouldn't be acting like spoiled kids on the playground. They're both better than that.


Would anybody else love to see the prodigal son return home?

I would support that also,Marvel needs to have someone who can talk back to Joe Q..and i would also like to see a more classic artist back at Marvel.

[StoneGold]

I would support that also,Marvel needs to have someone who can talk back to Joe Q..and i would also like to see a more classic artist back at Marvel.

What have we come to when John Byrne is considered a classic artist?


Gene Colan is still alive and doing work for Marvel, you know. And he's waaaaaayyy more classic than Byrne.

[anthony!]

I wouldn't mind seeing him back but only if he pencilled. Maybe also a little plotting.

I haven't really enjoyed his writing at Marvel since the early NAMOR stuff, and he needs to be inked by someone like Terry Austin. Brubaker, Oeming and Slott would be great writers to see his work on.

[XPac]

What have we come to when John Byrne is considered a classic artist?


Gene Colan is still alive and doing work for Marvel, you know. And he's waaaaaayyy more classic than Byrne.

Byrne drew the Phoenix Sage, Trial of Galactus, and Man of Steel ... this was the stuff that really stood out when we were reading this stuff as kids.

[The Shadow]

What have we come to when John Byrne is considered a classic artist?

Set aside any personal dislike and look at the guys career objectively.


He's been an artist in the comic field for over 30 years.
He's worked on all the biggest icons for both companies.
He's had some classic runs
Fantastic Four
Avengers
West Coast Avengers
Spectacular Spider-Man
Superman
X-Men
Wonder Woman
She-Hulk
Captain America
Next Men


Not to mention many great mini series' over his long career.

He's got a great sense of anatomy, can tell a sequential story and his style is quite distinctive. He's what artists today should aspire to.

He's also influenced everyone from Alan Davis to Jim Lee.

[StoneGold]

Set aside any personal dislike and look at the guys career objectively.



I am. I'm just setting my classic bar a little higher. At least with time span. Gene-o's been in the business a bit longer.

[Baytor]

This is going to seem like a dumb question, but I could still use an answer. I do like Byrne's older work, but I've always wondered how to properly pronounce his name. Is it:

"Burn"
"Bye-ron"
"Brine"
"Burnee"
"Burn-ay"

If someone could spell it phonetically for me, I'd feel better. It's kinda funny that I've been reading comics for over 20 years and I've never heard his name spoken out loud. Weird, eh?

[The Shadow]

"Burn"

You had it right off the bat!

[The Shadow]

I am. I'm just setting my classic bar a little higher. At least with time span. Gene-o's been in the business a bit longer.

I'd consider Byrne better than Colan any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Colan had a great Batman run... but, and remember this is simply my opinion, his Superman art always felt static... and almost boring.

His Daredevil and Dr Strange work is fantastic... but I still prefer Byrne.

[StoneGold]

I'd consider Byrne better than Colan any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Colan had a great Batman run... but, and remember this is simply my opinion, his Superman art always felt static... and almost boring.

His Daredevil and Dr Strange work is fantastic... but I still prefer Byrne.

I'm thinking of his Cap and his epic run on Tomb of Dracula.

[the Hornet]

I think he is a little spoiled. Particularly, when reading Spider-Man: chapter one. But I do like a lot of his works. Talent is talent. Having said that, he has his bad work and he has his good work. I agree that he should just draw. When he is given full writing chores, he tends to revamp things just to suit his likes. Look at what he did with Wonder Woman and Donna Troy. But I liked Marvel: The Lost Generation and X-Men:The Hidden Years. But now that I think about it, they were really not necessary to the actual Marvel continuity.

[Eric_Carnaby]

What have we come to when John Byrne is considered a classic artist?


We have come to a realization of who the classics are.
"jerk" or not, the man, art-wise, comic-book-history-wise IS a classic.

Arguably the best FF run since Lee/Kirby.
Arguably one of X-Man's all time top five runs, if not top 2.
Turned She-Hulk into an actual character as opposed to a Hulk WIth Boobs.
Alpha Flight
West Coast Avengers

etc...

