There was a time in the late 1970's/early 1980's where John Byrne strode over the comic industry like a god.
He came to prominence with the Claremont/Byrne/Austin issues of X-MEN (issues 108,109, 111-143) from 1977-1981.
He also had memorable runs on: AVENGERS (issues 181-191), CAPTAIN AMERICA (issues 247-255), IRON FIST (issues 1-15, and POWER MAN/IRON FIST 48-50), among many others.
And his signature work, FANTASTIC FOUR 232-293, where he wrote, pencilled and inked the series (which is a great run up through issue 274) and his tour-de-force brought FF back to the heights of popularity. I would argue that it was during the last year and a half of Byrne's run on FF (issues 275-293) that he began to decline.
And although his MAN OF STEEL/SUPERMAN/ACTION COMICS/WORLD OF KRYPTON run from 1986-1988 was a period of renewed interest in Byrne for his significant changes in Superman's mythology, this also represented an even further decline in Byrne's art, despite some good writing.
From 1975-1982, Byrne's art got increasingly detailed and refined. And it seemed to me that he just stopped caring about his art sometime in 1983, and from that point forward over a period of years, his writing began to decline as well. The first solid clue was when he announced in a letters page (FF 258) that he was drawing in ink, and skipping the pencil stage. I remember reading this and thinking that this guy no longer cares about his art.
But I still have fond memories of Byrne's early work, and occasionally have enjoyed some of his later work as well, such as his SENSATIONAL SHE-HULK run (1989, and 1991-1993)
I think Byrne's career breaks down into several different eras:
Early Period (Charleton) 1975-1976 Early Marvel period 1975-1980 Marvel, the Peak Years 1980-1986 DC/Superman period 1986-1988 Back at Marvel period 1989-1993 Dark Horse period 1992-1994 DC, Mid-1990's period 1995-1998 Marvel Again, Exploring Early Marvel period 1998-2001 Current DC period 2002-2003
I'm really curious why an artist who seemed so dedicated to the quality of his art, and was very popular and praised for that commitment, suddenly took such a shameless dive in quality and seems to have just stopped caring, despite being one of the highest-paid and most recognized artists in the field. This is the same guy that in the early 1980's would rip on other artists like Gil Kane and Don Heck and Bob Layton for the slightest imperfection in their work, and in particular ripped on many Silver Age artists for "doing nothing" to advance their art. And then Byrne HIMSELF became the epitome of a hack who continues to churn out half-hearted work.
As hard as Byrne was on his fellow professionals, I think Byrne has gotten relatively little abuse for the drop in quality of his own work.
There was a time where Byrne's work just got better and better, and he was arguably on a par with greats like Starlin, Gulacy, Buckler, Romita Jr., Perez, Rogers, Grell, Brunner, Chaykin, Simonson, Day, Bissette, Tottleben, Golden, Miller, Giffen, Paul Smith, Art Adams, Brent Anderson and Bill Sienkiewicz.
And even approaching the level of Neal Adams, Berni Wrightson, Michael Kaluta, Barry Windsor-Smith, Frazetta and Corben.
But at some point Byrne just oddly stopped caring.
What went wrong?
And on a more positive note, what are some of your best-loved favorites by Byrne?
But then compare that to his atrocious run on Wonder Woman.
I read something somewhere that when Jack Kirby died, Byrne said someone said to him that he was in charge now, that he was the comics god. Byrne didn't object to this.
I think Byrne might have decided that anything Byrne was good, so why bother with effort?
Incidentally, Byrne has been the subject of criticism over his often sadistic portrayal of women - see the She-Hulk graphic novel (She-Hulk is naked, chained and watched on video by a voyueristic and corrupt SHIELD agent): Big Barda's apparent rape at the hands of a minion of Darkseid in an issue of Action Comics (in which she and Superman later make a porn film - I kid you not!), and others. They was a website on the subject, the link to which I've now lost.
quote:Originally posted by Dave: I read something somewhere that when Jack Kirby died, Byrne said someone said to him that he was in charge now, that he was the comics god. Byrne didn't object to this.
iirc, in fact, he seemed quite pleased with the notion.
quote:Originally posted by Dave: I quite liked Sensational She-Hulk.
But then compare that to his atrocious run on Wonder Woman.
The only good thing Byrne did there was turn WW into a goddess..then DC stripped her of her new powers the next issue sfter his run was over...tragic. The only good thing Byrne did there was turn WW into a goddess..then DC stripped her of her new powers the next issue sfter his run was over...tragic
Incidentally, Byrne has been the subject of criticism over his often sadistic portrayal of women - see the She-Hulk graphic novel (She-Hulk is naked, chained and watched on video by a voyueristic and corrupt SHIELD agent): Big Barda's apparent rape at the hands of a minion of Darkseid in an issue of Action Comics (in which she and Superman later make a porn film - I kid you not!), and others. They was a website on the subject, the link to which I've now lost.
I have those...they are a bit twisted..I only realized recently that Shulkie's nipple was hanging out in one of the panels .
Next Men and Danger Unlimited were the last truly great Byrne stories IMO.
My favorite Byrne works in order are..
X-Men Alpha Flight Fantastic Four Avengers (various 175-200) Iron Fist Secret origins Doom Patrol Issue. Man of Steel/Superman/Action Comics (Action Comics Annual #1 being the jewel in the crown) She-Hulk Captain America Next Men/Danger Unlimited Marvel Team-Up Hulk Avengers west Coast (yeah, I liked it) Omac Namor (about half the run was pretty decent.especially the savage Land issues)
In terms of comparing Byrne to other artists i think John Buscema is a good comparison. John Byrne could have been a better version of John Buscema..but he got the attitude.
I met him..he was a decent enough fellow, but he exuded cockiness (if I can judge). he had a decent sense of humor and was relatively cheerful. It just felt that he lost all interest in comics when I finally met him in 92. He had no spark about him as other creators had.
His intent on inking his own work and writing his own work was to his detriment. He needed creative refreshers and he never allowed himself to have any. hopefully his new JLA work with Claremont will re-energize him..
quote:Originally posted by Dave: I read something somewhere that when Jack Kirby died, Byrne said someone said to him that he was in charge now, that he was the comics god. Byrne didn't object to this.
iirc, in fact, he seemed quite pleased with the notion.
Yes, I got that impression, too.
quote: I have those...they are a bit twisted..I only realized recently that Shulkie's nipple was hanging out in one of the panels .
Yes, her shirt was shredded by gunfire, and you can make out a green nipple on green skin.
I've been following John Byrne's work for soooooo long. I used to wonder why he was the target of so much anger & derision from so many "fans". Of course, in the last 5 years, even I've started to tire of his stuff.
My first exposure to Byrne's art was IRON FIST. He & Chris Claremont were each the 5th person in their slot on that series (arriving a few issues apart). After a remarkable ink job by Al McWilliams, Frank Chiaramonte proceeded to BUTCHER whatever it was John was trying to do. I wasn't sure at the time WHAT he was trying to do, because I'd never seen a style like his before. (I had NO IDEA he was influenced at all by Neal Adams-- even when, years later, I finally discovered Adams' work some years after-the-fact.) It wasn't until Dan Adkins (WHAT A PRO!) teamed with Byrne that I started to like his art. (The stories also got a BIT less doom-and-gloom around then, as well.)
I got the 2nd STAR-LORD story when it came out-- stunning work! I read that issue of MARVEL PREVIEW was what led to Byrne taking over X-MEN when the book went monthly, as Dave Cockrum at the time wasn't able to handle the schedule. (Dave recently said he stayed on a bit longer than planned, as Byrne was chomping at the bit, and getting on his nerves even before getting on the book!) I always felt from the beginning that the revival of X-MEN was too damn dark, serious & gloomy all the time, but somehow Byrne's more "cartoony" style (compared to Cockrum) lightened the tone just enough to make it bearable (for me anyway).
Chris & John's run on MARVEL TEAM-UP was a high mark for that entire misbegotten series, and I actually LIKED the "slick" look Dave Hunt brought to the inks. For a few years, I used to wonder what Byrne would look like if inked by Joe Sinnott (my favorite!), and I found out in MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE #50, the story when The Thing went back in time to meet his earlier self.
Later, Byrne took over from Keith Pollard right in the middle of Marv Wolfman's interminiably long outer-space epic in FANTASTIC FOUR. I LOVED the art-- the story was only so-so. After about a year off, Byrne returned to WRITE as well as draw the book. The ONE decision that irked me to no end was when he decided to INK his own work. Joe Sinnott had been a steady mainstay on the book since the middle of the Kirby run, and seen it through Buscema, Fradon, Buckler, Andru, Perez, Pollard, Byrne & even Sienkiewicz (what was HE doing on that book???). To have Sinnott REMOVED just so the look of the title could somehow be returned to an "earlier, rougher" style... WHAT was John trying to do, revive the GEORGE ROUSSOS era????? AUGH!!!
He eventually did get slicker... and then LESS so... when Jerry Ordway took over, it was as though Byrne had finally found his "own" Joe Sinnott. Strangely, Joe inked an issue or two late in the run-- and I noticed that John's style had changed SO much since their earlier teaming, that Joe was NO LONGER a good match with Byrne. how bizarre...!
John's SUPERMAN was interesting... but WHAT was the point of the "pocket universe Supergirl", when they'd gone to such LENGTHS to KILL OFF the original, then say she "now never existed"??? (And besides-- in Post-CRISIS DC, we have Power Girl-- AND Mary Marvel!!!)
John's runs on THE SENSATIONAL SHE-HULK and BABE rank very highly in my eyes, although NEXT MEN was a bit too gloomy for me. DANGER: UNLIMITED was incredible!!!!! I was genuinely PISSED when John stopped it prematurely, because he said the sales weren't doing his bank account enough good. (Some series NEED time to build an audience-- canning the book after only 4 issues was the kind of thing those underaged drug-addict TV execs have been doing for the last 25 years in Hollywood.)
