I originally started reading Spider-man in 66 or 67, so for me Romita was THE artist, while Ditko was the one from the reprints. Still love them both, but under Romita, Peter started to bloom. Got out of his Aunt's shadow, moved in with Harry, got a motorcycle and a real girlfriend.
I’m sorry sir, but I believe John Romita, is my favorite Spider-Man! Perhaps, it’s because I grew up collecting his work. But that’s just my humble opinion.Mstt
Man this webinar is such a blessing! I loved it! I think it is important to note that Ditko was more of a horror/mystery stile, while Romita, was a romance illustrator in the beginning, and I think that is the biggest influence in his style: the aesthetic.
You're right about Romita, I've never factored in his romance background. But wouldn't success been predictable for any competent artist handed that plum assignment, taking over Marvel's bestselling superhero title built mostly on Steve Ditko's back? His 4 years of groundwork gave birth to not just Spidey but an enormous soap opera cast of characters that endure 60 years later. I'd not be surprised if Ditko didn't get a Christmas card every year after that from Romita. With money in it, that Ditko would send back.
Ditko's Spider-Man remains unsurpassed for emotional involvement and is the one everyone returns to. John Romita was undoubtedly more polished, but I never got over the impression that his Spider-Man was a let down after what had gone before.
I was one of those kids in the 60's that traded away my classic early Spider-Man comics by Romita because I was mad that Ditko left. Now, I wish that I had kept those early Romita's in my collection. Romita's run definitely had some great bright colorful covers. I don't know if that had to do with advancements in technology or if Romita was just a great cover designer. However, no one could beat Ditko when it comes to drawing Spidey in action, and many of those Ditko covers are classics as well. I find it interesting that Ditko had images of the great illustrator Burne Hogarth in those photographs of Ditko's studio. Hogarth is famous for his anatomically correct figures in action. If you want your Spider-Man artwork to be very slick and "pretty", Romita is your man. If you liked your Spider-Man artwork a little quirky and sometimes just plain goofy, but the action sequences to be flat out breathtaking, Ditko when he was at his best, was the man.
For me it's gotta be John Romita Sr. Although I have huge respect for Ditko's artworks, Jazzy one has so much more eye pleasing look to it. But that's just my personal opinion. Either way both of them are LEGENDARY when it comes to drawing Spider-Man Edit : there was a typo😅
Super informative and entertaining webinar! Steve ditkos run on Spider-Man to this day is my all time favorite depiction of the wall crawler. No comic has ever emotionally moved me as much as issue 33, that full page masterpiece of him lifting the piece of metal off of him brought me to tears the first time I saw it. Thank you for this it was a great watch!
Ditko was a story teller first with comic art being his vocabulary. Ramita was a graphic artist first who fit his drawing to the story second. Ditko's Spider-man sticks to the wall. Ramita's Spider-man floats. Nuff Said
Great video! You definitely know your stuff. The Ditko/Lee run will always be my favorite run on Spider-Man but it’s hard to argue against Romita’s massive mainstream influence, and beautiful pop art.
@dashriprock9014, you're WRONG: because Ditko LEFT Marvel in November '65; but because he worked ahead of time, he had finished issue #38 then, which didn't get PUBLISHED until the spring of '66. But thanx for your sole comment on my webinar--got anything in it you LIKED for discussion here? Jeez.
No contest- Romita is the best. I enjoy Ditko’s quirkiness and creativity but Romita’s superior skills in art and storytelling are the reason that Spidey surpassed the FF in sales at the height of Lee/Kirby’s run.
Yes, Spider-Man was getting into stagnation as Ditko went on I feel. There were still some great moments, but not a great deal had changed in 3 years. It was the same 'ol same' ol. It couldn't have continued like that. It needed fresh input and a new direction, and we got that under Romita. I always thought the soap opera aspect of Amazing Spider-Man under Romita was more interesting and important than the fights with villains. It just made the comic book three dimensional instead of two dimensional. 👍
There is definitely something to be said about the difference in storytelling.... Ditko had a style that was perfect for the neuroticism of the teenage Peter and he had an incredible handle on the fluidity of Spidey in motion, but his general camera angles or 'cinematography' was often unremarkable. Romita imo had much more cinematic flair to his storytelling and the camera angles he would use in his panels. Which is also to say nothing of how Romita's cleaner art and more heroic looking Spider-Man perfectly complimented Peter's evolution in confidence in his college years. Both artists were great, and I don't think you can say one is 'better' than the other. Love Ditko but my fav is Romita.
Ditko will always have my respect and admiration, but I have to admit that I generally prefer Romita's work. It just strikes me as cleaner, more cohesive, and better overall. ASM 33 though is just pinnacle level comics.
I honestly love both artistic takes on the character equally. Ditko defined the look of the character and how strange and spider like the character could be, setting the stage for guys like Todd McFarlene to contort the character in strange ways WAY before McFarlene would ever get their hands on the character. At the same time however, Romita cleaned up the look of the costume and thanks to the colors of Spider-Man’s suit being brightened up during Romita’s run, we have a more definitive color palette for the web head that most adaptations still take inspiration from. While Ditko’s Spider-Man perfectly fit the character at the beginning of his hero career with his scrawnier build and even ‘creepier’ aesthetic, Romita’s Spider-Man was simply the perfect evolution of the character during an era of comics where Peter would have more of a handle on his powers and have more experience in being a costumed hero. As Peter became more confident during the Romita run, Spider-Man’s costume looked more streamlined and brighter, making him look as heroic as he was becoming. All in all, both were just perfect artist for the respective times in the webslinger’s life.
Fantastic presentation. Thanks, Mr. Schumer, your book is great, I do own it since a few years back, it is quite wonderful. The question of whose version of Spiderman was greater will probably never be resolved. Like you said, it is often a matter of personal preference. If you were raised on Ditko as a kid, it is probably him. If you are a child of the Seventies like me, Romita's version may be your preferred choice. However, I must say that in 1980, the publication of Spiderman in my home country (of Sweden) was handled by a company that reverted to Ditko's art and adventures of the 1960s for a whole year, (and thank God for that) and thusly mixed the styles of art, after having first published Romita's and Gil Kane's adventures during the years of 1978 and 1979. So, a young reader such as myself (8 years of age) would be introduced to many of these masters during a short period of years, both Ditko, Romita and Gil Kane, all at the same time. Having said that, one felt deeply, even as a very young reader, that there was just something extraordinary about those Ditko comics. He is the true master in my view, and always will be. Romita was a worthy heir to the throne, no question. But the way Ditko made those adventures come alive, the way he drew Peter Parker and his conflicts in life, I especially enjoyed the animosity between Parker and Flash Thompson, (anybody who's ever been bullied, knows what that can be like) and I loved how all of that was depicted by Ditko. The way he did misunderstandings, heart-ache, conflicts and relationships, and all the other stuff of life itself. It is simply unsurpassed in comic book history, I feel. Romita was plenty, plenty great, but Ditko is the ORIGINATOR of it all. Thanks for your webinar. Sincerely, Andy from Sweden.
I inherited my dads comic book collection from the 60s 70s and 80s. Shows like yours helped me to appreciate it a lot more than I would have otherwise. Thanks so much for sharing on youtube, Mr. Schumer. I love the Ditko and Romita Spider-man. They are both great. I also love the Sam Raimi/Tobey Maquire Spider-Man films. I thought they captured the best of the Lee/Ditko/Romita Spider-Man. I have a question, though. Jack Kirby drew the cover of the first Spiderman comic book. Who drew Spiderman first? Kirby or Ditko?
Ditko created spidermans look and spideriness, but Romita was THE artist needed to make spiderman a household name. I think most artists today emulate ditko, but Romitas influence was there for the first 15 years or so. Plus, he was the first artist to reveal the beautiful mj watson and stan penned her now famous line- face it tiger, you just hit the jackpot!!
Uh, that's an after-the-fact judgment, re: Romita making Spider a household name; the trajectory Ditko set in motion for the character by '66 for Romita to inherit might have gotten there just the same. Romita reminds me of NFL football coaches like George Seifert & Mike Shanahan, who inherited multiple-Super Bowl-winning teams, and won a few themselves because of it. But later, on their own, they couldn't create a great team from the ground up.
@@arlen6658 romita never had the chance to do that. It was all ditko and Kirby mainly to start with. Seeing as how Romita was art director for several years, I see that as a more prestigious role. Ditko was getting incredibly stale toward the end of his run, with tons of bland fist fights that all looked the same. And I'll agree with another commenter that neither Steve or Jack could draw decent looking women. Romita was a godsend at the time.
@@robertcoggeshall3071 ditko wasn't as good before he left obviously because he was the first artist to figure out that Smiley was ripping all of them off. Romita was the Company man kissing Smiley's @$$.
@arlen6658 Id argue Spider-Man's cast of supporting characters is what made Spider-Man what it was. That was the beauty of it, instead of a hero just fighting villains. I personally enjoyed the Peter Parker and soap opera than the fights under Romita. It was more three dimensional than the Ditko era. Ditko stagnanted. Three years on and it was still about aunt May and everyone thinking Peter was a snooty jerk. It was stuck in a rut. The best thing to happen with Spider-Man was Ditko leaving and Romita coming. It needed a fresh and vibrant new direction. We got that with Romita...... and then some. I can't understand anyone who didn't like looking at the gorgeous panels with MJ and Gwen. 😲. To me, Romita's absolute best work on Spider-Man was the run from #106 to #119, and nobody could do covers like Romita, as you've alluded to. That Marvel Treasury Edition #1 in 1974 is my absolute favourite Spider-Man pose. 👍
@josefserf1926, Romita following Ditko on Spider-Man was like Murphy Anderson following Kubert on Hawkman; both followers were competent, and had/have many fans--but neither of them ever surpassed their initial artists in raw originality.
I truly love both. I grew up with a small black and white pocket book with about ten early Ditko issues and it was my favorite comic book. Romita definitely refined what Ditko was doing and made it more appealing but some of the outsider uniqueness was lost. That is not to take anything away from Romita and I am so happy we have both versions.
Im so glad I found your channel Arlen. I was given your book on the Silver Age of Comics when I was about 8/10 or so and it got me hooked on these artists and this time period. Looking forward to seeing more of your videos!