[jam]

I am a self-confessed Byrne victim. So I guess you can't see my views as rationale and objective. I'm sorry.

And I've got it bad. Even some of his work that I dropped, I've gone back and bought the back issues and honestly enjoyed them. Yes, I know I'm in a minority.

I wish he could've stayed on as the All New Atom's artist. I wish he could continue on the Next Men or even Danger:Unlimited.

Most of all, I wish Marvel had left him alone to get on with producing XM:THY. That's a real disappointment.

I'm so pleased to hear that Marvel are going to issue his memorable run on Captain America with Roger Stern.

[Neptunicus]

I think he is a little spoiled. Particularly, when reading Spider-Man: chapter one. But I do like a lot of his works. Talent is talent. Having said that, he has his bad work and he has his good work. I agree that he should just draw. When he is given full writing chores, he tends to revamp things just to suit his likes. Look at what he did with Wonder Woman and Donna Troy. But I liked Marvel: The Lost Generation and X-Men:The Hidden Years. But now that I think about it, they were really not necessary to the actual Marvel continuity.

Yeah I defenitely agree with your statement. He does change things just to change them - one thing that comes to mind is him (for some reason he felt this was important to point out) he shows Vision nude in West Coast Avengers - and he had made him...ahem "smooth and featureless". When it had been previously established that Vision was exactly like a human and having romantic relations.

I still have a lot of love for his overall catalogue of work due to his FF run but I have a bit of trouble with his later stuff and feel conflicted b/c of him being a bit ego-maniacal.

[darkhawk76]

well I'm probably the only person in the known universe who really liked Marvel:The Lost Generation, so I wouldn't mind another a follow up series to that

as for going back to other titles, outside of FF I'm not sure his style fits any of the current titles

[jam]

well I'm probably the only person in the known universe who really liked Marvel:The Lost Generation, so I wouldn't mind another a follow up series to that

See, this is exactly what I mean! I used to *hate* M:TLG and I'm sure I fired off a snotty posting about it hereabouts. Dropped it after a couple of issues.

I'm *still* not sure I like the conceit of there having been another forgotten generation of Marvel heroes between the Atlas and Marvel eras.

Recently I bought the whole run as back issues and I really like the series. Told you I was a fully-paid-up Byrne victim.

as for going back to other titles, outside of FF I'm not sure his style fits any of the current titles

As I suggested in a prior post, give him back XM:THY and let him do what he wants!

[tricksterpup]

Out of the fires of Annihilation, I would like to see him do a Ronan or another space series.

[Rich L]

well I'm probably the only person in the known universe who really liked Marvel:The Lost Generation, so I wouldn't mind another a follow up series to that


No, there's me too...

[Colossus]

Wow.

There is a lot more Byrne love in this thread than I thought I would find. I am a big fan of Byrne as an artist, not as a person. But hey, I am not asking him to raise my kids or something, just draw pretty pictures.

When you look back at his body of work over the last few decades I feel that you MUST mention his name along with George Perez and Neal Adams as the truly classic artists in comicdom.

[Mister Mets]

I posted this elsewhere, but I think it would benefit Marvel/ Byrne if they got him doing more work.

I think it's a shame that an artist who is both talented and prolific isn't getting regular work, although I can understand why people wouldn't want to work with Byrne, given his many feuds/ complaints about the industry, and the controversy whenever he says something dumb (which is astoundingly often.) I still think there are benefits to getting him to work for Marvel.

My picks for the first year....
Astonishing X-men: With writer Mark Millar. This is a project Millar would love to do, and it provides a helluva team to follow Whedon/ Cassady. If Millar's other Marvel projects are indication, this will sell well (something Byrne needs) and he'll have a lot of cool things to draw.