WEST COAST AVENGERS started out as a huge improvement over what the 2nd half of Englehart & Milgrom's run had deteriorated to. But John NEVER finished his projected "Vision Quest" story, derailing the book's direction 5 issues in. I loved the art (who was inking those issues?) and John did the SEXIEST Scarlet Witch in ages. But his entire run seemed aimed at imposing violent retcons over whatever anyone before him had done. (When Roy Thomas took over-- because Byrne left ABRUPTLY-- Roy set about doing to Byrne what Byrne had done to Englehart!)
Since then... SPIDER-MAN: CHAPTER ONE was not only uncalled for, but between the multiple changes & INCESSANT choppiness of the plotting, near-unreadable AND an insult to the memory of the entire Steve Ditko run which was far superior to Byrne's rehash on EVERY level. John's AMAZING SPIDER-MAN was touted as being "independant" of SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN; within months you HAD to read both in sequence or be completely lost (and I HATED J.R.Jr.'s "art" with a passion). Plus, the break in all the depressing crap was not a new direction at all, as Byrne saw Peter's life turn into the worst hell it had EVER seen. I'd finally had it-- I dropped the series for the 3rd-- and FINAL-- time. Who needs to read just to be depressed?
The first 2 GENERATIONS minis were really interesting and quite fun. The 3rd (current) one suffers from the same OVER-complexity and SEVERE choppy plottig that murdered MARVEL: THE LOST GENERATION for me. What ever happened to "straightforward" storytelling? Whatever happened to letting scenes play out, instead of CONSTANTLY being interrupted with other scenes, so that by the end of a book, you feel you haven't been able to read ANYTHING? (I CAN'T be the only one who feels this way...)
I wish-- and I feel this way about a lot of creative types-- that John would create his OWN characters-- STICK with them for a really long time-- and find an INKER who can do his pencils justice. (Even Jim Steranko admitted that other inkers always did HIS work better than Jim did himself.)
quote:John's SUPERMAN was interesting... but WHAT was the point of the "pocket universe Supergirl", when they'd gone to such LENGTHS to KILL OFF the original, then say she "now never existed"??? (And besides-- in Post-CRISIS DC, we have Power Girl-- AND Mary Marvel!!!)
It was fucking pointless. You're right: Power Girl could easily have filled the role.
Reading some of the early Byrne/Claremont X-Men issues is how I got completely hooked on comics. I thought his art was fantastic and aspired to draw like him (there's still a bit of his influence, I think, in my own work, and noticeable among many pros today). I followed him to the Fantastic Four, and of course his work on Superman. While not as good, artistically, as X-Men, they were so well written (me not really being a fan of either properties, it goes to show how good storytelling can save anything), and since he was doing his Jack-of-All-Trades thing, I forgave the slip in art.
I'm probably one of the rare few who immensley enjoyed his West Coast Avengers run, as well.
And then came OMAC. This is still high on my list of favorite books. This is when I realized that there is a world of comics outside straight up superhero books, and began to get into some of the edgy stuff released by DC and Epic back in the 80s, as well as some indie stuff.
I followed over to the Next Men, which I liked a lot, but the art had slipped so much, this is when I realized it. Shortly after, I kinda dropped out of comics for a year or two.
When I came back, Byrne was still around, and I couldn't believe it was the same guy. The quality of art had dropped so dramatically, and his writing was so subpar, and so... old... it didn't seem right.
This is when I started talking with a few people and hearing the horror stories of how he treated his "fans", his fellow pros, etc. One year at the Mid-Ohio Con, my friend, a retailer, and I were in line to meet Sergio Aragones. Byrne was sitting at the next table, and saw my friend with his retailer name tag. He then proceeded to harass and hassle him, at first trying to get him to go over to Byrne's table (since no one was there). He moved on to annoyance and then insulting both my friend and Sergio Aragones, sitting no more than 10 feet away.
I've tried giving his most recent work a try, but it's so bland, sloppy and unexciting, I've given up.
My best friend Jim (who passed away from a heart attack 3 years ago) went with my to the 2nd (and last) "Marvel-Con" in NYC back in '76. He saw John Byrne up there (I missed him somehow, spending time at Marie Severin's table-- what a NICE and really FUN lady!). Jim always liked to say how, while Marie, a "famous pro" was doing sketches for FREE, Byrne, an "unknown newbie", was CHARGING for his. Maybe a silly complaint, but it stuck in HIS mind...
I forgot to mention CAPTAIN AMERICA! What a STELLAR run by Stern, Byrne & Rubinstein! They hit the ground running, cleaning up a MESS Roy Thomas had started 2 years earlier in only 4 PAGES-- then went on to tackle an even bigger mess left hanging since the Jim Steranko & Neal Adams X-MEN runs. And THEN it got better. UNTIL...!!! (as Bill Cosby once said) I mean really-- 8 issues in, and ALL 3 GUYS quit over some minor disagreement with the editor??? In the words of so many Message Board posters-- "WTF???!!!"
And of course, the same thing goes for his initial run on SHE-HULK. And what about his run on THE INCREDIBLE HULK ? That book had been, in one form or another, the PITS since shortly after Jack Kirby stopped doing plots & layouts (let's be HONEST, people-- 15 YEARS of treading water with the same mindless downbeat depressing pointless plots, with only the occasional bright points to break it up). Along comes Byrne with some radical thinking-- probably just what it needed... and he QUITS after only 6 ISSUES over some minor disagreement with his editor!!! (Hey, where have I heard this before???) And then, the issue he did that was rejected was PUBLISHED ANYWAY, 6 months later, in MARVEL FANFARE. Geez.
O M A C, after-the-fact, turned out to be my favorite of Kirby's 70's DC books. One more inspired project cut off in mid-stream, far too early. Ressurected in a completely ill-conceived and obscene (yet technically impressive) rethink by Starlin, who dropped off too soon because of the "DC Implosion". Continued to no avail by Mishkin, Cohn & LaRocque, whose attempt to back-peddle back to Kirby's intent felt awkward when compared to both Kirby AND Starlin. And then Byrne came along, and like HULK, did something UTTERLY bizzare... It was VERY interesting. I loved the part where OMAC killed Adolph Hitler! the discovery that "The World That's Coming" had always been an alternate-reality, NOT part of the "normal" DCU, created by time-travel, seemed inspired. But somehow, in the last half of part 4, I think he went to far-- OVER-COMPLICATING it to the point where, after reading the entire mini TWICE, I STILL couldn't make heads or tails of it. I see this as the real beginning of his downward slide-- and the start of the kind of things he's been doing in MARVEL: THE LOST GENERATION and GENERATIONS. (What's "wrong" with "simple" stories???)
Incidentally-- I believe it was Dan Green, who'd been slipping for ages, who did a really SUPERIOR job inking Byrne on some issues of AMAZING SPIDER-MAN. But it was John Romita (the "real" one) who inked ONE issue of that book over Byrne, who REALLY did the best-looking Byrne art I've seen in ages, even above the work Tom Palmer did on X-MEN: THE HIDDEN YEARS. I do wish John would find an inker or three who knows what they're doing.
I thought I'd add a Checklist of Byrne's early work (the first two eras of Byrne's career).
The first 1975-1980 part of the checklist is from the SQ Productions book THE ART OF JOHN BYRNE ( I added the book itself to the list, along with cover-dates and page-counts for each issue), which goes up to mid-1980. Some of the series listed continue past the July 1980 cut-off date, and I'll complete these runs in the 1980-1986 checklist section.
AVENGERS 164 (Marcos i )17p 10/1977 165 (Marcos i )17p 11/1977 166 (Marcos i )17p 12/1977
181 (Gene Day i ) 3/1979 182 (Janson i) 4/1979 183 (Janson i ) 5/1979 184 ( "Diverse hands" i , Wiacek, Milgrom, Rubinstein, Green , Austin) 6/1979 185 (Green i ) 7/1979 186 (Green i ) 8/1979 187 (Green i ) 9/1979 188 (Green, Springer i ) 10/1979 189 (Green i ) 11/1979 190 (Green i ) 12/1979 191 ( Green i ) 1/1980
CAPTAIN AMERICA 223 cover 238 cover 239 cover 247 (Rubinstein i )17p 7/1980 ** Byrne run continues to issue 255, in "1980 to 1986" section of checklist
FANTASTIC FOUR 209 (Sinnott i )17p 8/1979 210 (Sinnott i )17p 9/1979
211 (Sinnott i )17p 10/1979 212 (Sinnott i )17p 11/1979 213 (Sinnott i )17p 12/1979 214 (Sinnott i )17p 1/1980 215 (Sinnott i )17p 2/1980 216 (Sinnott i )17p 3/1980 217 (Sinnott i )17p 4/1980 218 (Sinnott i )17p 5/1980 220 (Sinnott i )17p 7/1980 221 (Sinnott i )17p 8/1980 ** this FF run continues in "1980 to 1986" section of checklist.