WOW, Anthony, what a great testimonial to receive! So which edition of the book do you have: the original 2003-4 soft- or hardcover, or the revised hardcover of 2014? Because if you got the FORMER, gift it to a friend or library, and get the LATTER (signed & sketched-in by me) at: bit.ly/3DiV40e
@@arlen6658 My dad had gotten me the original soft cover version of the book! It fell apart so I've always had it in the back of my mind to get another copy one day but now that I know it's you I might have to get a new copy soon!
In my opinion, it's Ditko, hands down. Spider-Man as we know the character, wouldn't exist without him. Yes, Romita Sr. drew attractive people and I like his art, a legend at Marvel in his own right, but he was strictly more of an illustrator/cartoonist, those who know, know.
Romita refined and built off of what Ditko created so arguably Ditko deserves to win by default....even though I like Romitas work a smidge more, he was able to make everything feel more alive and made Peter and May look more youthful
Those were not just generic Kirby robots on the rejected Spider Man poster. Those were the iconic Sentinels which Kirby introduced in the X-Men comics. Editorially, they probably wanted a poster with Spider Man - centric villains on it and rejected that one for those reasons. It does look like a good piece of work, like the others they approved of.
This was a GREAT listen really I was completely engaged the entire time. Loved seeing the art of both these greats and hearing your thoughts and break down of it all
Thanx for those kudos, Chulo! I'd be interested in your feedback on my other comics history videos on my TH-cam AND Vimeo channels: vimeo.com/arlenschumer1
Romita is my favorite artist and his run from #39-56 is my favorite. I would say through 77 but there were issues by Heck and Buscema in there. But Ditko co created most of Spidey's best villains and supporting cast. But as far as art goes I prefer Romita- who btw should have been included in your book!
Uh, he WAS represented in my book, with his cover to Spider #50 on a spread in the Ditko chapter (along with descriptive text) But no, he did NOT deserve his own chapter, compared to the 5 artists I put together in a chapter called "More Masters"--because they all did definitive versions of multiple characters during the Silver Age, whereas all Romita really did of note in the '60s was his Spider-Man run.
Arlen, great presentation. Apparently, Romita's original ASM 82 Electro cover got lost/delayed in the mail. So Stan has Marie create this other one for publication since it didn't show up on time. I would love to hear a webinar on the "Marvel Method" and the creative ownership issues that become entangled in that. You hint at that conversation here, but you offer such detailed research that your opinions would offer a new light on such a controversial topic.
Ian, i may not have a webinar on it, but e-mail me via the contact form on my website, at arlen@arlenschumer.com and ask me to send you a PDF of my 16-page verbal/visual essay on Kirby/Lee/"The Marvel Method," called "The Auteur Theory of Comics" that i think you'll enjoy!
Arlene, many people consider John Romita, Sr. The best Spider-man artist. But I like Steve Ditko too. And although a few people I've met don't agree with me, I like Gil Kane, too! 😀😃
I started with Spideys first appearance in Amazong Fantasy and now I'm on issue 44, it's been great. Love Ditko and think he's the master but I dig Romita A LOT. Stan Lee's writing takes the cake for me with Spiderman, the originals will always be the best imo
I started buying Spider-Man comics during Romita's run and loved them, Later when I went back to buying Ditko's comics I didn't like them as much. His character was to spindly and looked rushed to me.
I find ditko's leaner ruffer characters more dynamic and expressive more appealing I wish we could see some shocker and rhino ditko comics I also find the early ditko asm stories to be some of the best Unfortunately I can't say the same for his last writtings whilst good it wasn't as good so I think the switch to romita story wise to be for the best.
While I love both artists, Ditko's work had a looser feel with more implied motion, whereas Romita's work was a little stiffer. Case in point: Ditko's pinup-style splashes from ASM Annual #1 with each of the classic villains. Just looking at the one with Kraven, Spidey is so flexible and almost looks like he's moving off the page. The cats are rendered very fresh and loose as well, with a lot of implied movement. With this in mind, I think Ditko could have been a great animator too. However, I do like Romita's faces better, especially the female characters. That's where he really shined.
The DC artist whose style I would most compare to Ditko was Joe Kubert. They share certain similarities, though Kubert was not known for superheroes in particular (except Hawkman), and not for his costume design. Virtually all of Ditko's costume designs are great, even the less popular characters like Blue Beetle, Hawk & Dove, the Creeper. The only other costume design that even comes close to Ditko's design for Spider-Man is Wallace Wood's costume design for Daredevil. And just like Spider-Man, John Romita was the only other artist to do a really decent version of the previous artist's costume design.
I have yet to start an issue with romita. I’m currently on Spider-Man 14 or 15. And I can say wow he topped it off. Helped the Bronze Age too of marvel and he’s still alive today!
I'll have to watch this fully later on, but just to clarify: the Writer and Creator of the original Spider Man was indeed Stan Lee, correct? I understand the point you're making at the start about Ditko as a major force as a Storyteller of the comic as the main Artist, and how his art is partially responsible for the story, yet the origin of the idea/plot/theme was indeed Lee, true? As a Writer this is an important distinction for me. At any rate, I'll come back to this later and watch until the end of course. Thanks for the amazing research and presentations as usual!
Nope, all evidence points to the story being refined by Ditko, from a prior jack Kirby origin story; Lee merely added his usual dialogue & captions/editorial voice. FYI, there is ZERO concrete comic book forensic evidence that Lee created ANY of the core Marvel characters & stories; yet there are MOUNTAINS of forensic evidence that Kirby & Ditko DID.
@@arlen6658 Man, that is depressing to hear. Another childhood "hero" bites the dust. Bob Kain and Lee... Who's next? Since I am also a Writer/Storyteller myself I have to admit that I always felt something off in Lee's interviews about "his" creations... It almost looked like he's avoiding answering the creative process/ideation related questions, and those are the most important questions of all, the "how did you come up with that 15B$ idea?". That's where the magic starts, the sparks, the WHAT. Of course, the HOW, the Execution is equally important, but a good execution of a bad idea won't ever result in great art. Thanks so much for the elaborated response, and for the incredible content you create on this channel. You should have hundreds of thousands of subscribers at least. Your content is highly entertaining and informative and your presentation is masterful. Blessings from Jerusalem, Arlen 🙏
@@1995yuda Are you on Facebook? Friend me and come join my 3 comics history groups on The Silver Age, jack Kirby, & Neal Adams! You'll get an EDUCATION!!! :)
Compare the contrapposto stance of Ditko's Spider-Man that is on the cover of ASM annual #2, and used for years in the corner cover box, to Romita's remake of that figure; and later replaces Ditko's in the ASM cover corner box. Ditko's anatomy is more accurate, and the naturalness of the figure's stance illustrates the difference between the 2 artists. Don't get me wrong, Romita made his people beautiful, and much more attractive to the masses and newspaper strips than Ditko would have. Romita also treated his fans with much more respect than Ditko did, but the Ditko spider-man is the Spider-Man.
Romita's Spider-Man is the definitive Spider-Man. What Romita turned Spider-Man into is what has lasted decades. I rarely see a Ditko image on a t-shirt, mug or poster etc. Romita has lasted while Ditko long faded. The original is not always the definitive. I wouldn't say Kirbys Hulk is the definitive Hulk.
For me, it was always about Steve Ditko. I love his unique artistic style. If not for Ditko, there would be no Spider-Man and no Dr. Strange. Much love and respect for John Romita Sr. I love his art as well but for me, personally, it’s always been about Steve Ditko.
I never thought of Ditko as a great artist technically. He couldn't draw pretty women, which was a forte of Romita, who WAS a great artist technically. But Ditko was a GREAT storyteller with pen.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Romitaman was a Milton Caniff clone, he drew everything Romitaman would draw in the 60s back in the 40s. All Romitaman ever did was trace Caniff and Frank Robbins. Which is a shame for me to have to say because I met him and was generally nice with all the fans.
@@lyndoncmp5751 any artist can draw a perty girl. If Ditko's art looks crude and from the 40s, we need to go to art school. If there is a page and all Ditko drew on that page is put one line... Ditko is so good that , the line he drew must be looked at with an electron microscope. That line needs to be measured length and width. The type of pencil he used, the amount of pressure on the page, any curves on the line, what he was trying to say with the line . All these things must be studied, Ditko was just that good.
Those early years in the '60s were Ditko's and Marvel's best, and by far the most creative. Romita and what came after was good but formulaic and commercialized by comparison. Another fine video Mr. Schumer. Thank you.
1:01:50 "Stock Kirby androids," except for the color scheme, they are the Sentinels from X-Men right? I mean, Sentinels are Kirby androids, but I am saying I think Kirby intended those robots to be Sentinels, not having done any Spidey villains (although he used Ditko's Sandman a lot in Fantastic Four, albeit with a new costume) and the X-Men not having a poster, killing two birds with one stone. Why do Sentinels have a green color scheme? Same reason most of Spidey's villains are green and purple: it stands out against the red and blue. The Sentinels' red and purple was meant to stand out against the yellow and black of the X-Men, so it wouldn't work transposed to Spidey.
Ditko #1 No question... they should reprint ALL the Ditko issues (including Annuals) up to issue #38... the reboot with a REALLY good writer/artist team AND do it like Ditko.