ICON book- One way Marvel could get Byrne to come back is by offering him an ICON book to write, and draw, and tell whatever story he wants to tell, giving him complete and total creative freedom for at least twelve issues an year. The first issue could launch at the same time as Byrne's first Astonishing X-men, to get the highest amount of buzz. Next Men would be the best choice, but Byrne may have better ideas.

Unfinished projects: Byrne should finish his "Last Galactus story" so it could be released as an OGN. His Captain America VS Red Skull story with Roger Stern could also be a mini series/ OGN (and if it's anything like their other nine issues on the book, it'll be pretty good.) Finally Byrne's offered to redo his beloved "hero" story of Fantastic Four #285 for free (because he didn't like the Secret Wars 2 tie-in), so that should be done as a one-shot/ fill-in issue of Fantastic Four.

As for his second year.....
The Exiles- This book can involve variants of any Marvel superhero/ supervillain, and Byrne's one of the best superhero artists on the planet. It'll make a great follow-up to 12 issues of Astonishing X-men, and get additional hype as the X-verse reunion between Byrne & Claremont. It's a book that'll probably last more than two years, and Byrne seems to really want that kind of stability, which he hasn't had on any title in a long time.
It's also the type of book that would really please fans of Claremont & Byrne. And as it's a side book which doesn't tie into any of the other books Marvel's publishing, the people who don't like Byrne/ Claremont's work lose nothing by not buying it.

I wouldn't let Byrne write any books, aside from an Icon book/previously announced projects, since his recent works as writer have generally been commercial/ critical failures. I don't think he understands the current popular storytelling sensibilities.

[Mister Mets]

I started threads on the topic on other message boards.
http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?t=93889&highlight=John+Byrne
http://www.imwan.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10795&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=byrne&start=66


And if you're interested in judging his recent comic book art, his website includes a gallery with every page of his Action Comics/ Doom Patrol/ Blood of the Demon runs.
http://www.artofjohnbyrne.com/
I think his art's pretty decent (improved over the John Byrne who did Wonder Woman/ Spider-Man Chapter One) especially since he can draw 64+ pages a month, which can be useful for Marvel.

[Super Villains INC>]

count me in as well for another Lost Generation series.....I liked the idea of seeing heroes we never saw before appear in the Marvel U. I was always surprised writers didn't use some of the characters more since then. Not that it's the greatest series of all-time, but it was fun in its own way, and some characters had potential for future use.

[tricksterpup]

I wouldn't let Byrne write any books, aside from an Icon book/previously announced projects, since his recent works as writer have generally been commercial/ critical failures. I don't think he understands the current popular storytelling sensibilities.

I agree with everything you said except this last part. I actually like most of his writing. I enjoyed his Doom Patrol. I thought it was a nice throw back sci-fi series. I enjoyed most of his stuff in the past compared to some of the crap that came from Civil war.

[Dusty.]

I started threads on the topic on other message boards.
http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?t=93889&highlight=John+Byrne
http://www.imwan.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10795&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=byrne&start=66


And if you're interested in judging his recent comic book art, his website includes a gallery with every page of his Action Comics/ Doom Patrol/ Blood of the Demon runs.
http://www.artofjohnbyrne.com/
I think his art's pretty decent (improved over the John Byrne who did Wonder Woman/ Spider-Man Chapter One) especially since he can draw 64+ pages a month, which can be useful for Marvel.


haha...somebody at the Bendis board immeditely thought you were me because it was a Byrne thread. :D I've defended and promoted him a few times.

John Byrne needs to go with the flow and stop kicking and screaming about how he hates the industry. Sure he does, he's viewed as an jerk by some fans and professionals alike. He's become a bitter and always complains. He is no longer on top, and his last efforts to become relevant landed with a loud thud with Chapter One (I actually think it was pretty decent, but hated what was done to Electro) and a John Byrne X-Men series that wasn't exactly ruling the sales charts (but well above cancellation numbers) when it was axed, which started the fued with Marvel.

