The Peter David & Todd McFarlane Debate (1993)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 มิ.ย. 2020
- In late 1993, the writer, Peter David, and the writer/artist, Todd McFarlane, engaged in a debate centred around the topic: Image Comic & Todd McFarlane - Have they received fair treatment in the media? This event took place at the Philadelphia Comicfest Convention on October 08, 1993. Moderated by George Perez.
Please subscribe to be notified of future updates!
SUPPORT OVERLORD COMICS:
bit.ly/SupportOverlord
(Get early, ad free access to videos and other perks.)
OVERLORD COMICS ON TWITTER:
bit.ly/OverlordComics
SOURCES:
“Image: In The Beginning.” Written by Peter David. Published by the Comic Buyers Guide. February 21, 1992.
www.peterdavid.net/2005/06/29...
“After The Great Debate.” Written by Peter David. Published by the Comic Buyers Guide. November 12, 1993.
www.peterdavid.net/2010/09/02...
Name Withheld Letter To Comic Buyers Guide (Circa 1992):
members.tripod.com/fantom_drag...
The Full Debate:
• Peter David-Todd McFar...
Todd McFarlane Debates Peter David:
Part 01: • TODD McFARLANE DEBATES...
Part 02: • TODD McFARLANE DEBATES...
Part 03: • Todd McFarlane DEBATES...
“Bye Bye Marvel; Here Comes Image.” Written by M. Clark Humphrey. The Comics Journal #148. February 1992.
“Spawning A New Image.” Written By Gareb Shamus. Wizard Magazine. July 1992.
“Creators’ Rights.” Steve Bissette, Scott McCloud and Gary Groth. The Comics Journal #137. September 1990.
“…That’s The Spice Of Life, Bud.” Written by Gary Groth. The Comics Journal #152. August 1992.
“Jim Lee: A Bowl Of Granola.” Written by Rob Samsel. Wizard Magazine. August 1992.
“Fin Addicts.” Edited by Erik Larsen. The Savage Dragon #20. July 1995.
#Comics #ModernAge #ToddMcFarlane #PeterDavid #Spawn - บันเทิง
I would love for you to make a video about Image’s transformation as a publisher. How we got from Youngblood and Spawn to The Walking Dead and Saga.
Theres a good documentary on youtube about images rise and fall and rise. The History of Image Comics (So Much Damage) | Part 1: The Founding | SYFY WIRE
The cynical part of me wants to say that Todd was more concerned with making edgelord action figures then he was comics and thus publishing authority on his part was moot.
Saga sucks
I have respect for Image just for becoming competition for the big two, despite all the ego involved I think they did do good for the talent and audience of comics
Yeah but they folded faster than Superman on laundry. Leifeld and Lee jumping ship back to the big two undermined the whole enteprise.
"One has to respect the hustle. But at the end of the day, that's what it is, a hustle." Bullseye.
Image proponents shouldn't feel bad about this fundamental point being made. It was on heck of a hustle, after all.
Why I still harbor respect from Todd and Rob; they at least still have the hustle and 'take no crap' attitude respectively that the other founders have shed (*cough* Erik Larsen *cough* *cough* )
I just listened to a very recent Mcfarlane interview. He openly acknowledges the hustle.
This is one of those stories that I had never heard of and am so surprised that I’ve never heard of it and that there is so much to discuss. Thanks for the videos and observations.
same here. This'll be a good think
Moral of the story:
Writers; respect your artists.
Artists; respect your writers.
Artists who can write/writers who can draw: despite sales numbers, your farts can (and do) stink.
Facts
sorry to be off topic but does anyone know a way to get back into an Instagram account?
I somehow forgot my account password. I would love any tips you can offer me.
This dust up between a writer I admired and an artist I was unfamiliar with came at a time when family was my priority and I had no time for comics. I still had my subscription to The Comics Buyer Guide and read Peter David's column but with no direct understanding of why those artists split from Marvel. Other than they saw their art was selling large amounts of comics for Marvel and it dawned on them start their own company. Thankfully, your coverage helps to bring it all into focus.
Thanks again for all you do. I hope that with the way things are now structured you'll continue to provide us with a much needed history of our hobby.
I've always found early Image to be somewhat hypocritical in a few ways. McFarlane supposedly wanted creators rights for creators, but look at the lawsuits between McFarlane himself and Neil Gaiman over creator's rights (and, of course, money). Things like that just make it look like you're a greedy person out for oneself and just happen to see an opportunity what is currently going on in society that you take advantage of. It's pretty much an old story, really. Everyone is okay with an unfair system so long as they are the ones at the top of the food chain.