The first 2 comics I picked up, or that were given to me, were FF #114 and DD #85 when I was in the 5th grade. I was amazed by Buscema's art and to this day he and Romita are the best comic book artists ever. You look at Ditko's in comparison and his stuff is too sketchy and rough. Sure he and Kirby were the innovators and their styles were taught to others, but Romita and the Buscema brothers took that and ran with it excellently throughout the silver age, my favorite era in comics. As for Ditko, the 60's animated cartoon artist did a much better job even with less detail. And yes Ditko and Kirby drew ugly faces, they couldn't make a good face to save their lives, especially women. Kirby made every woman's face look like Jacky O (those spread eyes!) and every man's face look like William Devane (that mouth!). Jacky O was beautiful in person and photos, but the oddly similar female face in comics was not. Ditko's women resembled scratchy old ladies from the 30s. And yes, some of us notice that right away even though these comic are 90% superheroes. You gotta have good looking women in there, if not so much as the conquest, which all young boys yearn for, but the realism. The ugly women faces stood out for me like a sore thumb, especially on Kirby's stuff where he plastered them on the cover in small circles. My first impression of Kirby's art was "Yuck." I would not buy a comic if Kirby drew it, and this was right after he retired. Friends got used to me passing on certain comics, hearing me saying "Nah, Jack Kirby drew it." Even Bob Brown, a much less famous artist, made better looking women than Ditko or Kirby; witnessed in the Avengers comics of the early 70s. I never liked Gil Kane either. His fighting scenes were twisted like pretzels, and his close up of faces always had that weird upturned nose with the shadings underneath. His perspective was often way off. I also disliked Don Heck; too sketchy and messy, thin, and the action scenes were stiff and faces were so plain. The punches never followed through like my favorite artists mentioned. He was boring. Didn't care for Colan's extra shadowy style but his women, like Black Widow, could be drawn sexy. Romita, John Buscema, and Sal Buscema will always remain my all-time favorites. Best crossover... Avengers vs Defenders in the 70s. Today's artists do not compare which is one reason why I don't do comics anymore. The writing and dialogue are also bad.
WOW, artistamisto, whoever you are, your IGNORANCE of great comic book art and artists is only matched by your ARROGANCE in proclaiming their alleged "defects" in their art, while somehow championing yourself as some arbiter of great artistic judgment. You SUCK in my book.
For god sakes i see in the comments uneducated people saying stan Lee created spiderman🤦♂️ people have to realize the top marvel characters were created by jack kirby and Steve ditko all stan Lee did was add his used car salesman dialog to the story. Just look at some original art especially with kirby you can see kirby was penciling dialog in the original art so stan would know whats going on. Ditko indeed fully created spiderman.
My vote is for Romita, but that's the look I grew up with in the 70's. FYI the cover for Fantasy was drawn by Kirby ironic they use it for the Ditko book cover.
If Spider-man is required to stand there and look cool, then I prefer Romita. If Spider-man is required to webswing or uniquely pose in someway, then I prefer Ditko. I always enjoy your presentations, thank you Mr Schumer.
Romita excelled at drawing attractive women in Romance comics. Ditko was better at costumed characters This was due to Ditko's background in horror and fetish art(through his roommate Eric Stanton) You can say Romita was better at drawing attractive characters, but I think it would sacreligious to say Romita was better at drawing Spidey and his villains. Even standing, Ditko did it better. Ditko captured the spider-like qualities much more. Romita's was too Superman-esq
Exactly. Ditko handled action better because he drew looser than Romita, who was a little more stiff in comparison. Romita beat Ditko in rendering faces however, especially the women.
@@nukeskyhawker261 Romita was smooth, clean, perfected and drew anatomically beautiful looking comic characters to ones eyes (with more attention to Design detail). Ditko was down and dirty, rough and not always sure of his lines. I love both, but as a working artist my whole life (50+ years) Romita is far above the D. man. nuff said
I LOVE Ditko's Spider-Man BUT, the Romita Spider-Man/Peter Parker is really definitive. Every incarnation of Peter Parker/Spider-Man since Romita looks like they were derived from the Romita art
As a kid I found Ditko's drawing, especially in the early issues of Spiderman, to be too wanky and crude (though he did improve over time) and only started buying the magazine when Romita's handsome, more polished and professional looking art appeared. As an adult I do appreciate the creative contributions Ditko made more than I did then.
@robertcoggeshall3071, Uh, that's an after-the-fact judgment, re: Romita making Spider a household name; the trajectory Ditko set in motion for the character by '66 for Romita to inherit might have gotten there just the same. Romita reminds me of NFL football coaches like George Seifert & Mike Shanahan, who inherited multiple-Super Bowl-winning teams, and won a few themselves because of it. But later, on their own, they couldn't create a great team from the ground up.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Uh, let's see: Ditko created The Creeper & Hawk & Dove, characters still in use by DC 50 years alter; Mr. A, the vigilante model for Judge Dread & Dirty Harry. And Kirby created the New Gods, still being mined by DC 50 years later. And gee, what did your hero Lee create? Ravage 2099, Stripperella, and The Governator. "Nuff said," as your hero would say!
@@arlen6658 I don't know why you would say that when art is subjective. Everyone has their favorite, and Jazzy Johnny is mine. Nothing against Ditko, he's awesome.
@calixohiggins9843, only if you consider rounding out, smoothing out, blanderizing the idiosyncratic artistic aspects of Ditko's unique creation an "improvement"!
@garybrigham9538, Romita WAS represented in my book, with his cover to Spider #50 on a spread in the Ditko chapter (along with descriptive text) But no, he did NOT deserve his own chapter, compared to the 5 artists I put together in a chapter called "More Masters"--because they all did definitive versions of multiple characters during the Silver Age, whereas all Romita really did of note in the '60s was his Spider-Man.
Well that's somewhat unfair because Romita didn't have long runs on any other titles to make his mark. He only had a few issues on FF but still did a fantastic job, having to follow an icon (for the second time). His brief Daredevil stint pre Spider-Man was great. Whenever he did a cover or poster featuring other characters he usually nailed it in his own style of course. I think he drew one of the best ever Hulks (see covers #119 and #120 of Amazing Spider-Man, as well as the interior of #119). Kirby and Buscema couldn't really draw Spider-Man. Let's be honest. Nobody is great at everything. Cheers anyway.
Romita and its not even close. I grew up with both (British reprints in the 1970s namely Spider-Man Comics Weekly) but even as a kid I always thought Ditkos artwork was f-ugly. Yes its quirky and yes it's certainly unique so plaudits to him for that, but even Gwen Stacy looked like a hag when Ditko drew her. I hate to think how MJ Would have looked under Ditko. A younger version of Anna Watson? Eeek. Ditkos art, with relatively few exceptions, still looks like an eyesore to me. Romita's art is gorgeous. He could even make Gil Kane's artwork look pleasing when he inked it. Oh and nobody, but nobody, ever did covers like Jazzy Johnny. 👍 ☺
@1995yuda, Nope, all evidence points to the story being refined by Ditko, from a prior jack Kirby origin story; Lee merely added his usual dialogue & captions/editorial voice. FYI, there is ZERO concrete comic book forensic evidence that Lee created ANY of the core Marvel characters & stories; yet there are MOUNTAINS of forensic evidence that Kirby & Ditko DID.
Stan dreamt up the names ‘Spider-Man’ and ‘Peter Parker’… as well as naming all the cast. He came up with the spider bite, money worries, personal problems, being a teen hero, …. It might be cool these days to dismiss Stan’s contribution, but he is the one who dreamt all these characters up.
Lee had the basic idea for Spider-Man before it was turned over to Ditko. This is without doubt. Ditko didn't dream up Spider-Man. Ditko was grumpy. He clearly got plotting and drawing credit in Amazing Spider-Man yet still wasn't happy. Even when Stan Lee decades later officially gave him co credit as creator of Spider-Man he was still grumpy about it. Ditko wouldn't even meet Jonathan Ross when he crossed the Atlantic for a gushing tribute to him. Lee met him. Romita met him. Ditko stuck two fingers up. RIP to an icon (even if I dislike his art) but I don't think he was a very friendly person.
@@lyndoncmp5751 I don't even know where to begin with your KNOW-NOTHING CLAPTRAP. You're just another Lee Lemming, backi9ng up the Bob Kane of Marvel Comics.
@@bumface1810 I don't even know where to begin with your KNOW-NOTHING CLAPTRAP. You're just another Lee Lemming, backing up the Bob Kane of Marvel Comics. But hey, hiding behind a ridiculous pseudonym like "Bum Face" fits you TO A TEE.
If it weren't for Stan Lee, we wouldn't have the awesome Spider-Man suit! When Stan wanted to create Spider-Man, he first worked with Kirby. But even tho Stan knew Kirby was a genius, Jack didn't come up with the type of costume that Stan wanted. And Stan, in his editorial genius, decided to create Spider-Man with Ditko instead of Kirby.
WOW @langreeves6419, you really need to learn some real comic book history, vs. the Lee Kool-Aid you've obviously been drinking. It was Ditko who saw Kirby's pages of his Spiderman, and told Lee that they looked too much like Kirby/Simon's The Fly for Harvey, so, afraid of a possible lawsuit, Lee took the strip away from Kirby and gave it to Ditko, who went on to create the Spider-Man character & stories, that your hero Lee dialogued & wrote the captions for. You need to read Ditko's essays on the subject, vs, swallowing the Lee version of history that he's succeeded in having all of comic book fan-dumb--and plenty of pro-dumb, and the know-nothing press, too,--swallow whole.
Sorry I left comments based on biographies and interviews. I see the channel is run by someone who doesn't like conversations. There are so many Spider-Man comics to read, I don't have time to watch videos made by hateful mean people. Oh my, I read some other comments. Nice to know it was personal against me. Arlen is rude to pretty much everyone. Tells us to "deal with it." Well. I will deal with it. I'll mark you channel "Do not recommend" so TH-cam won't put your videos in my feed anymore
@calixohiggins9843, only if you consider rounding out, smoothing out, blanderizing the idiosyncratic artistic aspects of Ditko's unique creation an "improvement"!
@@arlen6658 Excellent choice of words- Romita's Spiderman world was much more 'rounded out' than Ditko's in that it was more three dimensional and felt more real than Ditko's relatively flat art style. Ditko's being more idiosyncratic, sure... but the more visually appealing and iconic Spiderman is Romita's.
@@arlen6658 Vanilla is the best flavor for a reason. I'd imagine your favorite flavor to be something like Harry Potter's poop. Most self-fashioned eccentrics will chew your ear off about their peculiar "taste" in a desperate attempt to attach themselves to a world that they had no hand in creating. Are you one of those?
When Romita took over I felt the same way as when Roger Moore took over as 007 - shallow by comparison . His women had a "glamor girl fashion model " superficial look to them . And the incomparable anatomy , as you said , the stress points - the suggestion of coiled fluid muscle ready to release . Ditko created a body language with no precedent - what it would look like if you could adhere to a wall . Lots of people like Romita more , as many people like Boris more that Frazetta , and sure , it's a matter of personal taste - if you put images side by side the difference would be more apparent .