The success of Bendis's Ultimate Spider-Man and Ultimate X-Men has got to rub Byrne hard and rough. He feels betrayed by M****L. ( :D ) because he says they didn't promote that book like they should have from the start. He's been reduced to making a living off commissions of characters from the very company that he claims "no longer exists"... DC isn't exactly throwing work his way, either.

I'd like this to change on Marvel's part, because John Byrne and Marvel make great comics together.

[Will.S]

I dunno, if I were really to want Byrne back he'd have to be inked by Terry Austin again and do some sort of retro tales like people have been saying on here. I'd preferably like to see more old school Avengers work by him similar to what they were doing in Hidden Years or maybe a backup or two in the Avengers classics reprints coming up.

[Frank]

... wow.

That was some of the best X-Men stories at the time, critically praised and loved by the fans. You should, you know, actually read the stuff before you comment on it.


Oh humour! For a moment there I thought Shadow had gone insane.

Thanks of the laugh, dude. I thought somebody actually liked those countless "we're trapped in a damn tempest and then we have to jump in a balloon, then we have pull our friends from danger with a rope" for a minute. Those first 5 issues were like episodes of the worst Survivior ever.


That said, if I would ever be tempted to give Byrne a job at Marvel would be X-Men. I would say to him "anything goes", let him go wild like he did on Next Men in term of creativity, unpredictability and violence.

[Frank]

count me in as well for another Lost Generation series.....I liked the idea of seeing heroes we never saw before appear in the Marvel U. I was always surprised writers didn't use some of the characters more since then. Not that it's the greatest series of all-time, but it was fun in its own way, and some characters had potential for future use.

Good idea. AWFUL execution.

[tricksterpup]

I dunno, if I were really to want Byrne back he'd have to be inked by Terry Austin again and do some sort of retro tales like people have been saying on here. I'd preferably like to see more old school Avengers work by him similar to what they were doing in Hidden Years or maybe a backup or two in the Avengers classics reprints coming up.

I dig this idea.. Terry Austin needs more work, man used to be one of the top inkers in the industry and now is hardly doing any work. I met him a few years ago, nice guy.

[The Shadow]

well I'm probably the only person in the known universe who really liked Marvel:The Lost Generation, so I wouldn't mind another a follow up series to that
I LOVED that series!

as for going back to other titles, outside of FF I'm not sure his style fits any of the current titles
So put him on a newly created book (Invaders: World War 2) and let him be!

[rick]

I know I'm in the minority but Byrne's X-Men: The Lost Years was for this old timer anyway, simply the very best book Marvel was publishing at the time and it was just stunning that they cancelled it while still running 1300 other interchangable X-Titles.

Personally I could care less that Byrne is a jerk.

I'm not asking to hang out with him, I just want to read his funnybooks.

[Mister Mets]

I agree with everything you said except this last part. I actually like most of his writing. I enjoyed his Doom Patrol. I thought it was a nice throw back sci-fi series. I enjoyed most of his stuff in the past compared to some of the crap that came from Civil war.
Since you consider Byrne a throwback, it kinda proves my point that his writing style will alienate some modern readers.

And I'm not sure if getting Byrne on what will at best be a mid-level book will be in Marvel's best interests if most of the new readers that book picks up will just be encouraged to bitch about the current status quo.

haha...somebody at the Bendis board immeditely thought you were me because it was a Byrne thread. :D I've defended and promoted him a few times.

John Byrne needs to go with the flow and stop kicking and screaming about how he hates the industry. Sure he does, he's viewed as an jerk by some fans and professionals alike. He's become a bitter and always complains. He is no longer on top, and his last efforts to become relevant landed with a loud thud with Chapter One (I actually think it was pretty decent, but hated what was done to Electro) and a John Byrne X-Men series that wasn't exactly ruling the sales charts (but well above cancellation numbers) when it was axed, which started the fued with Marvel.

The success of Bendis's Ultimate Spider-Man and Ultimate X-Men has got to rub Byrne hard and rough. He feels betrayed by M****L. ( :D ) because he says they didn't promote that book like they should have from the start. He's been reduced to making a living off commissions of characters from the very company that he claims "no longer exists"... DC isn't exactly throwing work his way, either.