GHOST RIDER 20 (Perlin i )17p 10/1976
GIANT-SIZE DRACULA 5 (Nebres i )8p 6/1975
HULK ANNUAL 7 (Layton i )35p 1978 8 Byrne script, co-plot with Roger Stern, no art 1979
IRON FIST 1 (McWilliams i ) 18p 11/1975 2 (Chiaramonte i )17p 2/1976 3 (Chiaramonte i )17p 3/1976 4 (Chiaramonte i )17p 4/1976 5 (Chiaramonte i )17p 6/1976 6 (Chiaramonte i )17p 8/1976 7 (Chiaramonte i )17p 9/1976 8 (Adkins i )17p 10/1976 9 (Chiaramonte i )17p 11/1976 10 (Adkins i )17p 12/1976 11 (Adkins i )17p 2/1977 12 (Adkins i )17p 4/1977 13 (Adkins i )17p 6/1977 14 (Green i )17p 8/1977 15 (Green i )17p 9/1977
IRON MAN 109 cover 118 ( Layton i )17p 1/1979
JUNGLE ACTION 23 Byrne/Adkins cover 9/1976
MARVEL CHILLERS 2 cover 12/1975 6 (Springer i )17p 8/1976
MARVEL PREMIERE 25 (McWilliams i ) 18p 10/1975 47 (Layton i )17p 4/1979 48 (Layton i )17p 6/1979
MARVEL PREVIEW (b & w magazine ) 11 Starlord (Austin i )52p 10/1977 reprinted in color as STARLORD: THE SPECIAL EDITION, in 1982
MARVEL TEAM-UP 53 (Giacoia i )17p 1/1977 54 (Esposito i ) 17p 2/1977 55 (Hunt i )17p 3/1977 59 (Hunt i )17p 7/1977 60 (Hunt i )17p 8/1977 61 (Hunt i )17p 9/1977 62 (Hunt i )17p 10/1977 63 (Hunt i ) 17p 11/1977 64 (Hunt i) 17p 12/1977 65 (Hunt i )17p 1/1978 66 (Hunt i )17p 2/1978 67 (Hunt i )17p 3/1978 68 (Wiacek i )17p 4/1978 69 (Villamonte i )17p 5/1978 70 (Dezuniga i )17p 6/1978
POWER MAN 48 "Power Man/ Iron Fist" team-up begins (Green i )17p 12/1977 49 (Green i )17p 2/1978 50 (Green i )17p 4/1978
SPECTACULAR SPIDERMAN 17 cover
STAR WARS 17 cover
SUPER-VILLAIN TEAM-UP 14 cover
X-MEN 108 (Austin i )17p 12/1977 109 (Austin i ) 17p 2/1978 111 (Austin i ) 17p 6/1978 112 (Austin i ) 17p 8/1978 113 (Austin i ) 17p 9/1978 114 (Austin i ) 17p 10/1978 115 (Austin i ) 17p 11/1978 116 (Austin i ) 17p 12/1978 117 (Austin i ) 17p 1/1979 118 (Villamonte i)17 2/1979 119 (Austin i ) 17p 3/1979 120 (Austin i ) 17p 4/1979 121 (Austin i ) 17p 5/1979 122 (Austin i ) 17p 6/1979 123 (Austin i ) 17p 7/1979 124 (Austin i ) 17p 8/1979 125 (Austin i ) 17p 9/1979 126 (Austin i ) 17p 10/1979 127 (Austin i ) 17p 11/1979 128 (Austin i ) 17p 12/1979 129 (Austin i ) 17p 1/1980 130 (Austin i ) 17p 2/1980 131 (Austin i) 17p 3/1980 132(Austin i ) 17p 4/1980 133 (Austin i ) 17p 5/1980 134 (Austin i ) 17p 6/1980 135 (Austin i ) 17p 7/1980 ** continues to issue 143, in "1980 to 1986" section of checklist.
SKYWALD Publishing:
NIGHTMARE 20 "The Castle" (Byrne p/Duffy Vohland i)2p 8/1974
CHARLETON comics:
DOOMSDAY PLUS ONE 1 (Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 7/1975 2 (Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 9/1975 3 (Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 11/1975 4 (Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 1/1976 5 (Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 3/1976 6 (Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 5/1976 ** issues 7-12 reprint issues 1-6 **also later reprinted with better colors and offset printing as THE DOOMSDAY SQUAD 1-7, in "1980 to 1986" section of checklist. The reprint series includes an unpublished 7th issue.
E-MAN 6 Rog 2000, "That Was No Lady" (Byrne pencils and inks) 8p 1/1975 7 Rog 2000, "Withering Heights" (Byrne pencils and inks) 7p 3/1975
9 Rog 2000, "The Wish" (Byrne pencils and inks)7p 7/1975 10 Rog 2000, "The Sog" (Byrne pencils and inks) 7p 9/1975
EMERGENCY 1 (Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 6/1976
SPACE 1999 3 (Byrne pencils and inks) 22p 3/1976 4 (Byrne pencils and inks) 22p 5/1976 5 (Byrne pencils and inks) 22p 7/1976 6 (Byrne pencils and inks) 22p 9/1976
THE MANY GHOSTS OF DR GRAVES 54 cover
WHEELIE AND THE CHOPPER BUNCH 1 2p (4 illustrations with 2-page text feature) 5/1975 2 (Byrne pencils and inks)20p 9/1975 3 (Byrne pencils and inks)22p 11/1975
John Byrne has also had work published in:
Charleton Bullseye Charleton Portfolio Chronicle C.P.L. Eclipse Epoch Fans of Central Jersey F.O.O.M. Heroes. Inc. Quest The Collector The Comics Journal The Comic Reader The Monster Times
Earliest known work:
A.C.A. COMICS # 1, featuring the Death's Head Knight (written, drawn & lettered by John)
THE EMERY WEAL , 12 installments in the Adventures of Gay Guy, a satirical comic strip
SQ Productions, book:
THE ART OF JOHN BYRNE (1980)
Editorials by Roger Stern, Chris Claremont and Terry Austin
Photos of Byrne and other artists.
Sketchbook drawings
Paintings
Interview (17 pages)
a 25-page science fiction story (written, pencilled and inked by Byrne)
CHECKLIST of comics by Byrne:
** all titles listed above are from the book's checklist**
Profh0011, IRON FIST is an early Byrne title I have a special attachment to.
I also like some of Byrne's earliest work. The first I purchased off the stands of Byrne's work was DOOMSDAY PLUS ONE # 1, which I still find very entertaining on re-reading.
And the ROG 2000 strips, in E-MAN. Which I first purchased in the 1981 Pacific comics reprint edition, in b & w.
SPACE 1999 also has some nice Byrne artwork, and painted covers.
But IRON FIST is the series where you can really see him develop, from 1975-1977. (And the IRON FIST storyline then continues in MARVEL TEAM-UP 63-64, and in POWERMAN/IRONFIST 48-50)
I especially like AVENGERS 181-191, as much for the Michelinie scripting as for Byrne's art. And Byrne has a huge range of inkers on this 11-issue run. I especially like the first issue, outstandingly inked by Gene Day.
But as you say, Prof, there are many other series I remember fondly. Some of the best were just single issues Byrne did, such as MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE # 50.
And also MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE # 43.
And HULK ANNUAL # 7 (1978)
And MARVEL PREVIEW magazine # 11 (Starlord)
And the two-part MARVEL PREMIERE story (Antman) in issues 47 and 48.
To Name a few.
The Doom Patrol issue of secret origins is my favorite Byrne art..also the Doom Patrol pages he did in Who's Who. You can tell he has alove for the characters. It's amazing he's never done them yet...
I have to admit, there was a point where I started separating my comics by creator rather than series, as certain runs might be so far superior to what surrounds them as to be absurd. But I do prefer thinking about series as whole entities, despite revolving-door creative teams-- the kind of thing which has been bugging me more of late than it ever did when I was younger.
I'd have to go back and look at those POWER MAN / IRON FIST issues. I recall how ABOMINABLE the book became, art-wise, during the McGregor & Wolfman runs (Frank Robbins! Aubrey Bradford! AUGH!). I don't recall Dan Green doing a bad job-- but later on, Green MURDERED Byrne's art on that AVENGERS run with Michelinie. I couldn't believe an inker who'd started out so good could sink as far as he did. It was like he started talking lessons from Frank Chiaramonte-- AUGH! Then again, Bob Wiacek has been on a steady downward slide for 20 straight years-- if he's still in the biz today. So Byrne is not alone in letting his craft slip away from him.
Ah yes-- ANT-MAN!!! Amazing. I've heard recently that Byrne got very puissed at Bob Layton for changing his art too much, and never wanted to work with him again. which I thought was strange, because I'd heard 20 years ago the same feelings were held by Dave Cockrum, after Layton completely redrew some faces in the one issue of X-MEN they did together.
I believe TWO-IN-ONE #50 was Byrne's writing debut-- he really showed what he could do. Oddly enough, in the 80's, more and more guys who started as pencillers and later did writing & pencils suddenly ONLY wanted to do writing-- Starlin, Grell, Miller, Giffen, Byrne... Of these, ONLY Byrne's work REALLY suffered terribly whenever anyone else would pencil his stories. I realized that John's art was ESSENTIAL to his entire "style" of storytelling-- without it, one would be suffering through interminable long storylines, without any pretty pictures to jazz it up.
I'm thinking of his ENTIRE RUN as writer of IRON MAN-- maybe I just really, REALLY HATE J.R.Jr.'s "new style", which he'd developed right about then-- but even after he left and Paul Ryan took over, there was hardly any noticeable improvement in the storylines. Yes, it's true-- long before, as legend now tells me, I.M. went COMPLETELY to hell, Byrne bored the hell out of sop much I stopped buying the series, so i missed all the REALLY awful stuff that came later!
I think John Byrne got overconfident in his own abilities. He took on too much in the 80s after he became convinced that he was the ultimate comics creator in the field. He started off drawing them (UXM), then writing and drawing them (FF), then re-conceptualizing them (Superman).
I recall a spread in USA TODAY back in 86 or so where Byrne's pulling aside his Oxford shirt to reveal Superman's S on a shirt underneath. Life imitates art. Byrne probably was convinced he could do it all.
Now, it seems, not only is he convinced he can still do it all, he's convinced that his visions for comics are the RIGHT ones. Just read his SLUSH shit. Or his posts on his own site. The man reeks of perceived self-importance. Good ole 50K Byrne.
I have little use for his work nowadays. I totally ignored his LAB RATS because the premise didn't grab me. The last serious reading I did of his work was his THE HIDDEN YEARS series of the X-Men he did. I found it had promise, but I disagreed with much of his execution and found his insertion of Storm to be nothing more than a cheeky wink and nod to the 4th Wall.
I still treasure those old UXM. But for me, Byrne is someone from my past.
Yes, Jim. I agree that Byrne thought he could do it all. And for a while, he actually COULD. His first few years on FF (1981-1984, issues 232-275 or so) were phenomenally good reading. As I recall, it was the second highest selling book through most of those years, and deservedly so. Script, art, and a good mix of both nostalgia and originality, I thought it was a great series. But as many here have stated, it finally went to Byrne's head.
I recall Claremont had a science fiction novel called First Flight that came out around 1986 or so. And then right after, Byrne had a science fiction book come out as well.