Dan Fraga was an early Image guy, and he has mentioned that McFarlane basically stole one of his character designs to make into a toy, and sort of dared him to do something about it, which he obviously couldn't. Fraga doesn't come off as a liar, I believe him as it sounds quite similar to a famous exchange between McFarlane and Gaiman before their lawsuit, where McFarlane threatened Gaiman with financial ruination from legal fees, like real bigtime corporate asshole shit. He said something like, you'll need a quarter of a million dollars to fight me, and Gaiman retorted that if that's the case, then he can just write another 250,000 dollar screenplay on the plane ride home. Zing! Then Gaiman went on to do 1602 with Marvel as a clever means of funding his lawsuit while simultaneously trolling McFarlane. A lawsuit which he then won, and then went around laughingly donating the winnings to various comic-related charities. Gaiman very much clowned and owned McFarlane there. In the courtrooms, McFarlane has suffered a number of shocking legal defeats because the juries were instantly turned off by his douchey, meatheaded bully boy attitude. His attitude is such that he could easily get convicted of crimes he didn't ever commit, because he just looks and acts like a thug or common criminal. He shouldn't have lost those cases really, but he just has a criminalish face and attitude and aura about him, and the judge and jury could detect it.
I very quickly felt that, despite their claims, early Image was never really about creator rights in general, or improving the system. They weren't out to change the system, they just wanted to become bosses within the system.
@@BainesMkII yeah another interesting thing is that Liefeld, in the somewhat propagandistic documentary 'The Image Revolution', paints himself as a great employer, saying he hooked his people up generously. But Liefeld doesn't mention punching his underling Fraga to the floor because he wouldn't do what he says, which definitely happened. But of course Liefeld can't say 'I punched my employees in the face when they annoyed me' in a documentary about how wonderful Image was.
@@system-error well said. Rob Liefeld’s podcast is interesting, but He’s trying to rewrite history.
@@system-error calling McFarlane a thug and a criminal is over the top
Cool video, but I wish I knew how you really felt about early image
I thought he had a tape of the interview because I lost my copy of the original article , instead I was assaulted by attacks on Image that I do not agree with! I seem to remember Erik Larsen contending that many of the books Marvel's writers were cranking out weren't that great and Image was being unfairly targeted because they were popular! I agreed with him then and I think the situation remains true today!
Pulsar Stargrave Agreed! I really would have enjoyed this if it wasn’t so biased against Image. Very sour and ugly.... it’s obvious to me in the present who really “won” this debate in the long run.
I agree! I love Image and Spawn was what got me into comics since I was 8! He, along with other Image comics, are still my favorite! I wouldn’t have minded a non bias look at this but this is 100% biased!
@@jaybofa617 Agreed and his argument is B.S. because I was still reading Marvels at the time and they WERE cranking out a LOT of superficial product! The X books were drawn by Jim Lee wannabes but the stories were awful! The Clone Saga was just getting started over in the Spider Man group, John Byne was wrecking The West Coast Avengers, especially The Vision! Marvel was just terrible, the only light in early 90s Marvel was Peter David's Incrediible Hulk! DC was doing decent work but resorted to gimmicks like The Death of Superman to get attention! Meanwhile at Image, McFarlane stepped up his game in his writing, Alan Moore started contributing to IMAGE, The Maxx started getting attention ! So this video maker is rehashing an argument that never made sense in the first place!
@@pulsarstargrave256 I actually enjoy the old image comic books; they were like b movies but great b movies and they offered an alternative to the tired concepts of marvel and dc. Now they're just another vertigo clone
This is such a great video. I love that you have these different styles of videos from quick reviews, in depth coverage, and ones like this, which is more about the history of the medium of comics, not the history within a comic.
The thing that most artists since the dawn of Image don't seem to understand, and this now even extends to the majority of independent publishers, is that making a comic book is a team effort. Not everyone can write, not everyone can draw, not everyone can ink, not everyone can color. And when someone decides to become the sole-maker of a comic, they tend to get behind, and often their fans become angry and move on. Not everyone is a Will Eisner. And even he tended to work with others to meet deadlines until he decided to go solo and create the graphic novel as we know it today with 'A Contract With God.' Sadly, people like Todd McFarlane don't know how to recognize their shortcomings and they tend to get arrogant and standoffish. But I also disagree with Peter David on some points he made. I don't think Todd McFarlane is a terrible writer. I have those Spider-Man issues McFarlane worked on, and I still think they're fine. They're not Chris Claremont, Neil Gaiman, or Alan Moore level, but the stories still work and make sense. But like Jack Kirby, McFarlane's dialogue can be a bit clunky, and even downright boorish to some degree depending on the specific comic issue you're reading. Sometimes you need a real wordsmith to make things pop and catch you. That's what made Stan Lee so great working with Kirby, Ditko, and other artists in the 1960's. His words and their art created a fantastic world of fantasy. That's what helped make the X-Men so great between Chris Claremont and John Byrne. If comics are to grow and move forward from 2020, artists need to start understanding that in comics writers are as inherently important as artists are. It takes two to tango, otherwise you're just spinning.