YUP; human nature always sides with surface beauty over superficial "ugliness" that forces you to dig deeper, to look beyond surface appearances at the "beauty" within.
just look at the web on the suit.. whit S.D it seems like 3d, with volume and that, with JR it just look flat. I like JRJr more than JRSr, and of course, Ditko is the best artist who ever draw spiderman.
For me its always going to be Romita Sr. Spider-Man became Spider-Man because of him. The book would have been fizzled out and we wouldn't have the character as he exists now if Ditko remained on the run. Also, Ditko draws poorly.
Uh, you're WRONG: because Ditko LEFT Marvel in November '65; but because he worked ahead of time, he had finished issue #38 then, which didn't get PUBLISHED until the spring of '66. But thanx for your sole comment on my webinar--got anything in it you LIKED for discussion here? Jeez.
The 60s SPIDER-MAN animated series which ran for 3 YEARS on a major network doubtless boosted comic book sales, something which often gets forgotten about in this debate! I'm a "Steve Ditko Guy" straight down the line! I think Romita was instrumental in making Spidey more like a DC character: popular, more accepted by the public, gorgeous girl friend who loved Peter no matter what ( until her father died which turned her into a clingy psychopath) and beautiful but more conventional artwork! Romita's Spidey was always broke but relatively stable compared to Ditko's neurotic nerd! They're just two different characters!
@erikrupp692 you don't know that for sure; but like most on Team Lee, you're just blindly repeating the same LEE LIES from 50 years ago, in which he baldly claims sole character & story creation. If you've read Ditko's own essays that he wrote between 1990 and his death, you'll get a more accurate description of who did what. Get educated, and unplug yourself from the LEE BORG.
@Danny-nm9sn--yeah, when people create a documentary, they present THEIR p.o.v. , as I presented mine. If YOU want to make your OWN doc that's pro-Lee, BE MY GUEST. I'm sure your p.o.s. doc will have YOUR biases on parade. Like your "opinion" that Ditko's "plotting" sucked--but hey, Ditko had ALWAYS been "plotting" Spider-man since the early issues of S-M--it was only circa issue #24 that Lee finally gave in to Ditko's demands to be credited. So yeah, what you call Lee's "ideas" were ALWAYS Ditko's--Lee just dialogued/captioned Ditko's stories, just like Lee did with Kirby. Get an education before you spout your pro-Lee nonsense.
WOW @langreeves6419, you really need to learn some real comic book history, vs. the Lee Kool-Aid you've obviously been drinking. It was Ditko who say Kirby's pages of his Spiderman, and told Lee that they looked too much like Kirby/Simon's The Fly for Harvey, so, afraid of a possible lawsuit, Lee took the strip away from Kirby and gave it to Ditko, who went on to create the Spider-Man character & stories, that your hero Lee dialogued & wrote the captions for. You need to read Ditko's essays on the subject, vs, swallowing the Lee version of history that he's succeeded in having all of comic book fan-dumb--and plenty of pro-dumb, and the know-nothing press, too,--swallow whole.
It was Stan's idea that Spider-Man be a nerdy teenager with the usual teenage problems. Ditko took Stan's real basic, simple idea and ran with it, but Stan came up with the ideas that made Spider-Man stand out from every other superhero around at the time.
@@erikrupp692 you don't know that for sure; but like most on Team Lee, you're just blindly repeating the same LEE LIES from 50 years ago, in which he baldly claims sole character & story creation. If you've read Ditko's own essays that he wrote between 1990 and his death, you'll get a more accurate description of who did what. Get educated, and unplug yourself from the LEE BORG.
@@arlen6658 - I never said Stan solely created Spider-Man. I said the idea of a superhero who could crawl on walls like an insect, the name, and the idea of him being a nerdy teenager all came from Stan. Everything else came from Steve. It was a collaborative effort. You seem to want to discount every major idea Stan ever had as unimportant or fiction. Neither Jack nor Steve ever came anywhere near the same level of success after working with Stan as they had when they did work with Stan. Why do you think that is? None of Jack's DC titles lasted. None of them were significant successes. Steve had less success than Jack did after his time at Marvel. Stan brought a lot to the table. Jack and Steve took Stan's rough, simple ideas and ran with them - they turned those bare bones ideas into well thought out characters and stories. And their art made it all work. COLLABORATION.
@@erikrupp692 you're just repeating all the LEE LIES about who created what, alll the cliches about Ditko & Kirby not being "successful" without Lee, because you're just another member of Team Lee. I'm done wasting my time on you. Get educated.
WOW, artistamisto, whoever you are, your IGNORANCE of great comic book art and artists is only matched by your ARROGANCE in proclaiming their alleged "defects" in their art, while somehow championing yourself as some arbiter of great artistic judgment. You SUCK in my book.
Lee created the name. He DID NOT describe how he wanted it, that IS NOT THE MARVEL METHOD. Here's the Marvel Method. Watch me create something. The Silver Owl. Now find a great artist who can give this character his abilities and his origin, have him do the panels I don't need to know how he sets it up, really don't have the time, and you now have the Marvel Method. Now I just have to add the word balloons to an already set up story. Wow I'm great,. I'm so excited, 𝓘 𝓦𝓡𝓞𝓣𝓔 𝓐 𝓒𝓞𝓜𝓘𝓒 𝓑𝓞𝓞𝓚 𝓢𝓣𝓞𝓡𝓨! The artist and I are now co-creators of Silver Owl. My name first as writer of course as I created the name and added the words. You are very decieved if you think Lee described any thing to his artists on how they should panelize the stories, he never had the time as editor of Marvel Comics. Ask any of the old artists that worked for Marvel at the time, not just Kirby and Ditko, even artist Wally Wood who gave Dare Devil his red costume purposely mixed the panels in his art to mess with Stan Lee's head. Wood didn't care for The Marvel Method of Lee's credit taking for the stories he didn't write. Lee was so happy when Wood resigned from Marvel. By the way, the saying, "With great power comes great responsibility," which was added to the last panel of the first issue of Spiderman by Stan Lee was even plageriized from Winston Churchill. Look it up on Google.
@@wiseguymaybeDitko hated flawed characters yet the reason Spider-Man is popular because he is a flawed character. Marvel heroes are popular because they are flawed people with imperfect lives while also being superheroes. Kirby cared more about writing God characters and Ditko cared more about writing Objectivist characters. Stan Lee brought more humanity and relatability to superheroes by making them flawed and imperfect people.
@@petermj1098 You are going to tell me that Stan the Conman stood over Steve Ditko's shoulder and directed him what panels to draw? Baloney, even by Stan's own words in the book The Origin Of Marvel. He himself said the artist's drew the panels, he did not give them any direction to follow, almost admitting that they did the stories, and he would add the words. Read it some time. Obviously Ditko would draw flawed characters that's the way he did the panels. The biggest direrection Lee would give is, "Let's bring back Doctor Doom" that's all he added. And past artists would tell you that. Jack Kirby is the main creator of the Marvel characters. in enterviews he will tell you he was the one that created the Fantastic Four, and never says he co-created it with Stan Lee. So somebody is lying some where, are you calling Jack Kirby a liar? Because I'm definately calling Stan Lee a liar.
I originally started reading Spider-man in 66 or 67, so for me Romita was THE artist, while Ditko was the one from the reprints. Still love them both, but under Romita, Peter started to bloom. Got out of his Aunt's shadow, moved in with Harry, got a motorcycle and a real girlfriend.
Arlen, this was incredibly entertaining. I'm always going to be a John Romita fan, but you've made me love Ditko's work more than ever.
Well, to quote the PREVIOUS Worst. President. Ever: "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!" :)
I’m sorry sir, but I believe John Romita, is my favorite Spider-Man! Perhaps, it’s because I grew up collecting his work. But that’s just my humble opinion.Mstt
Man this webinar is such a blessing! I loved it! I think it is important to note that Ditko was more of a horror/mystery stile, while Romita, was a romance illustrator in the beginning, and I think that is the biggest influence in his style: the aesthetic.
You're right about Romita, I've never factored in his romance background. But wouldn't success been predictable for any competent artist
handed that plum assignment, taking over Marvel's bestselling superhero title built mostly on Steve Ditko's back? His 4 years of groundwork
gave birth to not just Spidey but an enormous soap opera cast of characters that endure 60 years later. I'd not be surprised if Ditko didn't get
a Christmas card every year after that from Romita. With money in it, that Ditko would send back.
Eggs Ackley!!
Ditko's Spider-Man remains unsurpassed for emotional involvement and is the one everyone returns to.
John Romita was undoubtedly more polished, but I never got over the impression that his Spider-Man was a let down after what had gone before.
Nostalgia goggles
I was one of those kids in the 60's that traded away my classic early Spider-Man comics by Romita because I was mad that Ditko left. Now, I wish that I had kept those early Romita's in my collection. Romita's run definitely had some great bright colorful covers. I don't know if that had to do with advancements in technology or if Romita was just a great cover designer. However, no one could beat Ditko when it comes to drawing Spidey in action, and many of those Ditko covers are classics as well. I find it interesting that Ditko had images of the great illustrator Burne Hogarth in those photographs of Ditko's studio. Hogarth is famous for his anatomically correct figures in action. If you want your Spider-Man artwork to be very slick and "pretty", Romita is your man. If you liked your Spider-Man artwork a little quirky and sometimes just plain goofy, but the action sequences to be flat out breathtaking, Ditko when he was at his best, was the man.
I like them both equally. There, I've said it! I also like Ross Andru's run, especially the "Superman Vs Spider-Man" special edition.
For me it's gotta be John Romita Sr. Although I have huge respect for Ditko's artworks, Jazzy one has so much more eye pleasing look to it. But that's just my personal opinion. Either way both of them are LEGENDARY when it comes to drawing Spider-Man
Edit : there was a typo😅
Super informative and entertaining webinar! Steve ditkos run on Spider-Man to this day is my all time favorite depiction of the wall crawler. No comic has ever emotionally moved me as much as issue 33, that full page masterpiece of him lifting the piece of metal off of him brought me to tears the first time I saw it. Thank you for this it was a great watch!