I'd like this to change on Marvel's part, because John Byrne and Marvel make great comics together.
Random aside. I liked Chapter One, until I bought Essential Spider-Man Volume 1, and saw how much better the Lee/ Ditko originals were.

Incidentally, I can easily understand why Marvel didn't want to aggressively promote a standalone title like "Hidden Years" when its success won't really help out other titles (aside from making John Byrne more of a name creator to modern fans.)

[Mister Mets]

This is a random aside, but I think John Byrne doesn't "get" Marvel. I'm well aware that he's done some of the best Marvel comics ever (hell- I think his Uncanny X-men run w/ Claremont may just be the best creative run in comics) and his board's "Happy Birthday Stan Lee" thread was the largest I saw on the internet. But his opinions about current, and previous Marvel books just seem flawed.

He doesn't like the current focus on "name" creators (rather than the character), but name creators have always been a big part of Marvel comics, even during the silver age, with Kirby/ Ditko/ Sternako/ Romita/ Adams/ Wood (plus Stan Lee & Roy Thomas were the best regarded writers of the time.) The success of Sgt Fury & His Howling Commandos (a war book with the worst title Stan Lee could imagine) demonstrated that fans flocked to the creators, even more than to the characters.

Byrne complained about how Untold Tales of Spider-Man, which could've been Marvel's "Superboy" (just set vaguely in the past) had stories set between specific issues/ panels of Lee/ Ditko's Amazing Spider-Man. Amazing Spider-Man had continuing subplots, and subtle changes to the status quo every issue after the seventh, and I think there would be far too many contradictions for Marvel to have a continuing series set vaguely in the past, without acknowledging the developments/ continuity of a universally acclaimed run. Marvel wasn't Silver Age DC, where developments in one story in Superman rarely had an impact on the developments in the next story in the same issue, and that may have been one reason Marvel kept kicking DC's ass in sales.
http://www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17534&PN=1&TPN=3

This also ties into Byrne's complaints about how Marvel killed off Gwen Stacy, rather than allow her to be forgotten like Judie Madison (Batman's Golden-Age fiancee) ignoring the key differences. Gwen Stacy was a regular character for 90 issues, and the best stories w/ Gwen Stacy were a lot better than the best stories with Judie Madison, meaning that new readers were always going to be exposed to the character (especially given how often the Lee/ Ditko/ Romita issues have been reprinted).
Byrne was a big fan of books having a constant status quo, when that was never really characteristic of Marvel comics, even during the illusion of change era. While writers often go overboard with changes, stagnancy may just be worse, and I don't think Byrne understands the advantages of a changing status quo (ie- heroes quitting/ returning to the Avengers, Peter Parker dating a woman for 13 issues/ breaking up with her.)

He had legit complaints, but they're obscured by his demeanor, and many mistakes.

And that's one big reason I wouldn't want him writing a Marvel title.

[Will.S]

He had legit complaints, but they're obscured by his demeanor, and many mistakes.

And that's one big reason I wouldn't want him writing a Marvel title.
There's also the messed up stuff he did with the Doombots where he would make it out that if Doom appeared on another title, it would be attriubuted to being a Doombot.

[Omega Alpha]

There's also the messed up stuff he did with the Doombots where he would make it out that if Doom appeared on another title, it would be attriubuted to being a Doombot.

How many times did he do that? Because the only one i know is when he retconned the Doom from Uncanny #146 as a robot. Which, in the case, was a good thing, since Claremont used the character to promote Storm, by making him intimated and afraid of what she could do, when he was shown before to not be afraid even of the Silver Surfer.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Possibly. It didn't help he was writing that also, and his writing ability has deteriorated even worse than his art skills, as far as I am concerned.

His writing has became so blandishly bad that after 8 issues of Blood of the Demon I had to drop it. He wouldn't end and start a new arc. It was one....long.....storyline that drifted into another one and so forth.