While you make good points, ultimately I prefer it when the cartoonist is in control, whether he or she writes the material themselves or hires a writer, I just feel you get more of a personal vision whenever there are fewer "layers" of personnel involved! I appreciate the occasional corporate assembly line comic; but I find I get more excitement from reading an "Indie" title I love than from the latest issue of The Barfman which may contain an "editorially mandated" retcon to fix an "error" a handful of keyboard warriors didn't like!
I remember reading Todd McFarlane's Spider-Man: Torment as a 12 year old and oof, some of that dialogue was rough to get through. Cool story ideas and iconic art but some painfully corny dialogue even for my pre-teen standards, Spidey was even a bit outta character at times during it.
The quality is not important anymore for a couple reasons.
1. Too few people are reading comics sold in comic shops. The people who do read are collectors who read out of habit. They will buy crappy comics in order to "complete their run".
2. The book market, the indie market or the "ya market" also don't care about quality--they give importance to whether comic is politically correct not whether the artwork or cartooning is great.
@@DaFuckyouat Nah, Todd is a crappy writer. Comically so.
Yeah, sort of. I agree with you on the basis that American comic books are supposed to be monthly publications with corporate content. The likes of Clowes or Burns or any European authors have been pushing the medium beyond the “American comic book thing” for decades. What I mean is that your opinion applies to a niche, one which is smaller by the minute.
This was an amazing Video. Watching your videos is always a pleasure.
I was literally reading Savage Dragon #4 and 5 yesterday and saw this debate advertised wondering what it was about and what happened and this video got posted the same day. Weird coincidence.
Image did give it creators rights and continues to,to this day. Which is a good thing , that neither Marvel or DC will EVER do. Peter David was right about the level of quality that Image put out in that time. I myself owned almost every 1st issue of an Image title when they came out , but thats it. They were a headache to read. Great video.
I found most of the weaker Image books were written by Eric Stephenson! Next to him, Wildstorm's Brandon Choi sounded like Claremont!
The thing is that it isn't always the case, especially when Todd is involved. His hustle with Neil Gaiman where he lied about having Miracle Man pretty much proves that Peter David was right to question.
@@mikhaelgribkov4117Todd didn’t lie about owning MiracleMan he genuinely believed he bought the rights. When in reality he basically just bought the logo
Image is seen so differently now. I wonder how Peter David feels about the company nowadays.
"“DC has just declared war on Marvel Comics.
Oh, they aren’t framing it that way. But they have. "-Peter David more to that quote, but kinda an indicator on how Peter David thinks.
Frankie Velasco haven’t they been at war with each other for longer than Oceania has been at war with Eastasia?
Wow great video, thank you. Going by the footage and your own analysis of the debate it's seems to me that the American comic book industry (especially the big two) went full circle and created a monster in their own IMAGE!!
I'm a big Hulk fan David and McFarland is my favorite combination of writer and artist in all of comicdum. shame that it will never ever happen again
For me personally, I found the following two regular Hulk artists, Dale Keown and Gary Frank, to be far superior than McFarlane's pudgy Hulk. Keown's Hulk has become the most iconic and the one you usually see on t-shirts and other merchandise.
Great summary of an old debate. Thanks for posting this. (And the visual effects were great!!!)
Nice work as always
Fantastic video dude.
Great job I appreciate the effort
“The rules did not apply to them because they were the bosses”
God, that is so corrupt. Imagine if politicians said that. “Oh yeah. The laws don’t apply to me. I’m the president.”
🤔 Lot to digest. Gotta watch the rest.
I think you're exactly right. Alot of kefluffle with nothing resolved. Interesting af tho!
I think Older Todd has gained a modicum of wisdom. He's still a promotion machine. Part of me wishes I had 1/100th of his drive.
I've always loved David's books.
good job, thought I would have liked some actual soundbites from the debate in addition to the summation. hearing their words in their own voices goes a long way in presenting their perspectives and personalities.
I may have missed this on the subscriber stream. I enjoyed the debate but this context made it much more understandable.