Byrne really was trying to do it all. Although there has been a long-standing hostility and bitter rivalry between Byrne and Claremont, that I thought motivated Byrne to also pursue novels, when Claremont got published. I wonder if Byrne and Claremont would have both ventured into novels, if not for their competition. Both Byrne and Claremont demonstrated egotism that beyond a certain point ruined their previously outstanding work. And both declined at about the same time, the 1986-1988 period. (I like the idea voiced above for a similar "what went wrong" topic for Claremont. )
Here's the second part of a Byrne checklist I concocted, expanding on the one above:
______________________________________________
*********** Marvel, 1980-1986, the peak years ********
ALPHA FLIGHT 1 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 8/1983 2 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 9/1983 3 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 10/1983 4 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 11/1983 5 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 12/1983 6 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 1/1984 7 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 2/1984 8 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 3/1984 9 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 4/1984 10 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 5/1984 11 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 6/1984 12 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 7/1984 13 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 8/1984 14 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 9/1984 15 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 10/1984 16 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 11/1984 17 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 12/1984 18 (Byrne story, p and i) 22p 1/1985 19 (Byrne story & p, Keith Williams i) 22p 2/1985 20 (Byrne story & p, Keith Williams i) 22p 3/1985 21 (Byrne story & p, Wiacek i) 22p 4/1985 22 (Byrne story & p, Wiacek i) 22p 5/1985 23 (Byrne story & p, Wiacek/Williams i) 22p 6/1985 24 (Byrne story & p, Wiacek i) 22p 7/1985 25 (Byrne story & p, Wiacek i) 22p 8/1985 26 (Byrne story & p, Wiacek i) 22p 9/1985 27 (Byrne story & p, Keith Williams i) 22p 10/1985 28 (Byrne story & p, Keith Williams i) 22p 11/1985
DOOMSDAY SQUAD (reprints DOOMSDAY PLUS ONE, with better printing) by FANTAGRAPHICS 1(Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 8/1986 2(Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 9/1986 3(Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 10/1986 4(Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 11/1986 5(Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 1/1987 6(Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 4/1987 7(Byrne pencils and inks) 23p 6/1987 --previously unpublished 7th issue
EPIC ILLUSTRATED 26 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 10/1984 27 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 12/ 1984 28 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 2/1985 29 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 4/1985 30 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 6/1985 31 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 8/1985 32 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 10/1985 33 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 12p 12/1985 34 (Byrne s and p/ Austin i ) 6p 2/1986
FANTASTIC FOUR 220 (Sinnott) 17p 7/1980 221 (Sinnott) 17p 8/1980
232 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 7/1981 233 ( Byrne s, p and i )22p 8/1981 234 ( Byrne s, p and i )22p 9/1981 235 ( Byrne s, p and i) 22p 10/1981 236 ( Byrne s, p and i)40p 11/1981 237 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 12/1981 238 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 1/1982 239 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 2/1982 240 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 3/1982 241 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 4/1982 242 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 5/1982 243 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 6/1982 244 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 7/1982 245 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 8/1982 246 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 9/1982 247 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 10/1982 248 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 11/1982 249 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 12/1982 250 ( Byrne s, p and i)38p 1/1983 251 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 2/1983 252 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 3/1983 253 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 4/1983 254 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 5/1983 255 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 6/1983 256 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 7/1983 257 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 8/1983 258 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 9/1983 259 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 10/1983 260 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 11/1983 261 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 12/1983 262 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 1/1984 263 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 2/1984 264 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 3/1984 265 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 4/1984 266 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 5/1984 267 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 6/1984 268 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 7/1984 269 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 8/1984 270 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 9/1984 271 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 10/1984 272 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 11/1984 273 ( Byrne s, p and i)22p 12/1984 274 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 1/1985 275 ( Byrne s, p /Gordon i)22p 2/1985 276 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 3/1985 277 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 4/1985 278 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 5/1985 279 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 6/1985 280 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 7/1985 281 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 8/1985 282 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 9/1985 283 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 10/1985 284 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 11/1985 285 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 12/1985 286 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 1/1986 287 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 2/1986 288 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 3/1986 289 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 4/1986 290 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 5/1986 291 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 6/1986 292 ( Byrne s, p / Gordon i )22p 7/1986 293 ( Byrne s, p , and i )22p 8/1986
FANTASTIC FOUR ANNUAL 17 (Byrne s, p, and i) 38p 1983 19 (Byrne s, p and i)35p 1985
FANTASTIC FOUR ROAST (6 pages by Byrne, artist jam, with other pages by Golden, Sienkiewicz, Buscema, Brent Anderson, Romita Jr, Layton, Fred Hembeck, and the rest of the entire Marvel Bullpen at that time) 4/1982
FURTHER ADVENTURES OF INDIANA JONES 1 (Byrne s, p, Austin i ) 1/1983 2 (Byrne s, p, Austin i ) 2/1983
INCREDIBLE HULK 314 (Byrne script, p /Gordon i)22p 12/1985 315 (Byrne script, p /Gordon i)22p 1/1986 316 (Byrne script, p /Gordon i)22p 2/1986 317 (Byrne script, p /Gordon i)22p 3/1986 318 (Byrne script, p /Gordon i)22p 4/1986
MARVEL FANFARE 1 (two-page poster) 3/1982 29 (Byrne s, p and i)22p 11/1986 48 12/1989
MARVEL TEAM-UP 100 (Mcleod i)10p 12/1980
MARVEL TWO-IN ONE 100 (Byrne scripts,Ron Wilson/Sinnot art) 22p 6/1983 continues in THE THING, issues 1-36
ROG 2000 (reprint of Charleton material by Pacific Comics) 1 reprints (Byrne p and inks on all 5 stories)28p 7/1982, b & w magazine
ROG 2000 1 reprints, in color (Byrne p and inks) 1987 2 reprints, in color (Byrne p and inks) 1987
SHE HULK (Marvel graphic novel # 18) (Byrne s, p and i ) 64p 1985
LEGENDS 1 (Ostrander s/Byrne p/Kesel i ) 22p 11/1986 2 (Ostrander s/Byrne p/Kesel i ) 22p 12/1986 3 (Ostrander s/Byrne p/Kesel i ) 22p 1/1987 4 (Ostrander s/Byrne p/Kesel i ) 22p 2/1987 5 (Ostrander s/Byrne p/Kesel i ) 22p 3/1987 6 (Ostrander s/Byrne p/Kesel i ) 22p 4/1987
MAN OF STEEL 1 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p early 10/1986 2 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p late 10/1986 3 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p early 11/1986 4 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p late 11/1986 5 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p early 12/1986 6 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p late 12/1986
SECRET ORIGINS ANNUAL 1 (Doom Patrol, Kupperberg s, Byrne p and i ) 8/1987
SUPERMAN 1 (Byrne script and p/Austin i)22p 1/1987 2 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 2/1987 3 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 3/1987 4 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 4/1987 5 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 5/1987 6 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 6/1987 7 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 7/1987 8 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 8/1987 9 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 9/1987 10 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 10/1987 11 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 11/1987 12 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 12/1987 13 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 1/1988 14 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 2/1988 15 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 3/1988 16 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 4/1988 17 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 5/1988
18 ( Byrne s, Mignola p/Kesel i) 22p 6/1988
19 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 7/1988 20 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 8/1988 21 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 9/1988 22 (Byrne script and p/Kesel i)22p 10/1988
SUPERMAN ANNUAL 2 (Byrne art) 1988
SUPERMAN: THE EARTH STEALERS (Elseworlds) 1 (1988)
Quote: Dave said: </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">John's SUPERMAN was interesting... but WHAT was the point of the "pocket universe Supergirl", when they'd gone to such LENGTHS to KILL OFF the original, then say she "now never existed"??? (And besides-- in Post-CRISIS DC, we have Power Girl-- AND Mary Marvel!!!) </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It was fucking pointless. You're right: Power Girl could easily have filled the role.
I am sure to remember in an interview in one issue of the fanzine Amazing Heroes of the time, that he originally planned to use Powergirl.
I vaguely remember to have read that "Powergirl would have been discovered in the ice of the Antarctic, with no memories of her past".
But it came the issue of Secret Origins and the mini-series, that made Powergilr unavailable, so he choose to create the pocket Universe.
I still have that issue of Amazing Heroes at my mother's home. If any of you is interested in that, I can try to find it.
Quote: the G-man said: The simple answer here is that Byrne's ego got too big.
He started thinking he could do it all and he started thinking that he could do it quickly.
And his worked suffered.
G-man, I was going to say exactly the same thing. Byrne became convinced he could do no wrong at some point, and he stopped trying very hard.
I think Byrne can still produce quality work now, but he has to be controlled and limited to a single function on a book. He can write, but no artwork. He can pencil, but he needs an inker. NEVER leave him in charge of everything, and for god's sake, EDIT HIM!
And, as I noted on another thread about Bryne and Claremont's recent work on JLA:
Back in the 1970s, Byrne and Claremont were considered groundbreaking. They brought dynamic art, innovative story-telling and rich characterization to team books (such as JLA) that had previously been known for nothing so much as rote plots and cookie cutter personalities.
Now, they're doing the same kind of lame, throwaway, plot that we used to get in the "Justice League of America" nearly every month in the 1970s (and what drove us to give up on the book for comics like "X-men" in the first place): One or more members of the team is/was captured/mind controlled by some no-name villain and its up to the remainder of the team (whose personalities seem interchangeable) to come to the rescue. And Byrne's art, while still ahead of the hen scratchings that he's fostered upon us lately, was pedestrian and stiff.
Not only aren't these guys innovators any more, but they are ripping off the very type of comic book that we used to buy their work to avoid. And they aren't putting a unique or modern spin on it, either (the way that Moore does with his ABC comics, for example).
It's almost as if the Beatles were all alive, and reunited to do nothing except cover the old Frankie Avalon and Fabian tunes they forced off the charts back in 64.
I can kind of understand what Byrne and Claremont are doing creatively.
When I was younger, I was less interested in the stuff from the 40's and 50's and early 60's. I considered that stuff "before my time" and a bit stiff in its storytelling. But over time, once I'd exhausted my craving for the current fare, I began to look back and more fully appreciate the charming conventions of these earlier eras.