Thanx for those kudos! And hope you'll check out my other comics history videos on my TH-cam AND Vimeo channels: @t
Your seminars are always top notch and enjoyable.
Thanx, man! Also check out some of my webinar/lecture videos on my VIMEO channel: vimeo.com/arlenschumer1
Ditko was a story teller first with comic art being his vocabulary.
Ramita was a graphic artist first who fit his drawing to the story second. Ditko's Spider-man sticks to the wall. Ramita's Spider-man floats. Nuff Said
For me, Jazzy Johnny is my favorite Spidey artist, and my favorite artist period.
Great video! You definitely know your stuff. The Ditko/Lee run will always be my favorite run on Spider-Man but it’s hard to argue against Romita’s massive mainstream influence, and beautiful pop art.
...but if you HAD to choose ONE?
@@arlen6658 Ditko absolutely for me :)
@dashriprock9014, you're WRONG: because Ditko LEFT Marvel in November '65; but because he worked ahead of time, he had finished issue #38 then, which didn't get PUBLISHED until the spring of '66. But thanx for your sole comment on my webinar--got anything in it you LIKED for discussion here? Jeez.
No contest- Romita is the best. I enjoy Ditko’s quirkiness and creativity but Romita’s superior skills in art and storytelling are the reason that Spidey surpassed the FF in sales at the height of Lee/Kirby’s run.
Uh, you're using sales & popularity to gauge creative superiority? GOOD LUCK IN LIFE, pal!
Yes, Spider-Man was getting into stagnation as Ditko went on I feel. There were still some great moments, but not a great deal had changed in 3 years. It was the same 'ol same' ol. It couldn't have continued like that. It needed fresh input and a new direction, and we got that under Romita.
I always thought the soap opera aspect of Amazing Spider-Man under Romita was more interesting and important than the fights with villains. It just made the comic book three dimensional instead of two dimensional.
👍
There is definitely something to be said about the difference in storytelling.... Ditko had a style that was perfect for the neuroticism of the teenage Peter and he had an incredible handle on the fluidity of Spidey in motion, but his general camera angles or 'cinematography' was often unremarkable. Romita imo had much more cinematic flair to his storytelling and the camera angles he would use in his panels. Which is also to say nothing of how Romita's cleaner art and more heroic looking Spider-Man perfectly complimented Peter's evolution in confidence in his college years. Both artists were great, and I don't think you can say one is 'better' than the other. Love Ditko but my fav is Romita.
@@bumface1810 Very well articulated! Thank you.
As I've gotten older, I actually prefer Ditko over Romita. His style suited the character a lot better.
Ditko will always have my respect and admiration, but I have to admit that I generally prefer Romita's work. It just strikes me as cleaner, more cohesive, and better overall. ASM 33 though is just pinnacle level comics.
I honestly love both artistic takes on the character equally. Ditko defined the look of the character and how strange and spider like the character could be, setting the stage for guys like Todd McFarlene to contort the character in strange ways WAY before McFarlene would ever get their hands on the character. At the same time however, Romita cleaned up the look of the costume and thanks to the colors of Spider-Man’s suit being brightened up during Romita’s run, we have a more definitive color palette for the web head that most adaptations still take inspiration from. While Ditko’s Spider-Man perfectly fit the character at the beginning of his hero career with his scrawnier build and even ‘creepier’ aesthetic, Romita’s Spider-Man was simply the perfect evolution of the character during an era of comics where Peter would have more of a handle on his powers and have more experience in being a costumed hero. As Peter became more confident during the Romita run, Spider-Man’s costume looked more streamlined and brighter, making him look as heroic as he was becoming. All in all, both were just perfect artist for the respective times in the webslinger’s life.
Beautifully put. 👍
Fantastic presentation. Thanks, Mr. Schumer, your book is great, I do own it since a few years back, it is quite wonderful. The question of whose version of Spiderman was greater will probably never be resolved. Like you said, it is often a matter of personal preference. If you were raised on Ditko as a kid, it is probably him. If you are a child of the Seventies like me, Romita's version may be your preferred choice. However, I must say that in 1980, the publication of Spiderman in my home country (of Sweden) was handled by a company that reverted to Ditko's art and adventures of the 1960s for a whole year, (and thank God for that) and thusly mixed the styles of art, after having first published Romita's and Gil Kane's adventures during the years of 1978 and 1979. So, a young reader such as myself (8 years of age) would be introduced to many of these masters during a short period of years, both Ditko, Romita and Gil Kane, all at the same time. Having said that, one felt deeply, even as a very young reader, that there was just something extraordinary about those Ditko comics. He is the true master in my view, and always will be. Romita was a worthy heir to the throne, no question. But the way Ditko made those adventures come alive, the way he drew Peter Parker and his conflicts in life, I especially enjoyed the animosity between Parker and Flash Thompson, (anybody who's ever been bullied, knows what that can be like) and I loved how all of that was depicted by Ditko. The way he did misunderstandings, heart-ache, conflicts and relationships, and all the other stuff of life itself. It is simply unsurpassed in comic book history, I feel. Romita was plenty, plenty great, but Ditko is the ORIGINATOR of it all. Thanks for your webinar. Sincerely, Andy from Sweden.
Thanx for ALL those GREAT kudos, Andy--but call me ARLEN!!! :) Check out all my other works at my website: www.arlenschumer.com
I inherited my dads comic book collection from the 60s 70s and 80s. Shows like yours helped me to appreciate it a lot more than I would have otherwise. Thanks so much for sharing on youtube, Mr. Schumer. I love the Ditko and Romita Spider-man. They are both great. I also love the Sam Raimi/Tobey Maquire Spider-Man films. I thought they captured the best of the Lee/Ditko/Romita Spider-Man. I have a question, though. Jack Kirby drew the cover of the first Spiderman comic book. Who drew Spiderman first? Kirby or Ditko?
This was such a fun video to watch. Glad it got recommended to me ❤️✨ and happy it was over an hour long
Anything specific stand out for discussion?
Ditko created spidermans look and spideriness, but Romita was THE artist needed to make spiderman a household name. I think most artists today emulate ditko, but Romitas influence was there for the first 15 years or so. Plus, he was the first artist to reveal the beautiful mj watson and stan penned her now famous line- face it tiger, you just hit the jackpot!!
Uh, that's an after-the-fact judgment, re: Romita making Spider a household name; the trajectory Ditko set in motion for the character by '66 for Romita to inherit might have gotten there just the same. Romita reminds me of NFL football coaches like George Seifert & Mike Shanahan, who inherited multiple-Super Bowl-winning teams, and won a few themselves because of it. But later, on their own, they couldn't create a great team from the ground up.
@@arlen6658 romita never had the chance to do that. It was all ditko and Kirby mainly to start with. Seeing as how Romita was art director for several years, I see that as a more prestigious role. Ditko was getting incredibly stale toward the end of his run, with tons of bland fist fights that all looked the same. And I'll agree with another commenter that neither Steve or Jack could draw decent looking women. Romita was a godsend at the time.
@@robertcoggeshall3071 uh, I buy Spider-Man for SPIDER-MAN--not for drawings of women.
@@robertcoggeshall3071 ditko wasn't as good before he left obviously because he was the first artist to figure out that Smiley was ripping all of them off.
Romita was the Company man kissing Smiley's @$$.
@arlen6658
Id argue Spider-Man's cast of supporting characters is what made Spider-Man what it was. That was the beauty of it, instead of a hero just fighting villains. I personally enjoyed the Peter Parker and soap opera than the fights under Romita. It was more three dimensional than the Ditko era.
Ditko stagnanted. Three years on and it was still about aunt May and everyone thinking Peter was a snooty jerk. It was stuck in a rut.
The best thing to happen with Spider-Man was Ditko leaving and Romita coming. It needed a fresh and vibrant new direction. We got that with Romita...... and then some. I can't understand anyone who didn't like looking at the gorgeous panels with MJ and Gwen. 😲.
To me, Romita's absolute best work on Spider-Man was the run from #106 to #119, and nobody could do covers like Romita, as you've alluded to.
That Marvel Treasury Edition #1 in 1974 is my absolute favourite Spider-Man pose.
👍
@josefserf1926, Romita following Ditko on Spider-Man was like Murphy Anderson following Kubert on Hawkman; both followers were competent, and had/have many fans--but neither of them ever surpassed their initial artists in raw originality.
The original old cartoons of Spider-Man I used to watch as a child were based off of Ditkos' work. So I am biased towards Ditkos' version
I truly love both. I grew up with a small black and white pocket book with about ten early Ditko issues and it was my favorite comic book. Romita definitely refined what Ditko was doing and made it more appealing but some of the outsider uniqueness was lost. That is not to take anything away from Romita and I am so happy we have both versions.
Gil Kane and Ross Andru were better than Romita.
No they weren't. Gil Kane's Spider-Man only looked good when Romita inked or finished it. I did like Andru, even if he was no Romita.
Im so glad I found your channel Arlen. I was given your book on the Silver Age of Comics when I was about 8/10 or so and it got me hooked on these artists and this time period. Looking forward to seeing more of your videos!
WOW, Anthony, what a great testimonial to receive! So which edition of the book do you have: the original 2003-4 soft- or hardcover, or the revised hardcover of 2014? Because if you got the FORMER, gift it to a friend or library, and get the LATTER (signed & sketched-in by me) at: bit.ly/3DiV40e
And come join my Silver Age Facebook group: facebook.com/groups/1439974386262060/
@@arlen6658 My dad had gotten me the original soft cover version of the book! It fell apart so I've always had it in the back of my mind to get another copy one day but now that I know it's you I might have to get a new copy soon!
@@anthonyfreire7251 "Might"!?!?!?!?? :)
@@anthonyfreire7251 but seriously, you're missing an ENTIRE 16-page chapter that's ONLY in the hardcover!
In my opinion, it's Ditko, hands down. Spider-Man as we know the character, wouldn't exist without him. Yes, Romita Sr. drew attractive people and I like his art, a legend at Marvel in his own right, but he was strictly more of an illustrator/cartoonist, those who know, know.