Also, I'm happy that I'm not the only one who thought Mcfarlane's writing was terrible on Spider-Man and Spawn
Much of the criticism aimed at McFarlane and the Image founders' lack of quality writing during that era comes across as people in glass houses throwing stones. Many, if not most of the top selling superhero books from the Big 2 during that era were absolutely awful (see: post-Claremont X titles, Clone Saga, paralyzed Batman, etc.).
This video exemplifies why I enjoy your channel.
this channel is right up my alley! yet despite being on youtube nearly constantly It just now appears to me...youtube is ridiculous
Feeling vague, unearned pride that my sharing the link to the video of this debate may have inspired this video. (Unearned pride, given that I agree with the axiom that genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration.)
i love listening to you talk i could listen to you talk about paint drying omg! Listening while working on costume thanks for your hard work!
You're welcome! Thanks for watching and/or just listening.
I remember attending this debate as a kid. I especially remember the following evening when Todd received multiple awards and had multiple costume changes and referenced his debate loss.
Last part of "was it manufactured?" Is interesting. Did the founders plan it before hand?
I've heard about this legendary farce of a debate, but this was the first time that I've seen footage from it. Oh, and not to be "that guy"; but the Shakespeare quote you attributed to King Lear was actually from MacBeth; "...It is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury., Signifying nothing."
Just discovered this channel, really like the subjects and tone. One very minor nitpick on form: could you consider using “Furthermore” less often? Makes everything sound very “eight grader report”. Again, love everything else - joining today. :)
Thanks for joining! I will take your suggestion under advisement. :)
The video of the debate was great.
thanks for sharing it.
I think if McFarlane had taken the debate seriously instead of seeing it as a publicity stunt, he could've genuinely won the debate...
Excellent documentary.
Sorry dude. Todd McFarlane had to be taken to court for Angela. Image was against work for hire, then set up studios for work for hire business. David, Byrne, Miller all have said you could do creator owned stuff before Image, so David’s remarks are not in defense of Marvel
and DC.
Angela was his character and his design. It was his book and Gaiman might have been on that set of issues, but it was a mutual agreement at that time
Sketch Stevens Todd McFarlane designing Angela was never in question. Same with Medieval Spawn, but McFarlane and Gaiman didn’t have a Work For Hire Agreement. So Neil and Todd were co-Creators of those character which the courts held up. The creator’s right McFarlane preached didn’t extend beyond himself.
@@TheSpinnerRack True. I still think that it should have been a monetary exchange since it was Todd's world and they had a 50/50 split on the character.
Angela has been wasted at Marvel since her Mythos doesn't work well.. they literally took an angel and tried to force her and her namesake into Nordic Mythos with Thor
While comics in the extreme 90's do have style. There are thought bubbles on the characters in it. That can be considered substance too. In my opinion.
Hmm... This is debate. About Peter David and Todd McFarlane. Is now 30 years old. 30 years later, as in today. I think debate are more than just competition. To me, it feels like a study about similarities, differences, and sharing their own views, beliefs, and philosophies with each other.
I have an issue that has that ad
The Death of Jean DeWolff was a good Spider-Man story.
Image deserved a bit more credit here than they were given. They’re books weren’t all just sizzle, though it does seem that the sizzle is all people seem to remember. Spawn is easily the most revered character from the original launch, but as books I think Savage Dragon and Shadow Hawk we’re both far superior. That’s not even considering the second wave of image which brought in great books like Pitt and The Maxx. All that said though, there was a huge chip on the Image comics shoulders about how they essentially had made Marvel/DC great, but were treated with nothing but disrespect. In the end, it was a great time for fans of comic art, and it got the killer X-Cutioner’s Song crossover made. I think that Image really cleared the deck for Dark Horse, and they were the guys who really pushed the industry forwards.
I thought the 'sound and fury' line was from Macbeth.
People say its not about money, usually about money, lol, and the guys who started Image were always gonna have a better deal than those who came later, is it right? Eh, but them the breaks. Todd is completely wrong about their being no need for writers of course.
I have a vague memory of a short, say around 2-3 pages long, by Don Simpson (I think, forgot where I saw it) that sums up the debate as Peter David giving a logical argument, with McFarlane stating that since he showed up in a jockstrap, he won.
It may or not have been accurate, but it did kind of show an interesting take on wjat things were like at that time.
Creative rights. Nuff said.
Such a great topic of debate,
My personal feeling is that Image Comics was needed at the time, for too long Marvel And DC had a monoply on the industry,
Is Todd McFarlane the greatest comic book creator? No of course not,
But wether or not Image was founded on principles is not of consequence, giving mainstream options outside of Marvel and DC to creators and fans was,
While most Image made franchises are dead now they represented at the time a middle finger to anyone that insisted on everyone playing by the rules set by Marvel and DC,
I would also argue that Spawn has been a long term financial success and The Maxx is one of the greatest comic books ever written and transcends the genre much like Sandman, Watchmen and Maus.