So Byrne and Claremont, with a similar appreciation, have done the equivalent of re-creating Frankie Avalon. Which I don't have a problem with, except that it's a poor re-creation by two creators way past their prime.
Byrne's FF (beginning with issue 232) was similarly a re-creation of that earliest Lee/Kirby era on FF. And Claremont similarly captured a Stan Lee brand of melodrama in his best X-men work, in Claremont's first 100 issues or so ("I've never seen Reed so...", "How can I face Sauron again, when the the last time we fought he... raped my soul !", and similar drama ).
From Claremont/Byrne/Austin's glory days, here's one of my favorite X-Men covers:
In the current Marvel titles, as I'm sure most of you have noticed, they're selling a statue figure re-creation of this cover.
Also, here's a few more installments of my Byrne checklist:
**************** Back at Marvel period, 1989-1993 *****
AVENGERS 305 (Byrne scripts, Ryan p/Palmer i)22p 7/1989 to 316 (Byrne scripts, Ryan p/Palmer i)22p 4/1990
AVENGERS WEST COAST 42 (Byrne script and art in all)22p 3/1989 to 57 (Byrne script and art)22p 4/1990
NAMOR, THE SUB-MARINER 1 (Byrne script and art)22p 4/1990 2 (Byrne script and art)22p 5/1990 3 (Byrne script and art)22p 6/1990 4 (Byrne script and art)22p 7/1990 5 (Byrne script and art)22p 8/1990 6 (Byrne script and art)22p 9/1990 7 (Byrne script and art)22p 10/1990 8 (Byrne script and art)22p 11/1990 9 (Byrne script and art)22p 12/1990 10 (Byrne script and art)22p 1/1991 11 (Byrne script and art)22p 2/1991 12 (Byrne script and art)22p 3/1991 13 (Byrne script and art)22p 4/1991 14(Byrne script and art)22p 5/1991 15 (Byrne script and art)22p 6/1991 16 (Byrne script and art)22p 7/1991 17 (Byrne script and art)22p 8/1991 18 (Byrne script and art)22p 9/1991 19 (Byrne script and art)22p 10/1991 20 (Byrne script and art)22p 11/1991 21 (Byrne script and art)22p 12/1991 22 (Byrne script and art)22p 1/1992 23 (Byrne script and art)22p 2/1992 24 (Byrne script and art)22p 3/1992 25 (Byrne script and art)22p 4/1992
26 (Byrne story, Jae Lee art) 22p 5/1992 27 (Byrne story, Jae Lee art) 22p 6/1992 28 (Byrne story, Jae Lee art) 22p 7/1992 29 (Byrne story, Jae Lee art) 22p 8/1992 30 (Byrne story, Jae Lee art) 22p 9/1992 31 (Byrne story, Jae Lee art) 22p 10/1992 32 (Byrne story, Jae Lee art) 22p 11/1992
OMAC, ONE MAN ARMY CORPS ( for DC) 1 9/1991 2 10/1991 3 11/1991 4 12/1991
31 (Byrne story/pencils, KeithWilliams inks)22p 9/1991 32 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 10/1991 33 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 11/1991 34 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 12/1991 35 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 1/1992 36 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 2/1992 37 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 3/1992 38 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 4/1992 39 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 5/1992 40 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 6/1992 41 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 7/1992 42 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 8/1992 43 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 9/1992 44 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 10/1992 45 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 11/1992 46 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 12/1992 47 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 1/1993 48 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 2/1993 49 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 3/1993 50 (Byrne story/pencils, Keith Williams inks)22p 4/1993
STARBRAND 16 (Byrne s, p and i) 1/1989 17 (Byrne s, p and i) 1/1989 18 (Byrne s, p and i) 3/1989 19 (Byrne s, p and i) 5/1989
DANGER UNLIMITED 1 (Byrne story and art) 2/1994 2 (Byrne story and art) 3/1994 3 (Byrne story and art) 4/1994 4 (Byrne story and art) 5/1994
JOHN BYRNE'S 2112 1 (Byrne script and art) 10/1994
BABE 1 (Byrne script and art) 7/1994 2 (Byrne script and art) 9/1994 3 (Byrne script and art) 11/1994 4 (Byrne script and art) 1/1995
BABE 2 1 (Byrne script and art) 3/1995 2 (Byrne script and art) 5/1995
HARLAN ELLISON'S DREAM CORRIDOR 1 "I Have No Mouth, I Must Scream" adaptation , part 1 (of 4) 3/1995 2 4/1995 3 5/1995 4 6/1995
________________________________
There were a number of good stories, and good art, that Byrne continued to do throughout this period. His art quality was slightly less than his 1976-1983 work, but it was still good in the late 80's /early 90's.
It was after this period where I felt Byrne's work really began to decline.
For me, Byrne began losing it during ALPHA FLIGHT. His Snowbird story, where she's the only thing he's drawn in the entire book, trying to convince readers that she's lost in a snow storm, was really pathetic. His issues began to feel less and less like a full book (though I commend him on the creation of one of my favorite characters, Northstar, that was a bold move).
And like many, I found his attitude toward taking over Superman to be somewhat lacking in proper reverence. As though his vision for the character was the only correct one.
And his Internet persona has never been the most fan-friendly.
Of his work lately, I really wanted to like THE HIDDEN YEARS, but I just didn't care for what he was doing with the characters. His inclusion of Storm was silly. LAB RATS was never a concept that interested me.
With his revising the Doom Patrol, I'm interested because it's got the original team in it, not because it's Byrne. Though I will fully admit, I got a bit of a chill reading JLA 95 and seeing some of the DP's action. I'll stick with John's DP as long as the stories are to my liking. There's a lot of sturm und drang over on the DCMBs because John's probably going to wipe out just about all DP history. But I'm not in a knot over it. Tell a good story.
OT a bit: anybody else think that this "Tenth Circle" story that he and CC are doing in JLA is just a kind of a cheeky X-Men reference...as X stands for 10, and I'm envision an X in a circle...which is a classic X-Men symbol (I have a tee shirt with that very symbol on it and I wore it proudly to the premier of X:2 last summer).
Byrne did lose it during Alpha Flight and he says that's why he left that book. He felt there was no depth to the characters and that a new creative team was needed. I enjoyed his writing on Iron Man though. His use of the Marrs twins as Tony's competition in the business world was very creative and his run on Namor was well done also. (But when he stopped pencilling it, IMO he became too experimental in his scripting.) His West Coast Avengers was so-so though. I did, however, appreciate his bringing the Original Human Torch back and doing some continuity clean up in his origins.
"You kind of get tired giving the other team credit. At some point you've got to look in the mirror and say 'I sucked.'"
Alex Rodriguez, after the NY Yankees were eliminated from the 2006 ALDS by the Detroit Tigers.
****************Back at DC period, 1995-1998 ********
WONDER WOMAN 101 9/1995 to 136 9/1998
NEW GODS 12 Byrne story and art 10/1996 13 Byrne story and art 11/1996 14 Byrne story and art 12/1996 15 Byrne story and art 1/1997
JACK KIRBY'S FOURTH WORLD 1 Byrne story and art 3/1997 to 20 Byrne story and art 10/1998
SUPERMAN AND BATMAN: GENERATIONS ( Elseworlds ) 1 Byrne story and art /1999 2 Byrne story and art /1999 3 Byrne story and art /1999 4 Byrne story and art /1999
*************** Marvel again period, 1999-2001 ********** *************** Exploring Early Marvel Period *****
SPIDERMAN: CHAPTER ONE 1 (Byrne script and art)22p 12/1998 2 (Byrne script and art)22p 1/1999 3 (Byrne script and art)22p 2/1999 4 (Byrne script and art)22p 3/1999 5 (Byrne script and art)22p 4/1999 6 (Byrne script and art)22p 5/1999 7 (Byrne script and art)22p 6/1999 8 (Byrne script and art)22p 7/1999 9 (Byrne script and art)22p 8/1999 10 (Byrne script and art)22p 9/1999 11 (Byrne script and art)22p 10/1999 12 (Byrne script and art)22p 11/1999 0 (Byrne script and art)22p 5/1999
Here's another great cover, from back when Byrne was still at the peak of his powers:
The "Pegasus Project" storyline from MARVEL TWO-IN ONE was a very good one (issues 53-58) that has faded into obscurity in recent years. The storyline also provides an interesting but very compatible set of contrasting artists. The first three issues (53 to 55) are by John Byrne/Joe Sinnott, and the latter three issues are by George Perez/Gene Day.
I love Day's inks on these and other issues of MARVEL TWO-IN-ONE (particularly issue 60, also inking Perez). And inking Byrne in AVENGERS 181. And of course, Day's longest run, in MASTER OF KUNG FU.
Day was one of Marvel's best inkers, when after 30 or so issues inking Zeck in MOKF, he switched to pencilling in MASTER OF KUNG FU 102-120. And issue 120 was the last story Gene Day did before he died very unexpectedly in late 1982 of a heart attack at the age of 31.
Regarding Ordway, I like Ordway on Ordway, but not really with anyone else. His style as an inker is too dominant. I like his less dominant inks on ALL STAR SQUADRON back in the early 1980's, especially on ALL STAR SQUADRON ANNUAL # 1 (1982). Much cleaner work.
Ordway also did a great job inking Perez in issue 11 of CRISIS. But for most of the CRISIS series, I felt he took away from Perez's art, and made it look stiff.
Byrne and Austin were such a great art team during X-MEN (1977-1981), but even when Austin came back just a year later to ink FURTHER ADVENTURES OF INDIANA JONES, issues 1 and 2, you could see the two had diverged in style to the point that the same magic was no longer there. Likewise in 1986, when Austin inked the first issue of Byrne's new SUPERMAN series.
Quote: Dave the Wonder Boy said: MASTER OF KUNG FU 102-120. And issue 120 was the last story Gene Day did before he died very unexpectedly in late 1982 of a heart attack at the age of 31.
