RIP Steve Ditko
David_D
Posts: 3,884
Steve Ditko has died at age 90.
I’m glad that those of you who met him, or wrote to him, did so when you could.
I’m glad that those of you who met him, or wrote to him, did so when you could.
Comments
Always sad to see the greats leave us.
Thank You Mr. Ditko!
Thank you for all you did.
I’m convinced with Stan Lee our living so many of his contemporaries, he’s been taking the Infinity Formula.
My kind of guy.
He was one of the first artists I was able to identify. He had such a unique style that was so nuanced you couldn't tell who his influences were, and no one was able to ape him. Truly one of a kind.
The video I've linked to is a 2007, hour-long BBC4 Steve Ditko documentary:
Nevertheless I learned a long time ago that Steve Ditko was one of greats, one of the reasons we all get to enjoy this medium.
I'm looking forward to the inevitable Spotlight on Steve Ditko!
While ASM #31, 32, 33 are the great issues typically discussed.... my favorite part of Steve Ditko's ASM run was the Green Goblin and Crime-Master stories between Issues #23 and #27, with #27 "Bring Back My Goblin to Me!" my favorite.
His Question stories are also a hoot since they're so steeped in Randian philosophy, it's hard to describe them even as conservative. All of his stories are steeped in Randian thought, but Hawk and Dove would likely also appeal to conservatives. DC reprinted his one full length Question story in one of their Millenium reprints which you can probably find on eBay for a cheap price.
His early Mr. A stuff is also extremely Randian (and therefore appealing to anyone looking for unusual and unique takes on the "superhero" but not interested in stuff that's weird just for weird's sake -Ditko was no David Lynch) but I've never seen a complete collection of Mr. A reprints. Hopefully one day Craig Yoe can release something. The problem with some of his independent stuff like Mr A is that over time he seemed to become less interested in building an absorbing story around his ideas and is mostly just preaching. His artwork also became much more abstract.
As a huge fan of Ditko's Spider-Man for many years, I have to say, this both comes off as shocking and disappointing. How did one of the most compassionate and sympathizing heroes in the history become the creation of such an objectivist man with no mercy? This is truly heartbreaking.
I can't believe I'm saying this now... but thank god Ditko was gone. Goddammit.
Steve ditko was always respectful towards people who believed. He was always willing to talk to people about them and listen to others, but he was always respectful.
Your comment is bigoted and intolerant.
Stan didn't kick Ditko off the book. Ditko quit because he wasn't given the royalty he asked for and felt he (I think rightly) deserved. Stan wanted him to stay, because he was a good plotter and storyteller on a successful book.
The mark of a good creator is they can make convincing characters with perspectives different than themselves, and whatever you may think of Ditko, he was a great storyteller. That being said, Peter Parker would have been a different character from the outset without Stan's dialogue making him more universally likeable. I think it's telling that the characters created solely by Ditko are pretty obscure, even those created for DC.
If he wants to talk to people like that, there are plenty of places online for him to do so.
Moving on.
Why someone who'd spent the first 18 years of his life learning to dislike and fear humans on such a profound level from the only 2 people who ever loved and cared for him would then become a hero who would make it his life's mission to constantly go around saving humans remains MoS's unanswerable question IMO. Having his biological father show up once he's grown up and tell him that he should disregard everything his true parents and life experiences ever taught him and that his mission in life is to go around saving them because eventually you'll realize how awesome they really are (even though Jor-El has exactly zero experience living with humans) does not come anywhere near explaining the 180 degree change for me. I understand there are others who are fine with this explanation.
IMO Snyder and the screenwriters created an utterly botched attempt at "realism" - they gave us a more "realistic" origin, but conveniently decided to ignore "realism" whenever they needed to. As a result, many viewers -fans included - thought that the filmmakers "did not know what to do with" the superman character or "couldn't get a handle on him". IMO a lot of these problems begin with the giant disconnect between everything we see young Clark learn and everything we see grown up Superman do. All of this could have been avoided if they'd stuck closer to the original version of the Kents. There is nothing unrealistic about the lessons Glenn Ford teaches Christopher Reeve in the 1978 Superman film (that teen version of Clark didn't have an easy time of it either) and I see nothing more "realistic" about teaching your super son that "yeah you may want to let a bus full of kids die".
Again, this is all just my opinion. I understand you and others may disagree, but for me both MoS and Bats vs Supes are not just "not great" or "not a masterpiece" but badly written, especially in terms of characterization and the choices the writers made for the characters. (I need never see Jesse Eisenberg have to channel Heath Ledger's manic anything-goes energy as the Joker in order to play deliberate and calculating genius Lex Luthor again.)