Why should McFarlane have to explain anything to David??
Sachs and bullshit whatever is all I needed to be reminded of for this debate to be over in my mind.
As opposed to today, where the writer's ethnical, sexual, and political identity is more important than the comics themselves.
The obvious hate for McFarlane is clear with the commentator.
I have to say calling Todd a “salesman not a businessman” couldn’t be farther from the truth. The guy created McFarlane Toys, which is one of the most influential and successful toy companies in the last 15 or so years. He runs Image comics and has many business ventures. The guy is certainly a businessman. Todd’s not the best writer but he isn’t the worst.Torment is great. Either way Image is the best comic book company with the best stories today. Not back then but it definitely is today.
Not "definitely." It depends on what sorts of stories appeal to you.
I’m with you man, this video and all the hoopla is just because of what is viewed as disrespect and showing off? Todd and image is supposed to be the bad guy here but the mainstream goliaths and nitpicking whining Peter David are the respectable good guys? GTFO! I wrote a longass commentary and why people like me thank the comic Gods for Todd and Image bringing the comics revolution and ending the mainstream monotony. Maybe I’ll post it later after cleaning it up and cool down. The crumb and comix underground vid was good, yet now after seeing this vid I’m wondering why a big ole deal is made against Todd but Crumb co gets a pass?? Okidoki!
Todd is both if you ask me. Totally sold me on those Kickstarter Spawn figures. I was just gonna get one, but the dude made it hard not to buy all 3, signed. As a buisness man, though the guy has one of the most prolific toy companies still around. His toys sold because they had a detail in quality you couldn't get from figures back then, and I feel like figures wouldn't be as awesome if it wasn't for his figures raising the bar. He had a movie, an hbo series, and god knows how much he made on Spawn as a brand.
Jason Grimm if you post that I would like to see it. I agree with you man.
None of Your Business I say Definitely because image has accumulate more Eisner awards than any other comic company since it’s inception.
Why is McFarlane shirtless and wearing swim trunks? It looks like they just caught him on his way to the beach
Maybe Todd was going for more of an "Andy Kaufman" in the room energy.
It is actually 'Macbeth.'
I heard about it at the time, but I never really got the nuts and bolts of it like you've laid out here. Looking back now, even though there were some IMAGE books I really liked (I still enjoy SAVAGE DRAGON to this day), most of the stories were less than memorable - but you could make that claim about a lot of the 90s - and whatever the IMAGE boys were running on at the start certainly wasn't sustainable.
Todd reminds me of that Donkey Kong guy
I’m a little confused tho is this an education piece or a bashing of The ToddFather and Image comics!
The content producer is biased against Todd. He might have been an Image fanboy in the 1990s who became disillusioned with ToddFather and Image comics when they realized Image had no effect on the declining sales of North American floppy comics. Most of the founding creators of Image had returned to work-for-hire or left comics, often leaving the readers they had with unresolved storylines.
Remember Jim Lee and Grant Morrison's WildCats?
How about the numerous Youngblood stories Rob never finished?
Can you honestly recommend Spawn comics to anyone ? A comic where nothing happens and has no substance whatsoever and is probably unprofitable but is being printed out of ego alone?
@@DaFuckyouat He isn't a fanboy, he just hates the type of writing employed by imape from early to mid 90s. He has a different standard in what he believes is a great comic, stuff like neill gaiman's sandman.
While I do admire McFarlane's knack for business - the guy is undeniably successful in most if not all of his business ventures - I never really liked his style even back in the 90's when it was all the rage. His anatomy looks atrocious to me; not 'Liefeld bad' but definitely odd to say the least. And his writing is... lacking in many respects but it gets by. But my beef is that he *always* came off as a douchebag to me. While having confidence in one self is certainly a virtue, one has to be careful to not come off as arrogant and it doesn't sound like Todd is too concerned with that. And that debate certainly doesn't speak too highly of him, that's for sure.
"...and one has to respect the hustle" Strange Brain Parts droppin' them gems, aye? Lol. Nah, real talk, Image comics were aimed at that rich kid's allowance money.
David is a great guy and writer first of all. No quest there but there is no winner in this weird hissy fit.
The first 2 dozen issues of Spawn aren´t better or worse than many cape books that came out around the same time. Style over substance edge. Calling Todd´s work or writing mediocre at best is disingenuous. He delivered a book that met the standards of its time and sold. He was just way behind schedule. It also gave us a great HBO toon that ended way too soon.