Byrne and Austin were such a great art team during X-MEN (1977-1981), but even when Austin came back just a year later to ink FURTHER ADVENTURES OF INDIANA JONES, issues 1 and 2, you could see the two had diverged in style to the point that the same magic was no longer there. Likewise in 1986, when Austin inked the first issue of Byrne's new SUPERMAN series.
I recall Byrne saying that he didn't feel Day's death was all that unexpected given that, even though rather young, Day was very much overweight and a *heavy* smoker.
Also, you're right about the Byrne/Austin work on INDIANA JONES...but they still produced quality, competent work.
I just flipped through it tonight at my local comic shop, Jim.
It was pretty icky, art-wise.
I can't vouch for the story, since I didn't find it appealing enought to buy. The art is extremely loose, and in some spots actually reminded me of japanamation, on pages with female characters.
I'm just amazed that anyone is still buying Byrne's work, as sub-standard as it is to his prior work.
What a jolt, compared to Byrne's work on the 1987 SECRET ORIGINS ANNUAL. Which I think was clearly much more inspired.
I thought Byrne's art on DP 1 was functional. It conveyed the story, nothing more. I no longer expect JB's work to be anything more than competent.
The story...well, for a first issue, it's very weak. It's a direct continuation from the JLA "Tenth Circle" storyarc. And I mean direct...to have any semblance of what's going on in DP1, you have to read the JLA issues. And for a #1, I think that's not a good tack to take. There's no amount of substantive character introductions, nada. It's "Tenth Circle,"part 7.
I'm in favor of rebooting the DP, but if the series doesn't get any better than what's indicated in the first issue, it won't last. You can't compare this book to say, ASTONISHING X-MEN. Byrne's whole approach seems to be to tell a story reminscent in style and dialog to a 70s DC comic.
To me, Byrne's work started going downhill when he started using Duo-Tone paper (a chemically-treated paper that's supposed to produce two graphic "screen tones") instead of Zip-A-Tone self-adhesive screen tone sheets.
I haven't seen the new Byrne trade you refer to, T-Dave. I saw Visionaries: John Byrne FANTASTIC FOUR, out about two years ago, reprinting FF 232-240. But if what you refer to is a more recent one, I haven't seen it.
Here's another cover from back when Byrne was still B*Y*R*N*E:
A classic from 1980 by Roger Stern, John Byrne and Joe Rubinstein. And this issue is especially relevent and fun in an election year, when perhaps we yearn even more for a candidate who engenders idealism and trust. Great story.
Does anyone else here really love ROG 2000 by Byrne?
Although a great character, Rog 2000 has had very few appearances.
I first discovered these stories in the ROG 2000 collected reprint magazine by Pacific Comics, out in 1982.
Collecting all the stories from E-MAN issues 6, 7, 9, and 10, along with some other stories and features from CPL and other fan publications where Byrne and ROG's other creators started out.
Byrne's own website shows fan-magazine covers, convention sketches, and even a Twinkie ad, all featuring ROG 2000.
Rog 2000 also had a cameo in Byrne's SHE HULK run, in issue 8.
I loved Byrne's FF run.I liked his Superman stuff & of course,his X-Men.As far as recent stuff goes,I'd say the first two Generations minis,Batman/Captain America Elseworlds & Darkseid/Galactus Elseworlds were the only blips on the radar that I enjoyed.I have found the current Blood of the Demon series to be interesting enough for me to pick it up every month(like DP,it's ending before it even hits the 20 issue mark).I met him once a few years ago at Pittsburgh & he was actually pretty nice to me as we discussed Superman & what he had coming up that involved the Man of Steel(at the time it was the Elesworlds Annual of Action Comics I think).
It's a dog eat dog world & I'm wearing milkbone underwear.
Rog 2000 was enjoyable stuff that stood out at the time (as well as the original E-man run) I think the Showcase revival of Doom Patrol at the time sported a Robotman with a very Rog 2000-ish body.
allan1 said: I loved Byrne's FF run.I liked his Superman stuff & of course,his X-Men.
I met him once a few years ago at Pittsburgh & he was actually pretty nice to me as we discussed Superman & what he had coming up that involved the Man of Steel(at the time it was the Elesworlds Annual of Action Comics I think).
That's great that you got to meet John Byrne.
I saw him at a distance at a few South Florida conventions, but he was always too mobbed for me to talk with him.
I saw recently that almost Byrne's entire FF run has been released in glossy trades. It's beautiful work in its original form, and even more so in these high-quality collected editions.
I'd like to see Byrne's entire X-MEN run (issues 108, 109, 111-143) in similar reasonably priced trade editions.
And Byrne's AVENGERS 181-191 run.
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said: Rog 2000 was enjoyable stuff that stood out at the time (as well as the original E-man run) I think the Showcase revival of Doom Patrol at the time sported a Robotman with a very Rog 2000-ish body.
Glad to hear I'm not the only Rog 2000 fan out there, M E M. !
Here's another great pin-up of Rog 2000, titled "Rog 2000 meets Howard the Duck" :
And another that plays on the similarities of Rog 2000 to Robotman you mention.
What's especially amazing is that he did these stories in 1973 !
But they're very professional looking work mostly, done about two years before Byrne started working professionally for Charleton and Marvel.
And again, it's an example of early work by Byrne that far surpasses what he's doing now. If only Byrne could have maintained the standard he had from 1977-1982.
Byrne especially excels at drawing robots and space ships, and these stories show that off nicely.
Another great early cover by Byrne from COMIC BOOK READER 128 from 1976, again featuring Rog 2000 and Howard the Duck:
Byrne's Rog 2000 run in E-MAN ended in late 1975, and the first HOWARD THE DUCK issue (by Steve Gerber and Frank Brunner) was cover-dated January 1976.
It's really funny to think of Rog 2000 being jealous of HOWARD THE DUCK getting his own book, while Rog's backup series in E-MAN (issues 6, 7, 9, and 10) floundered. Or perhaps this illustration reflects Byrne's wish to do a Rog 2000 series, and a sense that if Howard the Duck could get a regular series, then Rog was worthy of a regular series too.
Although Byrne seems to be fond of Howard the Duck too, as reflected in the number of fan illustrations Byrne has done of Howard the Duck.
John Byrne was th first artist I ever bought books specifically because he drew them. For some reason I bought his books for years after his work got really shitty, the horrible artwork on Next Men was the last straw....
Yeah, unfortunately, I kept buying his shit out of inertia myself. At least you quit at a decent time, I kept going all the way through Marvel: The Lost Years and his Spider-Man crap...
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
Yeah, my mistake. A sharpie would be used for inking, and all the X-MEN pages and covers I linked above were Byrne pencils, none showed Byrne inks.
But the Rog 2000 pages I showed are Byrne pencils and inks.
And virtually all the art in the ART OF JOHN BYRNE book from my opening post (published in 1980) are examples of Byrne's ability with a pen, if not a Sharpie pen in particular.
And on second glance, you're right, issue 143 was Austin pencils/Austin inks(no Byrne). But it sure looks like Byrne art. Issue 142's cover as well (a futuristic Sentinel killing all the X-Men) is Austin pencils and inks, with no Byrne art.
So that would make Byrne's spectacular cover for issue 141 his last X-MEN series cover.
[Click images to enlarge]
But as you say, while very pretty, none of these X-MEN pages shows Byrne inks, only his pencils.
Some comments you guys have made about the series:
Quote:
Pig Iron said:
My favorites by Byrne [include]:
O.M.A.C....
Quote:
profh0011 said: O M A C, after-the-fact, turned out to be my favorite of Kirby's 70's DC books. One more inspired project cut off in mid-stream, far too early. Ressurected in a completely ill-conceived and obscene (yet technically impressive) rethink by Starlin, who dropped off too soon because of the "DC Implosion". Continued to no avail by Mishkin, Cohn & LaRocque, whose attempt to back-pedal to Kirby's intent felt awkward when compared to both Kirby AND Starlin.
[color:"red"][SPOILERS][/color] And then Byrne came along, and like HULK, did something UTTERLY bizarre... It was VERY interesting. I loved the part where OMAC killed Adolph Hitler! the discovery that "The World That's Coming" had always been an alternate-reality, NOT part of the "normal" DCU, created by time-travel, seemed inspired. But somehow, in the last half of part 4, [color:"red"][/SPOILERS][/color]
I think he went too far-- OVER-COMPLICATING it to the point where, after reading the entire mini TWICE, I STILL couldn't make heads or tails of it.
Quote:
Mr Nobody said: And then came OMAC. This is still high on my list of favorite books. This is when I realized that there is a world of comics outside straight up superhero books, and began to get into some of the edgy stuff released by DC and Epic back in the 80s, as well as some indie stuff.
Quote:
Im Not Mister Mxypltk said: I have OMAC and I like it a lot. Art and story are excellent.
Some of you like Byrne's O.M.A.C. series, some don't. But your reviews are 3 to 1 in favor.
I initially passed on this one because it was in B&W, and because it was out in a period I'd already lost respect for Byrne's work.
I wonder how it compares to Kirby's original series (1974-1975), and to Starlin's backup in KAMANDI 59 (stalled by the book's cancellation after just one issue in the DC Implosion of 1978) and finally concluded as a backup series in WARLORD 37-39, in 1981. Probably not very consistent in style to Kirby, but perhaps innovative and intriguing in its own right.
Mixed reviews, but I think I'll check these out finally.
No comic artist solicits the abuse on himself quite like Byrne. The hackery of his own work should shame him into either silence, or producing better work that would qualify him to make such comments.
Byrne demonstrated real talent in that 1975-1982 period. If only he had not allowed himself to so quickly become such a has-been. And a pathetically bitter has-been at that.
If you read Lying in the Gutters,you'll come across a piece how Byrne banned a guy from his boards for reading some sympathy posts from people on Byrne's MB at a funeral for a guy who posted there.All class that JB.
It's a dog eat dog world & I'm wearing milkbone underwear.
But then compare that to his atrocious run on Wonder Woman.