[Magnificent Bastard]

Byrne is waaaay past his prime and doesn't have the chops to carry a book like he did in the 80's. His old school style is too lame to even be considered throwback or retro-cool.

I'll give him credit for consistently drawing the worst faces for females. Worst Sue Storm, ever.

[The Shadow]

He wouldn't end and start a new arc. It was one....long.....storyline that drifted into another one and so forth.
Isn't having a natural progression between issues better than the bluntness of arc after arc? I'd personally rather there be something that ties the stories together and a natural flow between issues than not.

I think Byrne writes very old school like Claremont... whereas for the past 10 years we've been given arc after arc all set for the trades.

6 issues and done. Repeat over and over. Byrne writes with an overarching flow between tales.

[The Foreigner]

John Byrne's art is icky.

[Ernasto]

John Byrne's art is icky.

You mean John Romita Jr's :evilsmile

[The Shadow]

You mean John Romita Jr's :evilsmile

Agreed 100% ;)

[Mikl C]

Agreed 100% ;)

God forbid you say that in the thread though... :eek:

[Frank]

This is a random aside, but I think John Byrne doesn't "get" Marvel. I'm well aware that he's done some of the best Marvel comics ever (hell- I think his Uncanny X-men run w/ Claremont may just be the best creative run in comics) and his board's "Happy Birthday Stan Lee" thread was the largest I saw on the internet. But his opinions about current, and previous Marvel books just seem flawed.

He doesn't like the current focus on "name" creators (rather than the character), but name creators have always been a big part of Marvel comics, even during the silver age, with Kirby/ Ditko/ Sternako/ Romita/ Adams/ Wood (plus Stan Lee & Roy Thomas were the best regarded writers of the time.) The success of Sgt Fury & His Howling Commandos (a war book with the worst title Stan Lee could imagine) demonstrated that fans flocked to the creators, even more than to the characters.

Byrne complained about how Untold Tales of Spider-Man, which could've been Marvel's "Superboy" (just set vaguely in the past) had stories set between specific issues/ panels of Lee/ Ditko's Amazing Spider-Man. Amazing Spider-Man had continuing subplots, and subtle changes to the status quo every issue after the seventh, and I think there would be far too many contradictions for Marvel to have a continuing series set vaguely in the past, without acknowledging the developments/ continuity of a universally acclaimed run. Marvel wasn't Silver Age DC, where developments in one story in Superman rarely had an impact on the developments in the next story in the same issue, and that may have been one reason Marvel kept kicking DC's ass in sales.
http://www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=17534&PN=1&TPN=3

This also ties into Byrne's complaints about how Marvel killed off Gwen Stacy, rather than allow her to be forgotten like Judie Madison (Batman's Golden-Age fiancee) ignoring the key differences. Gwen Stacy was a regular character for 90 issues, and the best stories w/ Gwen Stacy were a lot better than the best stories with Judie Madison, meaning that new readers were always going to be exposed to the character (especially given how often the Lee/ Ditko/ Romita issues have been reprinted).
Byrne was a big fan of books having a constant status quo, when that was never really characteristic of Marvel comics, even during the illusion of change era. While writers often go overboard with changes, stagnancy may just be worse, and I don't think Byrne understands the advantages of a changing status quo (ie- heroes quitting/ returning to the Avengers, Peter Parker dating a woman for 13 issues/ breaking up with her.)

He had legit complaints, but they're obscured by his demeanor, and many mistakes.

And that's one big reason I wouldn't want him writing a Marvel title.

My problem with his complaints is that he whines about stuff that he himself did. Untold Tales of Spider-Man is especially a good example since he hated it but does the same thing with X-Men: Hidden Years. He says that super-hero should not be too real and decry the violence in comics such as The Ultimates while he and Claremont had the X-Men slaughtered in Days of Futur Past. Too much pop culture references in the Ultimate line' stories? The guy he reveres so much Stan Lee used to use tons of pop culture references! You read classic Spider-Man stories and it's funny how much dated it feels.