He is further a good artist most of the time and is imitated to this day. I won´t defend any of the other Image books from the early period but Jim Lee at least tried and his part of the imprint improved greatly over the years. Mid 00s and onwards Image is further a good company and Todd is still part of that.
Do plan on ever making a video about Comicsgate?
2nd. 🎩
He would certainly get views and votes on the video. Haha.
What would be the point? It would also be a silly topic at this point. Maybe after a few years.
Image wasn’t the punk rock movement of the 90s they were the hair metal of the comics world all gimmick no substance vertigo was far superior in every way
16:17 The quote is from MacBeth, not King Lear; the quote itself being 'a tale told by an idiot, full of noise and fury, which signifieth nothing.'
Dude image was rob liefelds idea
Man, I honestly don't care how arrogant they were. Their books were fun and the art was what inspired me. Writing isn't always the most important thing about a comic. If Image couldn't give me top quality writing I just got that from somewhere else. I was drawn to Image because it did things that other publishers weren't doing at the time. Those splash pages were beautiful. 😅 the character designs captured my full attention and sparked my imagination. I love them.
As I always say, like what you like. Don't let anyone tell you different. :)
"Image is loud and profiting from their shtick." And? Are you not a allowed to be that and do that?
Time is a strange bitch, one of the guys is a multi-millionaire toymaker and publisher and the other was begging on a crowdfunding site to raise money for his back money taxes. makes one think doesn't it?
Shows up to a debate shirtless. McFarlane is the GOAT. lol!
Imagine if people showed up to serious debates like that.
I do have some Brigade comics and I have to say story wise they sucked but art wise they were great.
Yet again... great video! I have to say, during this time (with Image, Vertigo, and even Valiant) starting... I never imagined Image lasting even 10 years based on the story quality of their 1 series (sure, the line work was beautiful, but that’s about it). And Vertigo’s (and Valiant’s) launches put the writing first, and I loved those series soooo much more! Oh well... I guess with Image shifting from the “extreme” art of the 90’s, they finally smartened up, and started publishing more varied, and great stories.... and Vertigo is all gone now
Not gonna lie, I'm kind of amazed at how folks in 2020 can still make excuses for Image comic's early years.
Did everyone forget what happend to superman creators? what happend batman creator? Remember Steve Ditko? all these people gets screwed by big companies.
I personally dont care if Tod Mcfralane is good writter or not, what he did was the right thing to do, otherwise he would be chewed off and thrown out like most artists would be after they done working for those companies who basically LEECHING off the characters made YEARS ago.
Comic industry needs more people like McFarlane, Japanese manga proved that you can be your own artist and writter and it works, not always and very flawed, but its sure beats the hell out of all the same superhero corporate trash we have seen for years, for a country that is so proud of its "freedom" and "cult of individuality", it lacks those things when you have to be a slave for a big corporation and sell your personal skill just to make corporate leeches even more rich.
But I Digress
Never knew this was a thing, but it's awesome. I gotta disagree with the analysis though, but im probably biased. I was expecting a young Todd just talking shit, and being immature, but he treated it like a serious debate, even in a joke panel It was quite the opposite, Peter David just roasted Todd the entire time, which was pretty funny, but I still don't know his point. Fuck Todd I guess?
People hate on Image because they feel their success was "undeserved". Behind all this criticism and pretentious pontificating is jealousy. Jealousy that a young rambunctious group of upstarts where whiling to do what they could never imagine and leave the big two while risking their careers and reputation and tap into the cultural zeitgeist of the time while making millions.
You bash on McFarlane's writing, but writing is more than just adding "thee's" an "thou's" into word bubbles. Writing is storytelling and in comics that involves panel to panel page to page illustration, it involves character creation and world building. Mcfarlane didn't just create one longstanding well known character, he created several, for Marvel, DC and himself. For that matter so did Liefeld who also gets lambasted.
For all the crap the Image guys get, you'd think they were the worst to ever hit comics, where they're certainly not the best, but definitely not the worst. There are much worst writers out there right now who get a magnanimous amount of praise while being unable to sell anything.
I'm not trying to fanboy for any of these guys. Personally I've met some of them and I find them to be pretty unbearable. But I just want to point out the hypocrisy.
The content producer is biased against Todd. He might have been an Image fanboy in the 1990s who became disillusioned with ToddFather and Image comics when they realized Image had no effect on the declining sales of North American floppy comics. Most of the founding creators of Image had returned to work-for-hire or left comics, often leaving the readers they had with unresolved storylines.