The only good thing Byrne did there was turn WW into a goddess..then DC stripped her of her new powers the next issue sfter his run was over...tragic. The only good thing Byrne did there was turn WW into a goddess..then DC stripped her of her new powers the next issue sfter his run was over...tragic
Incidentally, Byrne has been the subject of criticism over his often sadistic portrayal of women - see the She-Hulk graphic novel (She-Hulk is naked, chained and watched on video by a voyueristic and corrupt SHIELD agent): Big Barda's apparent rape at the hands of a minion of Darkseid in an issue of Action Comics (in which she and Superman later make a porn film - I kid you not!), and others. They was a website on the subject, the link to which I've now lost.
I have those...they are a bit twisted..I only realized recently that Shulkie's nipple was hanging out in one of the panels .
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Next Men and Danger Unlimited were the last truly great Byrne stories IMO.
My favorite Byrne works in order are..
X-Men Alpha Flight Fantastic Four Avengers (various 175-200) Iron Fist Secret origins Doom Patrol Issue. Man of Steel/Superman/Action Comics (Action Comics Annual #1 being the jewel in the crown) She-Hulk Captain America Next Men/Danger Unlimited Marvel Team-Up Hulk Avengers west Coast (yeah, I liked it) Omac Namor (about half the run was pretty decent.especially the savage Land issues)
In terms of comparing Byrne to other artists i think John Buscema is a good comparison. John Byrne could have been a better version of John Buscema..but he got the attitude.
I met him..he was a decent enough fellow, but he exuded cockiness (if I can judge). he had a decent sense of humor and was relatively cheerful. It just felt that he lost all interest in comics when I finally met him in 92. He had no spark about him as other creators had.
His intent on inking his own work and writing his own work was to his detriment. He needed creative refreshers and he never allowed himself to have any. hopefully his new JLA work with Claremont will re-energize him..
I was just reading this "List of Aborted Storylines", where Byrne answers what made him leave various series, and was surprised by this one about why he left SHE-HULK after issues 1-8, and a Rog-2000 appearance that was aborted:
Q: re-reading the Comics Interview book that collected various interviews with you, and in it they have your cover to SENSATIONAL SHE-HULK #9 with "Roger the Robot". Since you left the book before that issue, can you share what your story idea was for that issue?
BYRNE: I'd planned to introduce a very ROG-like golden robot as Jen's butler. She was going to meet him when she found herself prosecuting him for murder in a story I could not resist titling "Who Framed Roger Robot?"
In my defective memory roughly 2 decades later, I thought the story was actually used. But it was planned for issue 9, and Byrne was taken off the series with issue 8.
Byrne later came back to the series for issues 31-50, when Bobbie Chase was replaced with editor Renee Witterstatter.
Yeah, all the more so for me because I love the ROG 2000 character. I wish they'd publish a book collecting every last Byrne story and illustration of ROG 2000, back to the original CPL days. A lot of them are on Byrne's site.
Fantagraphics was going to release the ROG 2000 stories again around 1987-1988 in a two-issue offset-printed collection with better coloring (the Charleton printing was horrible in E-MAN 6,7, 9 and 10) and the 2-issue Fantagraphics color reprint was advertised as coming out (in DOOMSDAY SQUAD 7), but to my knowledge was never released.
I have the original Charleton E-MAN issues, and the 1982 black-and-white reprint from Pacific Comics, but I'd still like to see a complete edition of this playful and fun character, that represents Byrne's earliest characters, and is possibly the first character he created, at least as a pro artist.
I just ran across this COMIC BOOK ARTIST inteview of Byrne, from the period he broke into comics working for Charleton, and gradually migrated to Marvel, circa 1975-1976.
He had a special affection for Rog 2000 that came through in the interview. His complete work for Charleton and Marvel in that era is in my checklist on page 1 of the topic.
I bought his first issue of DOOMSDAY +1 on the stands back in 1975, and had no idea then who Byrne was, but still enjoyed it (Byrne did 6 issues, reprinted in 1985 with far better offset printing by Fantagraphics with a 7th unpublished issue!) Around 1980 I got very into Byrne's work, and was surprised to learn from the checklist that this was one of his books!
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
Hell, I'm surprised David doesn't have Brian on Ignore, and vice versa...
Indeed!
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
I wish someone would do a collected book of every 70's Byrne Rog 2000 story and illustration.
Byrne did a 1-page Hostess Twinkies parody ad in the 1983 new E-MAN issue 1 for First Comics. Which except for the unpublished SHE HULK cameo, is to my knowledge the last work on the character Byrne did.
Though ROG 2000 hasn't seen print in 30 years, I think the character is worthy of a collected edition. He has remarkable personality for a robot. A defining early character for Byrne, that displayed many of his strengths as an artist.
"Batman is only meaningful as an answer to a world which in its basics is chaotic and in the hands of the wrong people, where no justice can be found. I think it's very suitable to our perception of the world's condition today... Batman embodies the will to resist evil" -Frank Miller
"Conan, what's the meaning of life?" "To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!" -Conan the Barbarian
"Well, yeah." -Jason E. Perkins
"If I had a dime for every time Pariah was right about something I'd owe twenty cents." -Ultimate Jaburg53
"Fair enough. I defer to your expertise." -Prometheus
I like the concept of doing the new X-Men in the original X-Men costumes, and I grudgingly admit it does show some talent in design by Byrne. But it's still a pale shadow of his former work.
Yeah, I prefer the "original" version of the sketch from nearly thirty years ago. Among other things, the original captures (with them just standing there) the individual personalities of the team members (regal Storm, defiant Wolverine, relaxed Banshee, solid Peter, alert Nightcrawler and leader Cyclops) much better than the grinning idiots in the new version.
This looks to be a late 1970's pin-up by Byrne. I never thought of Captain America and Bucky as being virtually identical to Batman and Robin, until I saw this page by Byrne, emphasizing the similarities.
Yeah, I prefer the "original" version of the sketch from nearly thirty years ago. Among other things, the original captures (with them just standing there) the individual personalities of the team members (regal Storm, defiant Wolverine, relaxed Banshee, solid Peter, alert Nightcrawler and leader Cyclops) much better than the grinning idiots in the new version.
There was also a nice Marvel house-ad at the time of the Claremont/Byrne X-men run, that showed the old X-men and new X-men together. A run that presented Byrne at the peak of his talent, to be sure. A beautiful house ad By Cockrum, that oddly was used to promote the Claremont/Byrne/Austin run, after Cockrum had left the series.
And odd also that Byrne never did a similar house ad for his own run. In interviews at the time Byrne similarly expressed annoyance that there were Cockrum X-Men character heads in the upper left of covers for most of his run, as if it was still Cockrum's book and Byrne was just the fill-in guest artist for 4 years from 1977-1981.
I was looking through my SUPERMAN 400 issue (Oct 1984) that among a ton of other great work has a nice Superman pin-up page by Byrne.
It actually resembles the photo-collage work Grell was doing at the time in JON SABLE FREELANCE, that added to the realism of that series. But more importantly, relative to the MAN OF STEEL, SUPERMAN and ACTION series Byrne was doing 2 years later, while still a nice pin-up page, it portrays a more slender Superman, and actually looks more like Reed Richards in a Superman costume. Byrne did FANTASTIC FOUR from 232-293 (1981-1986), and this pin-up was concurrent with his run on that series, out the same month as FF 271.
This was at the tail end of the period where Byrne was still doing good work. It was two years later, at the point Byrne began his SUPERMAN run in 1986 that I thought the quality of his work made a bad and sudden decline. Hit and miss after that, but the point where I largely lost interest in Byrne's work. I think his writing was still often good, but his art became a pale shadow of the greatness of his 1975-1982 period.
One of my favorite Byrne pages, from a Bullpen Bulletins page he did that ran in all the September 1983 Marvel titles. I think it showed how much Byrne loved working for Marvel and trying his hand and talents and particular style to all their characters. Byrne from 1976-1985 was the quintessential Marvel staff artist, and he was clearly in his element. He described in a FANTASTIC FOUR CHRONICLES fanzine that he was glad to be a cog in the Marvel machine.
Until suddenly he wasn't. And when Byrne resigned to do Superman for DC, in what he intended as a friendly and temporary separation to do his take on Superman for a few years, in his closing months faced editorial harassment at Marvel, to the point that he left abruptly and prematurely.
What a contrast in 2 years, from 1983-1985, to go from being the heart of Marvel to persona non grata there.
A Neal Adams poster done of Byrne's DOOMSDAY PLUS ONE characters. In THE ART OF JOHN BYRNE book published in 1980, Byrne passed on a story told to him by an editor at Charleton, where Neal Adams visited the Charleton offices, and the editor showed Adams some of Byrne's pages for DOOMSDAY PLUS ONE. After looking at them Adams responded: "They're very good. What can he do?"
Observing the obvious amount of Neal Adams influence in Byrne's art.
It reminds me of a COMICS JOURNAL cartoon of Neal Adams at the IRS office, with the IRS agent telling Adams he would be fully justified claiming Rich Buckler as a dependent.
The above Adams pin-up was later used as a cover for an issue of Fantagraphics' 1986 reprint of DOOMSDAY PLUS ONE, reprinted as DOOMSDAY SQUAD.
This looks to be a late 1970's pin-up by Byrne. I never thought of Captain America and Bucky as being virtually identical to Batman and Robin, until I saw this page by Byrne, emphasizing the similarities.
I’d guess it’s closer to 96 when the team up book came out
Yeah, I think you're right. I've seen mid-1970's Byrne pages of Captain America from early in his career. But this one looks to be on more modern blue-line paper, as you can see at the top of the page.
But there are many early Byrne pages of Captain America, he was clearly hot to do the character in print, long before he ever did.
Un-flippin' beleivable. Ours has definitely become a much more expensive hobby than it used to be. In the 1980's you probably could have picked up that 2-page spread, or any other pages from X-MEN 137, for in the neighborhood of $100 a page or less.
I remember when guys were offering me early 70's DC Kirby pages for 15 to 25 per page, and that was in 1987. When I was at a show in 2012 looking at similar 70's Kirby Marvel and DC original pages, they were in the $2,000 range per page.