Romita refined and built off of what Ditko created so arguably Ditko deserves to win by default....even though I like Romitas work a smidge more, he was able to make everything feel more alive and made Peter and May look more youthful
Those were not just generic Kirby robots on the rejected Spider Man poster. Those were the iconic Sentinels which Kirby introduced in the X-Men comics. Editorially, they probably wanted a poster with Spider Man - centric villains on it and rejected that one for those reasons. It does look like a good piece of work, like the others they approved of.
It was those two Pocket Books, Spider-Man reprint paperbacks that immersed me in Ditko, my Spider-Man artist.
Me too. I still have them.
In my opinion both are goats
Ditko had Spidey in more of an actual spider feel and look.
Fascinating and edifying! Another informative spree, Arlen.
This was a GREAT listen really I was completely engaged the entire time. Loved seeing the art of both these greats and hearing your thoughts and break down of it all
Thanx for those kudos, Chulo! I'd be interested in your feedback on my other comics history videos on my TH-cam AND Vimeo channels: vimeo.com/arlenschumer1
Thanx for all the great comments & kudos here!
Love both Ditko and Romita. Kinda need both. Kinda can't have one without the other.
Great ending Mr.Schumer. I lived through it as a fan and I give them a 51 / 49 split with Ditko in the majority.
Thanx for the kudos--but call me ARLEN!!! :)
Romita is my favorite artist and his run from #39-56 is my favorite. I would say through 77 but there were issues by Heck and Buscema in there. But Ditko co created most of Spidey's best villains and supporting cast. But as far as art goes I prefer Romita- who btw should have been included in your book!
Uh, he WAS represented in my book, with his cover to Spider #50 on a spread in the Ditko chapter (along with descriptive text) But no, he did NOT deserve his own chapter, compared to the 5 artists I put together in a chapter called "More Masters"--because they all did definitive versions of multiple characters during the Silver Age, whereas all Romita really did of note in the '60s was his Spider-Man run.
Ditko is so amazing at drawing hands
Arlen, great presentation. Apparently, Romita's original ASM 82 Electro cover got lost/delayed in the mail. So Stan has Marie create this other one for publication since it didn't show up on time. I would love to hear a webinar on the "Marvel Method" and the creative ownership issues that become entangled in that. You hint at that conversation here, but you offer such detailed research that your opinions would offer a new light on such a controversial topic.
Ian, i may not have a webinar on it, but e-mail me via the contact form on my website, at arlen@arlenschumer.com and ask me to send you a PDF of my 16-page verbal/visual essay on Kirby/Lee/"The Marvel Method," called "The Auteur Theory of Comics" that i think you'll enjoy!
Arlene, many people consider John Romita, Sr. The best Spider-man artist. But I like Steve Ditko too. And although a few people I've met don't agree with me, I like Gil Kane, too! 😀😃
I started with Spideys first appearance in Amazong Fantasy and now I'm on issue 44, it's been great. Love Ditko and think he's the master but I dig Romita A LOT.
Stan Lee's writing takes the cake for me with Spiderman, the originals will always be the best imo
I know Ditko was the original, but I'm Team Romita. Just saying when you picture Spider-Man and his Rogues they picture Romita's artwork
I started buying Spider-Man comics during Romita's run and loved them, Later when I went back to buying Ditko's comics I didn't like them as much. His character was to spindly and looked rushed to me.
I find ditko's leaner ruffer characters more dynamic and expressive more appealing I wish we could see some shocker and rhino ditko comics
I also find the early ditko asm stories to be some of the best
Unfortunately I can't say the same for his last writtings whilst good it wasn't as good so I think the switch to romita story wise to be for the best.
While I love both artists, Ditko's work had a looser feel with more implied motion, whereas Romita's work was a little stiffer. Case in point: Ditko's pinup-style splashes from ASM Annual #1 with each of the classic villains. Just looking at the one with Kraven, Spidey is so flexible and almost looks like he's moving off the page. The cats are rendered very fresh and loose as well, with a lot of implied movement. With this in mind, I think Ditko could have been a great animator too. However, I do like Romita's faces better, especially the female characters. That's where he really shined.
Arlene, hi! MY 3 favorite Spider-man artist were Ditko, Romita, Sr., and Gil Kane!😂😄
The DC artist whose style I would most compare to Ditko was Joe Kubert. They share certain similarities, though Kubert was not known for superheroes in particular (except Hawkman), and not for his costume design. Virtually all of Ditko's costume designs are great, even the less popular characters like Blue Beetle, Hawk & Dove, the Creeper. The only other costume design that even comes close to Ditko's design for Spider-Man is Wallace Wood's costume design for Daredevil. And just like Spider-Man, John Romita was the only other artist to do a really decent version of the previous artist's costume design.
I have yet to start an issue with romita. I’m currently on Spider-Man 14 or 15. And I can say wow he topped it off. Helped the Bronze Age too of marvel and he’s still alive today!
I'll have to watch this fully later on, but just to clarify: the Writer and Creator of the original Spider Man was indeed Stan Lee, correct? I understand the point you're making at the start about Ditko as a major force as a Storyteller of the comic as the main Artist, and how his art is partially responsible for the story, yet the origin of the idea/plot/theme was indeed Lee, true? As a Writer this is an important distinction for me. At any rate, I'll come back to this later and watch until the end of course. Thanks for the amazing research and presentations as usual!
Nope, all evidence points to the story being refined by Ditko, from a prior jack Kirby origin story; Lee merely added his usual dialogue & captions/editorial voice. FYI, there is ZERO concrete comic book forensic evidence that Lee created ANY of the core Marvel characters & stories; yet there are MOUNTAINS of forensic evidence that Kirby & Ditko DID.
@@arlen6658 Man, that is depressing to hear. Another childhood "hero" bites the dust. Bob Kain and Lee... Who's next?
Since I am also a Writer/Storyteller myself I have to admit that I always felt something off in Lee's interviews about "his" creations... It almost looked like he's avoiding answering the creative process/ideation related questions, and those are the most important questions of all, the "how did you come up with that 15B$ idea?". That's where the magic starts, the sparks, the WHAT. Of course, the HOW, the Execution is equally important, but a good execution of a bad idea won't ever result in great art.
Thanks so much for the elaborated response, and for the incredible content you create on this channel. You should have hundreds of thousands of subscribers at least. Your content is highly entertaining and informative and your presentation is masterful.
Blessings from Jerusalem, Arlen 🙏
@@1995yuda "...You should have hundreds of thousands of subscribers at least." YOUR MOUTH TO GOD'S EARS, my fellow landsman! :)
@@1995yuda Are you on Facebook? Friend me and come join my 3 comics history groups on The Silver Age, jack Kirby, & Neal Adams! You'll get an EDUCATION!!! :)
@@1995yuda And re: Bob kane/Bill Finger, maybe you've already watched this one?: th-cam.com/video/FUEdYc0faqc/w-d-xo.html
Compare the contrapposto stance of Ditko's Spider-Man that is on the cover of ASM annual #2, and used for years in the corner cover box, to Romita's remake of that figure; and later replaces Ditko's in the ASM cover corner box. Ditko's anatomy is more accurate, and the naturalness of the figure's stance illustrates the difference between the 2 artists. Don't get me wrong, Romita made his people beautiful, and much more attractive to the masses and newspaper strips than Ditko would have. Romita also treated his fans with much more respect than Ditko did, but the Ditko spider-man is the Spider-Man.
the first picture ditkos left hand is crooked
Romita's Spider-Man is the definitive Spider-Man. What Romita turned Spider-Man into is what has lasted decades. I rarely see a Ditko image on a t-shirt, mug or poster etc. Romita has lasted while Ditko long faded.
The original is not always the definitive. I wouldn't say Kirbys Hulk is the definitive Hulk.
I respectively disagree. There are plenty of Ditko images floating around on T-shirts (I own some) to the late 60's cartoon.
@MtHockey
There really aren't.
For me, it was always about Steve Ditko. I love his unique artistic style. If not for Ditko, there would be no Spider-Man and no Dr. Strange.
Much love and respect for John Romita Sr. I love his art as well but for me, personally, it’s always been about Steve Ditko.
No respect for Romita, he was just a Milton Caniff clone, nothing original about him. Ditko influenced a lot more artist than Romita the Company man.
I never thought of Ditko as a great artist technically. He couldn't draw pretty women, which was a forte of Romita, who WAS a great artist technically. But Ditko was a GREAT storyteller with pen.
Ditko's art was crude, rushed and an eyesore particularly his everyday people. His Spider-Man and cast of characters looked they were from the 1940s.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Romitaman was a Milton Caniff clone, he drew everything Romitaman would draw in the 60s back in the 40s.
All Romitaman ever did was trace Caniff and Frank Robbins.
Which is a shame for me to have to say because I met him and was generally nice with all the fans.
@@lyndoncmp5751 any artist can draw a perty girl.
If Ditko's art looks crude and from the 40s, we need to go to art school.
If there is a page and all Ditko drew on that page is put one line...
Ditko is so good that , the line he drew must be looked at with an electron microscope. That line needs to be measured length and width.
The type of pencil he used, the amount of pressure on the page, any curves on the line, what he was trying to say with the line .
All these things must be studied, Ditko was just that good.
@@lyndoncmp5751 stay away from Romitaman, he will copy your art.
@@lyndoncmp5751 and don't forget, Ditko created Spiderman. If not for Ditko creating Spiderman, there would be no Spiderman for Romitaman to copy.
Those early years in the '60s were Ditko's and Marvel's best, and by far the most creative. Romita and what came after was good but formulaic and commercialized by comparison. Another fine video Mr. Schumer. Thank you.
"Mr. Schumer"?!?!? Call me ARLEN!!! :)
what a great video. Subbed!
1:01:50 "Stock Kirby androids," except for the color scheme, they are the Sentinels from X-Men right? I mean, Sentinels are Kirby androids, but I am saying I think Kirby intended those robots to be Sentinels, not having done any Spidey villains (although he used Ditko's Sandman a lot in Fantastic Four, albeit with a new costume) and the X-Men not having a poster, killing two birds with one stone.
Why do Sentinels have a green color scheme? Same reason most of Spidey's villains are green and purple: it stands out against the red and blue. The Sentinels' red and purple was meant to stand out against the yellow and black of the X-Men, so it wouldn't work transposed to Spidey.