Remember Jim Lee and Grant Morrison's WildCats?
How about the numerous Youngblood stories Rob never finished?
Can you honestly recommend Spawn comics to anyone ? A comic where nothing happens and has no substance whatsoever and is probably unprofitable but is being printed out of ego alone?
@@DaFuckyouatNo. None of that. Shame on you.
Can't say I'm a fan of either of these guys but ever seen "Amadeus"? The fact David was undoubtedly dumfounded, jealous and probably enraged by McFarlane's $uccess was no small part of this story. Yeah, the Image stuff was unreadable. But the audience bought it up to the tune of millions instead of David's brilliantly constructed watchmaker plots nobody cared about featuring all the characters quipping like borsht-belt comedians. Yeah, David came up with some good ideas but always shot himself in the foot with his "Look how clever I am!" dialogue. David even tried his hand at producing a statue of his "Sachs & Violens" character...because, well, if McFarlane could produce action figures (a nigh impossible feat back in '93) then ANYONE could do it, right? Especially the super brilliant Peter David who's waaay smarter than dum-dum McFarlane. Um, don't recall that ending well for anyone but I might be misremembering. As for the "debate" itself, who cares? One guy could sell more comics than the other guy, who earnestly believed he was entitled to sell more. Or something. Two huge egos going at it, sit back and enjoy the insanity. And as far as McFarlane dressing like a boxer -- that's pretty funny and highlighted the ridiculousness of the drama. But while you're on the subject of attire, I seem to recall Peter David always wearing a white button shirt under a black Han Solo-ish vest at every convention during late '80s through the early '90s. And within all the little pockets of the vest, I swear to gawd, were snacks and juice boxes and things to eat. Unlike McFarlane, David wore the vest un-ironically.
4:45 Funnily enough, the same thing is happening again with the ComicsGate campaign on all sides.
Peter David garbo
is this the WORST STB ever, or just ONE OF THE WORST?? i can't believe this stuff is the viewpoint of ONE writer, cuz it's TOO contradictory otherwise.
History has shown David correct.
Once Image got profesinals to help run the company. They became a better company in general.
Say what you will, but Todd McFarlane is a well known name and brand even to those who don't read comics. Peter David is in no way known except by comic experts.
'Nuff Said
I was at this "debate" and found it rather entertaining. Todd walked in wearing a chicken outfit and a group of cheerleaders cheering him on.
I hear there was more than one
@@theragoooverlord5021 I do not know if there were other debates. I was at this one in Philadelphia.
Mcfarlane won.
25+ years later, he is a millionaire several time over. PAD is selling photocopies of his scripts at conventions. The Image founders created a system that created opportunities for many other creators. PAD will be a footnote in comics. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it would be hard to disprove that point.
Image did have a positive impact on the industry, but at the time of this debate it wasn't quite there yet.
Most comic book writers are just company men and women. They don't create these characters and most of the time don't write them well. Look at the industry in recent years with writers being the focus. It's a mess.
Don't get me wrong, Mcfarlane won, but you are selling Peter David really short. Almost everything we know currently about the character of the hulk including his different personalities of Joe Fixit and Savage hulk and the constant struggle of those personalities was all Peter David's doing. We wouldn't have the current incredible run of Immortal Hulk (a title that was outselling Batman at one point) without the initial ground work that was laid by David 30 years earlier. He was also the main writer of X-Factor during the comic boom. I'm sure he's doing okay for money.
@@kalkella8822 Hulk has not been a popular character since the late 1960s.
The problem with Peter David is that his approach is not replicable. Writers who came after him did not build on his stories. Yeah, Hulk has multiple personalities but no one knows what to do with them. Immortal Hulk's success has little to do with it building on PAD's Hulk run. Making Hulk capable of normal speech is not something PAD thought of first and it's not really a good idea because creators have to find something to replace Hulk's internal conflict--of him being his worst enemy and most aren't up to the task. Peter's legacy is a burden to Marvel--something others cannot live up to.
PAD's run on x-factor was short--lived. he was allowed to return and work on another X-factor series in 2006 but it was cancelled for low sales.
Meanwhile Todd has been publishing Spawn for over twenty years and is making much more money than PAD. PAD, who is more prolific and some say more talented only attained a high income when he briefly worked in Hollywood. His recent work is a a pale imitation of his earlier efforts. He is probably making less money now than in the 1990s because over lower overall comic sales and the fact his work doesn't sell very well anymore.
In twenty years, if there is anything resembling comics or superheroes in any human culture, they BOTH will be obscure to readers and nothing they worked on will be profitable. I don't think manga readers or YA readers in the future will care about any of their work .