A cool project from 1980, Byrne worked on 2 of the 4 pages for the X-MEN PORTFOLIO, published by SQ Productions in 1980. What appears to be Byrne pencils or layouts, airbrushed and painted by Fastner or Larson.
Without Byrne, Fastner/Larson also did a HULK PORTFOLIO and a SPIDER-MAN PORTFOLIO, all in that 1979-1981 period. And a later 2nd X-MEN PORTFOLIO, without Byrne, and I think less impressive without him.
From that period I described in my opening post, a time where Byrne pretty much strode over the industry like a god.
. Regarding Roger Stern and John Byrne's run in CAPTAIN AMERICA 247-255, I knew at the time that Stern and Byrne had both left the book abruptly, for reasons not disclosed at the time. This link on Byrne's site answers that question :
Stern says it was for deadline reasons, and being treated badly by book editor Jim Salicrup.
Byrne has a different recollection that it was Jim Shooter's sudden order that all stories had to be resolved in a single issue, that Stern wanted to comply after completing a 3-part Red Skull storyline he had just plotted. That Shooter insisted had to be condensed to one issue, that Stern resigned in protest, and Byrne resigned in solidarity with Stern.
Byrn'e version rings more true to me, of all the factors involved. Stern's version makes Jim Salicrup look like the bad guy. Byrne's version makes Jim Shooter the bad guy. It could be one reason or both reasons. But ultimately, they both resigned from the series abruptly in protest.
Marvel in the 1970's and 1980's, by many accounts, was not an easy place to work for many. I'd love to see a panel of writers and artists who did work for both Marvel and DC, and see their consensus of whether Marvel or DC was the better place to work. Both seem to have had their good and bad moments.
Byrne again, this time photographed like he was posing for a Macy's Labor Day weekend sale catalog. But with some really nice oversize commission pages.
Byrne did early art on issues 3-6, the last of which Byrne also scripted. At which point Byrne was increasingly working only for Marvel, and at a better rate of pay.
Where the Thing is given a cure by Reed Richards that should make Ben Grimm human again. But unfortunately, Grimm has been the Thing for too long for it to work, at this stage of his mutation. So when left alone, Grimm has the idea to use Richards' time machine to go back to 1961, and administer the cure to himself at his earliest stage of his mutation, so the formula will work on him.
It's a nice character exploration, of how the Thing was portrayed in his earliest days, and how the character had evolved up to that point over 18 years (from 1961-1979), the things of two eras meeting, where they could be contrasted side by side. An impressive opening offering by Byrne as writer/artist And a precursor of what Byrne would do in FANTASTIC FOUR 232-293 as writer/artist, with a solid grasp of science fiction, time travel paradoxes, and a good understanding of the FF characters from the earliest days of the series, tapping into the appeal of those earliest issues, returning those elements to the series during his run. https://readcomiconline.li/Comic/Fantastic-Four-1961/Issue-232?id=26930
Also interesting to see the FF issues from 1979-1980, circa issues 209-221, when Marv Wolfman was writing the series, and Byrne was just pencilling the series, inked by Joe Sinnott, where Byrne was not at the creative helm, just one part of the FF creative team. https://readcomiconline.li/Comic/Fantastic-Four-1961/Issue-209?id=26904
Given the Memorial Day holiday today (and in the weeks leading up to July 4th) , I thought I'd also mention Byrne's CAPTAIN AMERICA run, in issues 247-255. Teamed with Roger Stern, penciilled by Byrne, with Rubinstein inks. A great little run.
And also the story that partly re-lives Cap's World War II Golden Age glory days in issues 253-254, with an aged Union Jack, Baron Blood, and a mysterious series of vampire murders in the English countryside, coinciding with Cap's visit to the region.
I also loved the opening 3-issue story in 247-249, in a more SF vein, with Cap visiting Nick Fury and a hidden SHIELD tech center in the middle of Manhattan, with a lot of cool robots and futuristic high-tech machinery that Byrne excels at, along with the giant gargoyle-looking Dragon Man.
And the great finale in issue 255, re-telling Captain America's origin story, that again strokes the heartstrings of nationalism and patriotism at the core of what makes the character work. And a nice plus, most of the story is reproduced directly from Byrne's pencils, only partially inked, that also gives the art a nice additional layer of texture and detail, and somehow also adds to the story's Golden Age look and tribute.
This run was also reprinted in the CAPTAIN AMERICA: WAR AND REMEMBRANCE collected trade, with an additional 6 pages of Byrne pencils, for an issue left unfinished when Roger Stern and John Byrne both abruptly quit the series, due to editorial interference, by either Jim Shooter or the book editor, or both. As I recall, Byrne quit, and then Stern left in solidarity with Byrne. And then Stern took over DOCTOR STRANGE for a great run in 46-73. And Byrne took over as writer/artist on FANTASTIC FOUR 232-293. So in a way it worked out, but one can't help but wonder what might have been, if they remained on CAPTAIN AMERICA for another year or two, and finished the storyline they'd in interviews discussed having already plotted.
Roger Stern's best work was on this CAPTAIN AMERICA series, on AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 224-250, and on DOCTOR STRANGE 46-73. Two of the three of which he left because of ediorial interference (on SPIDER-MAN, Stern had planned to reveal the Hobgoblin's identity with issue 250, but after a year's worth of buildup, the book editor blocked what Stern had planned, so he left the series. ) Gee, why did Stern leave Marvel to write SUPERMAN? I can't imagine.
I think maybe the guy who posted it took the early Byrne issues from the 1970's-1980's period, and had them professionally bound, in a one-of-a-kind personal set of hardcovers for himself.
I've seen the same done by others, where they took individual issues and had them bound together in a personal hardcover collections.
I bought one on Ebay a few years back of a small-press trade collection of Lou Fine's complete Black Condor and The Ray stories, that the seller decades ago had re-bound in a decorative hardcover. Mostly black and white with about 20% in color, but still nice to have. The book has an intro by Jim Steranko.
I've seen other similar custom-made collected hardcovers on Ebay I didn't buy. Where for example, another guy did the same with his CONAN THE BARBARIAN Barry Smith and John Buscema issues. If you have the cash and inclination, making your own hardcover is a way to have a collected edition exactly the way you want it. I was tempted to do the same 25 years ago with Jack Kirby 1970's DC work, or a custom-made complete hardcover set of all Neal Adams work for Marvel and DC. But then Marvel and DC started publishing all that stuff in nice hardcover editions, and I no longer felt the need.
I wouldn't want to damage nice copies of comics, even if I did make a hardcover. I'd want to purchase Good or VG copies for that mission, if I did it at all. And really, as old as these issues are, 50 years or more old, I'd hate to ruin original comics of that era in any grade. I talked about my hardcover-binding old comics issues idea with a rare used bookstore owner in my area I grew up with, and he was horrified at the idea. He looked at me like I wanted to murder children.
This video asks the same question I began this topic with: At what point did John Byrne lose it as an artist?
In the video, he argues that Byrne lost it in the latter third of his FF run, circa 1985-1986, that he narrows down issue by issue to FF 265, 266 and 267. I would argue the decline was visible a little earlier than that, where Byrne still has a lot of detail, but even with the detail, it was much looser and less decorative than his earlier work, starting to decline back around 247-250.
It was in FF 258 that Byrne in the letters page explained that for several issues up to then, he had already begun drawing in ink, skipping the pencil stage, which made clear to me as a reader he didn't care anymore. I still enjoyed the series for the writing, and the art was only slightly diminished. but still nice. I enjoyed the series up till about 275, and only slightly less the issues from 276-293.
Byrne's work on MAN OF STEEL 1-6 and SUPERMAN 1-22, ACTION COMICS 584-600, a one-shot THE EARTH STEALERS special, and other Superman stuff he did, remained somewhat impressive, but again, below that of his past work such as X-MEN, early FF, and his other 1975-1982 Marvel work. His version of Superman was out of proportion and way over-muscular, way out of character. Even so though, to a large degree I liked much of Byrne's art and his new story concepts on the Superman tiles.
I really never warmed up to any of Byrne's work after that. His SENSATIONAL SHE-HULK run was fun, but again nowhere near his earlier work, and that was the last series of his I regularly bought.
![[Linked Image from babelio.com]](https://www.babelio.com/users/AVT_John-Byrne_6479.jpg)
![[Linked Image from 3.bp.blogspot.com]](https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dl2BMQNCZJo/UnUBblHR3yI/AAAAAAAAGDQ/VMbbXemYQrY/s1600/byrnecommission.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/02/ee/cf/02eecf2bbba8777dc58aa6e7654c6fb6.jpg)
![[Linked Image from 2.bp.blogspot.com]](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IyusDnNL9pA/Uu-b4Q8axFI/AAAAAAAAAkA/bJlsI5ofTIE/s1600/rog2000color.jpg.php.jpg)
![[Linked Image from 1.bp.blogspot.com]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Gh8MbWbRCh8/U3Wq0zIiYVI/AAAAAAAALn4/gjG3Xcg1Ma4/s1600/Rog+At+Desk.jpg)
![[Linked Image from comicvine.gamespot.com]](https://comicvine.gamespot.com/a/uploads/scale_medium/5/58245/1220909-rog20004.jpg)
![[Linked Image from milehighcomics.com]](http://www.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/fullsize/30663729872.249.jpg)
![[Linked Image from milehighcomics.com]](http://www.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/fullsize/83735731560.8.jpg)
![[Linked Image from milehighcomics.com]](http://www.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/fullsize/77802678848.6.jpg)
![[Linked Image from milehighcomics.com]](http://www.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/fullsize/54757110448.50.jpg)
![[Linked Image from captainamericacomicbookfans.wordpress.com]](https://captainamericacomicbookfans.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/captain_america_vol_1_254.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/15/cb/66/15cb66c43439875ae2103ec746cb6ff8.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c7/92/c3/c792c329c516ea4012b9cec12dcdb74f.jpg)
![[Linked Image from milehighcomics.com]](http://www.milehighcomics.com/istore/images/fullsize/01052011824.584.jpg)
![[Linked Image from cafans.b-cdn.net]](https://cafans.b-cdn.net/images/Category_11616/subcat_99931/rog.jpg)