Ditko #1 No question... they should reprint ALL the Ditko issues (including Annuals) up to issue #38... the reboot with a REALLY good writer/artist team AND do it like Ditko.
Without the Romita run?
I read that Ditko wanted co-writing credit but Lee wasn’t going to give him.
Nope, Stan Lee credited Steve Ditko.
The first 2 comics I picked up, or that were given to me, were FF #114 and DD #85 when I was in the 5th grade. I was amazed by Buscema's art and to this day he and Romita are the best comic book artists ever. You look at Ditko's in comparison and his stuff is too sketchy and rough. Sure he and Kirby were the innovators and their styles were taught to others, but Romita and the Buscema brothers took that and ran with it excellently throughout the silver age, my favorite era in comics. As for Ditko, the 60's animated cartoon artist did a much better job even with less detail.
And yes Ditko and Kirby drew ugly faces, they couldn't make a good face to save their lives, especially women. Kirby made every woman's face look like Jacky O (those spread eyes!) and every man's face look like William Devane (that mouth!). Jacky O was beautiful in person and photos, but the oddly similar female face in comics was not. Ditko's women resembled scratchy old ladies from the 30s. And yes, some of us notice that right away even though these comic are 90% superheroes. You gotta have good looking women in there, if not so much as the conquest, which all young boys yearn for, but the realism.
The ugly women faces stood out for me like a sore thumb, especially on Kirby's stuff where he plastered them on the cover in small circles. My first impression of Kirby's art was "Yuck." I would not buy a comic if Kirby drew it, and this was right after he retired. Friends got used to me passing on certain comics, hearing me saying "Nah, Jack Kirby drew it." Even Bob Brown, a much less famous artist, made better looking women than Ditko or Kirby; witnessed in the Avengers comics of the early 70s.
I never liked Gil Kane either. His fighting scenes were twisted like pretzels, and his close up of faces always had that weird upturned nose with the shadings underneath. His perspective was often way off. I also disliked Don Heck; too sketchy and messy, thin, and the action scenes were stiff and faces were so plain. The punches never followed through like my favorite artists mentioned. He was boring. Didn't care for Colan's extra shadowy style but his women, like Black Widow, could be drawn sexy. Romita, John Buscema, and Sal Buscema will always remain my all-time favorites. Best crossover... Avengers vs Defenders in the 70s. Today's artists do not compare which is one reason why I don't do comics anymore. The writing and dialogue are also bad.
WOW, artistamisto, whoever you are, your IGNORANCE of great comic book art and artists is only matched by your ARROGANCE in proclaiming their alleged "defects" in their art, while somehow championing yourself as some arbiter of great artistic judgment. You SUCK in my book.
@@arlen6658 I kind of appreciated his blunt take. What, are you the only one that's allowed to be arrogant around here?
@@calixohiggins9843 "arrogant" is YOUR word, and yeah, this is MY webinar, sir I can say whatever the fuck I want. DEAL WITH IT.
Great Video. Well done.
For god sakes i see in the comments uneducated people saying stan Lee created spiderman🤦♂️ people have to realize the top marvel characters were created by jack kirby and Steve ditko all stan Lee did was add his used car salesman dialog to the story. Just look at some original art especially with kirby you can see kirby was penciling dialog in the original art so stan would know whats going on. Ditko indeed fully created spiderman.
Thanx of the kudos, Sebastian--Anything specific stand out for discussion?
i think romita's is more iconic in the eyes
My vote is for Romita, but that's the look I grew up with in the 70's. FYI the cover for Fantasy was drawn by Kirby ironic they use it for the Ditko book cover.
If Spider-man is required to stand there and look cool, then I prefer Romita. If Spider-man is required to webswing or uniquely pose in someway, then I prefer Ditko.
I always enjoy your presentations, thank you Mr Schumer.
"Mr. Schumer"?!?!? Call me ARLEN!!! :)
I formalised it, as a form salute to your great work. Thanks again Arlen :)
Romita excelled at drawing attractive women in Romance comics. Ditko was better at costumed characters This was due to Ditko's background in horror and fetish art(through his roommate Eric Stanton) You can say Romita was better at drawing attractive characters, but I think it would sacreligious to say Romita was better at drawing Spidey and his villains. Even standing, Ditko did it better. Ditko captured the spider-like qualities much more. Romita's was too Superman-esq
Exactly. Ditko handled action better because he drew looser than Romita, who was a little more stiff in comparison. Romita beat Ditko in rendering faces however, especially the women.
@@nukeskyhawker261 Romita was smooth, clean, perfected and drew anatomically beautiful looking comic characters to ones eyes (with more attention to Design detail). Ditko was down and dirty, rough and not always sure of his lines. I love both, but as a working artist my whole life (50+ years) Romita is far above the D. man. nuff said
John Romita Sr and it’s not even close, he’s superior in every single aspect.
I LOVE Ditko's Spider-Man
BUT, the Romita Spider-Man/Peter Parker is really definitive. Every incarnation of Peter Parker/Spider-Man since Romita looks like they were derived from the Romita art
@Nullpoint2006, is that your ONLY takeaway from the webinar?
As a kid I found Ditko's drawing, especially in the early issues of Spiderman, to be too wanky and crude (though he did improve over time) and only started buying the magazine when Romita's handsome, more polished and professional looking art appeared. As an adult I do appreciate the creative contributions Ditko made more than I did then.
@robertcoggeshall3071, Uh, that's an after-the-fact judgment, re: Romita making Spider a household name; the trajectory Ditko set in motion for the character by '66 for Romita to inherit might have gotten there just the same. Romita reminds me of NFL football coaches like George Seifert & Mike Shanahan, who inherited multiple-Super Bowl-winning teams, and won a few themselves because of it. But later, on their own, they couldn't create a great team from the ground up.
When did Kirby and Ditko create anything truly great on their own?
@@lyndoncmp5751 Uh, let's see: Ditko created The Creeper & Hawk & Dove, characters still in use by DC 50 years alter; Mr. A, the vigilante model for Judge Dread & Dirty Harry. And Kirby created the New Gods, still being mined by DC 50 years later. And gee, what did your hero Lee create? Ravage 2099, Stripperella, and The Governator. "Nuff said," as your hero would say!
@@arlen6658
Forgettable mediocrity. Be honest.
@@lyndoncmp5751 "Forgettable mediocrity"? "Be honest"? Okay--you're a goddamned ignorant cretin.
Romita is God.
THAT'S your only takeaway? Did you actually watch the webinar video?
@@arlen6658 Yes, and for me, Romita is the greatest comic artist of all time.
@@kingofmars9627 Then i think you need to broaden your artistic outlook!
@@arlen6658 I don't know why you would say that when art is subjective. Everyone has their favorite, and Jazzy Johnny is mine. Nothing against Ditko, he's awesome.
John romita
@trollheyman2703, FINALLY a voice of REASON!! :)
@calixohiggins9843, only if you consider rounding out, smoothing out, blanderizing the idiosyncratic artistic aspects of Ditko's unique creation an "improvement"!
Turning f-ugly eye sores into things of beauty is an art in itself. That's what Romita did. He took the crude and made a masterpiece.
@garybrigham9538, Romita WAS represented in my book, with his cover to Spider #50 on a spread in the Ditko chapter (along with descriptive text) But no, he did NOT deserve his own chapter, compared to the 5 artists I put together in a chapter called "More Masters"--because they all did definitive versions of multiple characters during the Silver Age, whereas all Romita really did of note in the '60s was his Spider-Man.
Well that's somewhat unfair because Romita didn't have long runs on any other titles to make his mark. He only had a few issues on FF but still did a fantastic job, having to follow an icon (for the second time). His brief Daredevil stint pre Spider-Man was great. Whenever he did a cover or poster featuring other characters he usually nailed it in his own style of course. I think he drew one of the best ever Hulks (see covers #119 and #120 of Amazing Spider-Man, as well as the interior of #119).
Kirby and Buscema couldn't really draw Spider-Man. Let's be honest. Nobody is great at everything.
Cheers anyway.
Romita and its not even close. I grew up with both (British reprints in the 1970s namely Spider-Man Comics Weekly) but even as a kid I always thought Ditkos artwork was f-ugly. Yes its quirky and yes it's certainly unique so plaudits to him for that, but even Gwen Stacy looked like a hag when Ditko drew her. I hate to think how MJ Would have looked under Ditko. A younger version of Anna Watson? Eeek.
Ditkos art, with relatively few exceptions, still looks like an eyesore to me. Romita's art is gorgeous. He could even make Gil Kane's artwork look pleasing when he inked it.
Oh and nobody, but nobody, ever did covers like Jazzy Johnny. 👍 ☺
And 1:04:24 is THE single greatest Spider-Man image ever. I still have my original Marvel Treasury Edition from 1974 framed.
👍
So did I, an unabashed Ditko fan, give Romita his due in the webinar? :)
@1995yuda, Nope, all evidence points to the story being refined by Ditko, from a prior jack Kirby origin story; Lee merely added his usual dialogue & captions/editorial voice. FYI, there is ZERO concrete comic book forensic evidence that Lee created ANY of the core Marvel characters & stories; yet there are MOUNTAINS of forensic evidence that Kirby & Ditko DID.
Stan dreamt up the names ‘Spider-Man’ and ‘Peter Parker’… as well as naming all the cast. He came up with the spider bite, money worries, personal problems, being a teen hero, …. It might be cool these days to dismiss Stan’s contribution, but he is the one who dreamt all these characters up.
Lee had the basic idea for Spider-Man before it was turned over to Ditko. This is without doubt. Ditko didn't dream up Spider-Man.
Ditko was grumpy. He clearly got plotting and drawing credit in Amazing Spider-Man yet still wasn't happy. Even when Stan Lee decades later officially gave him co credit as creator of Spider-Man he was still grumpy about it. Ditko wouldn't even meet Jonathan Ross when he crossed the Atlantic for a gushing tribute to him. Lee met him. Romita met him. Ditko stuck two fingers up. RIP to an icon (even if I dislike his art) but I don't think he was a very friendly person.