McFarlane clearly lost, like 100% lost. This wasn't a debate on who was the richest or if Image helped a minority of certain creators (by the way the internet helps indie comics more than anything now a days as people can self pubish and promote).
This was a debate on the claims made with regarding lies. Todd lost so bad he couldn't even coherently form direct rebuttals to the questions asked or within the context of the claims. McFarlane was slaughtered here.
You just have to read Spiderman 2099 to know how monumentally better Spawn could have been with David as writer.
In my personal opinion the rise of image of image comics in the early 90s was the punk rock movement of comics.
The artwork certainly matched that idea
I really don’t understand why people hate Mcfarlane’s writing so much
i dont want to butt in, i am a fan of Spawn, really like the character and the setting, but i feel Mcfarlane doesn't really like things like continuity, he always forgets things that can have potential to be explored, and his series, as much as i love it, is a mess of retcons and abandoned ideas. oh yeah, and a somewhat tenuous consistency on tone. But i still enjoy many things about it, like Spawn himself as a character.
7:47 If you are "coming to intellectually fight" about comics, you already lost.
By the way, I like Peter David's Aquaman but if you are going to tell me that run didn't focus on bringing style to the character, that is being dishonest.
"Assigning all rights...", known legally as "work for hire", is a standard that has existed since the 1940s, if not earlier. Martin Nodell never got anything for Green Lantern. Siegel and Shuster never saw anything for Superman. Decades later, they may have sued to get some cash, but they never got any actual royalties or ownership. You don't seem to know much about the history of the comics business.
These guys took a marketable skill and got paid. You can bet if i could do what they did i would be thumping my chest too. They were shat on for years at the big companies and looking back at it now, they did change the game. They own their work and made hefty bags full of money 💰. How could this not be a win? They were more popular than DC when i was in school and they still make solid books. Also, the media hopped on a bandwagon that got attention from viewers. Thats the nature of media around the world. New sewer lines rarely get front page coverage but an industry shift like what these guys did was bound to get attention. I will agree that the early stories were pretty garbage but the artwork was what sold the books.
Lol. Bias much? Todds the man. Bye.
Pshh
Lot of opinions stated as fact here.
booyah
Writers and Artists are EQUALLY important in the comic book industry...a book without images is a novel.....a comic without dialogue is a portfolio.
Image did save the industry, or at least gave artists and creators the best platform to launch their work. What has Peter David given us? Sachs and Violens? It's a no contest here. David risked nothing and gained nothing - there is no definitive, killer Peter David story. It's all just kind of 'fine'. Maybe that Future Imperfect story where Hulk fights Maestro, other than that... whomp whomp. All his books that were hyped back in the day are truly underwhelming today, whereas even the most flash and substance Youngblood or Spawn are more entertaining, fun and enjoyable. Risk nothing, gain nothing, Peter.
The X-Men #1 panoramic cover has always seemed silly to me. Magneto is facing the complete opposite direction from an un coming attack from the X-Men. Cyclops has already fired off his optic blast and Magneto is just standing there looking at us/the reader. (Now I know that each portion also makes one individual image and was sold that way as variant cover. I’m speaking of the image as whole ( panoramic). So shut up to anyone who was going to point that out ahead of time.)
Todd is a right wing Republican politician
Ok? and?
@@SterlingOladapominiiglo If you have to ask....
Great video. Todd was kind of an ass back in the day. Always had respect for Peter.
I think there's more substance to Spawn than churning put throwaway star trek paper backs for 20 years. I did dig David's hulk run as a kid tho.
People just hate because they did something everyone else thought they couldn't do. Its called jealousy and being a hater. And to be honest Image and Dynamiite both shit on Marvel on DC these days in my opinion.
They got praise for making waves, not making better comics or bringing in new readers. Image began hemorrhaging creators and readers by the late 1990s and became a generic Indie comics company by the mid-2000s making comics for the same people who read Fantagraphics: hipsters. This is not even a unique marketing position. Almost every single comic company is trying to reposition themselves as an Indie brand. The Big Two are doing it by hiring indie creators.
Rather than continuing to be trailblazers, Image is now just another generic company following the market trends. Rob Liefeld and Jim Lee sold their creations to other people because being self-publisher wasn't working out . I don't see anything for anyone to be jealous of here because they ultimately failed. Creator rights don't pay the bills if no one's buying. Image Comics, in its current form, is more focused on hipsters and getting options from Hollywood than growing a diverse readership for comics.
Well to be fair, no one knows who peter david is, so.....whatever todd did, clearly worked for him