Ditko let Ross inside his apartment and was in fact friendly towards him he just insisted on it not being filmed.
@@lyndoncmp5751 I don't even know where to begin with your KNOW-NOTHING CLAPTRAP. You're just another Lee Lemming, backi9ng up the Bob Kane of Marvel Comics.
@@bumface1810 I don't even know where to begin with your KNOW-NOTHING CLAPTRAP. You're just another Lee Lemming, backing up the Bob Kane of Marvel Comics. But hey, hiding behind a ridiculous pseudonym like "Bum Face" fits you TO A TEE.
If it weren't for Stan Lee, we wouldn't have the awesome Spider-Man suit!
When Stan wanted to create Spider-Man, he first worked with Kirby. But even tho Stan knew Kirby was a genius, Jack didn't come up with the type of costume that Stan wanted. And Stan, in his editorial genius, decided to create Spider-Man with Ditko instead of Kirby.
WOW @langreeves6419, you really need to learn some real comic book history, vs. the Lee Kool-Aid you've obviously been drinking. It was Ditko who saw Kirby's pages of his Spiderman, and told Lee that they looked too much like Kirby/Simon's The Fly for Harvey, so, afraid of a possible lawsuit, Lee took the strip away from Kirby and gave it to Ditko, who went on to create the Spider-Man character & stories, that your hero Lee dialogued & wrote the captions for. You need to read Ditko's essays on the subject, vs, swallowing the Lee version of history that he's succeeded in having all of comic book fan-dumb--and plenty of pro-dumb, and the know-nothing press, too,--swallow whole.
@@arlen6658 Relentlessly sneeringly mocking someone who left a sincere comment on your channel. Nice.
@@c.a.t.732 DEAL WITH IT
@c.a.t.732
If he did that in real life he'd be flattened in two minutes.
Sorry I left comments based on biographies and interviews.
I see the channel is run by someone who doesn't like conversations.
There are so many Spider-Man comics to read, I don't have time to watch videos made by hateful mean people.
Oh my, I read some other comments.
Nice to know it was personal against me. Arlen is rude to pretty much everyone. Tells us to "deal with it."
Well. I will deal with it. I'll mark you channel "Do not recommend" so TH-cam won't put your videos in my feed anymore
Ditko created Spiderman, but Romita improved upon it in the same way that the great artists at DC improved upon Bob Kane's Batman.
@calixohiggins9843, only if you consider rounding out, smoothing out, blanderizing the idiosyncratic artistic aspects of Ditko's unique creation an "improvement"!
@@arlen6658 Excellent choice of words- Romita's Spiderman world was much more 'rounded out' than Ditko's in that it was more three dimensional and felt more real than Ditko's relatively flat art style. Ditko's being more idiosyncratic, sure... but the more visually appealing and iconic Spiderman is Romita's.
@@calixohiggins9843 the majority of people have bland, vanilla tastes; congratulations for being one of them!
@@arlen6658 Vanilla is the best flavor for a reason. I'd imagine your favorite flavor to be something like Harry Potter's poop. Most self-fashioned eccentrics will chew your ear off about their peculiar "taste" in a desperate attempt to attach themselves to a world that they had no hand in creating. Are you one of those?
Try creating your own webinar, smartass.
@shinchannohara1902, got anything to say or discuss about in my webinar?
Ditko all day
When Romita took over I felt the same way as when Roger Moore took over as 007 - shallow by comparison . His women had a "glamor girl fashion model " superficial look to them . And the incomparable anatomy , as you said , the stress points - the suggestion of coiled fluid muscle ready to release . Ditko created a body language with no precedent - what it would look like if you could adhere to a wall . Lots of people like Romita more , as many people like Boris more that Frazetta , and sure , it's a matter of personal taste - if you put images side by side the difference would be more apparent .
YUP; human nature always sides with surface beauty over superficial "ugliness" that forces you to dig deeper, to look beyond surface appearances at the "beauty" within.
Hey @flounder2283, proud of your IGNORANCE?
just look at the web on the suit.. whit S.D it seems like 3d, with volume and that, with JR it just look flat. I like JRJr more than JRSr, and of course, Ditko is the best artist who ever draw spiderman.
so true
I liked romita’s work but I was more of a Ross Andru fan.
For me its always going to be Romita Sr. Spider-Man became Spider-Man because of him. The book would have been fizzled out and we wouldn't have the character as he exists now if Ditko remained on the run. Also, Ditko draws poorly.
Ditko drew Spiderman until '66, not '65 (ASM 38 - July'66).
Uh, you're WRONG: because Ditko LEFT Marvel in November '65; but because he worked ahead of time, he had finished issue #38 then, which didn't get PUBLISHED until the spring of '66. But thanx for your sole comment on my webinar--got anything in it you LIKED for discussion here? Jeez.
Ditko. Romita was a good company man, but lacked Steve's incredible imagination.
18:39
Ditko wins.
The 60s SPIDER-MAN animated series which ran for 3 YEARS on a major network doubtless boosted comic book sales, something which often gets forgotten about in this debate!
I'm a "Steve Ditko Guy" straight down the line! I think Romita was instrumental in making Spidey more like a DC character: popular, more accepted by the public, gorgeous girl friend who loved Peter no matter what ( until her father died which turned her into a clingy psychopath) and beautiful but more conventional artwork! Romita's Spidey was always broke but relatively stable compared to Ditko's neurotic nerd!
They're just two different characters!
Uh, WHY, Falilou Seck?
WHAT @MtHockey SAID
@erikrupp692 you don't know that for sure; but like most on Team Lee, you're just blindly repeating the same LEE LIES from 50 years ago, in which he baldly claims sole character & story creation. If you've read Ditko's own essays that he wrote between 1990 and his death, you'll get a more accurate description of who did what. Get educated, and unplug yourself from the LEE BORG.
By your logic ‘getting educated’ means becoming an edgy Ditko borg.
@@bumface1810 with a stupid pseudonym you hide behind like "bum face," I expect an asinine response.
@Danny-nm9sn--yeah, when people create a documentary, they present THEIR p.o.v. , as I presented mine. If YOU want to make your OWN doc that's pro-Lee, BE MY GUEST. I'm sure your p.o.s. doc will have YOUR biases on parade. Like your "opinion" that Ditko's "plotting" sucked--but hey, Ditko had ALWAYS been "plotting" Spider-man since the early issues of S-M--it was only circa issue #24 that Lee finally gave in to Ditko's demands to be credited. So yeah, what you call Lee's "ideas" were ALWAYS Ditko's--Lee just dialogued/captioned Ditko's stories, just like Lee did with Kirby. Get an education before you spout your pro-Lee nonsense.
You're damn right. 👍
WOW @langreeves6419, you really need to learn some real comic book history, vs. the Lee Kool-Aid you've obviously been drinking. It was Ditko who say Kirby's pages of his Spiderman, and told Lee that they looked too much like Kirby/Simon's The Fly for Harvey, so, afraid of a possible lawsuit, Lee took the strip away from Kirby and gave it to Ditko, who went on to create the Spider-Man character & stories, that your hero Lee dialogued & wrote the captions for. You need to read Ditko's essays on the subject, vs, swallowing the Lee version of history that he's succeeded in having all of comic book fan-dumb--and plenty of pro-dumb, and the know-nothing press, too,--swallow whole.
It was Stan's idea that Spider-Man be a nerdy teenager with the usual teenage problems. Ditko took Stan's real basic, simple idea and ran with it, but Stan came up with the ideas that made Spider-Man stand out from every other superhero around at the time.
@@erikrupp692 you don't know that for sure; but like most on Team Lee, you're just blindly repeating the same LEE LIES from 50 years ago, in which he baldly claims sole character & story creation. If you've read Ditko's own essays that he wrote between 1990 and his death, you'll get a more accurate description of who did what. Get educated, and unplug yourself from the LEE BORG.
@@erikrupp692 you can never get a straight answer from Smiley, he was a born con-man.
@@arlen6658 - I never said Stan solely created Spider-Man. I said the idea of a superhero who could crawl on walls like an insect, the name, and the idea of him being a nerdy teenager all came from Stan. Everything else came from Steve. It was a collaborative effort. You seem to want to discount every major idea Stan ever had as unimportant or fiction. Neither Jack nor Steve ever came anywhere near the same level of success after working with Stan as they had when they did work with Stan. Why do you think that is? None of Jack's DC titles lasted. None of them were significant successes. Steve had less success than Jack did after his time at Marvel. Stan brought a lot to the table. Jack and Steve took Stan's rough, simple ideas and ran with them - they turned those bare bones ideas into well thought out characters and stories. And their art made it all work. COLLABORATION.
@@erikrupp692 you're just repeating all the LEE LIES about who created what, alll the cliches about Ditko & Kirby not being "successful" without Lee, because you're just another member of Team Lee. I'm done wasting my time on you. Get educated.
WOW, artistamisto, whoever you are, your IGNORANCE of great comic book art and artists is only matched by your ARROGANCE in proclaiming their alleged "defects" in their art, while somehow championing yourself as some arbiter of great artistic judgment. You SUCK in my book.
Funny YOU should talk of arrogance here, it’s as if you lack any self awareness.
Lee created Spiderman. Ditko drew him, i.e., translated what Lee described to him to paper.
Lee created the name. He DID NOT describe how he wanted it, that IS NOT THE MARVEL METHOD. Here's the Marvel Method. Watch me create something. The Silver Owl. Now find a great artist who can give this character his abilities and his origin, have him do the panels I don't need to know how he sets it up, really don't have the time, and you now have the Marvel Method. Now I just have to add the word balloons to an already set up story. Wow I'm great,. I'm so excited, 𝓘 𝓦𝓡𝓞𝓣𝓔 𝓐 𝓒𝓞𝓜𝓘𝓒 𝓑𝓞𝓞𝓚 𝓢𝓣𝓞𝓡𝓨! The artist and I are now co-creators of Silver Owl. My name first as writer of course as I created the name and added the words.
You are very decieved if you think Lee described any thing to his artists on how they should panelize the stories, he never had the time as editor of Marvel Comics. Ask any of the old artists that worked for Marvel at the time, not just Kirby and Ditko, even artist Wally Wood who gave Dare Devil his red costume purposely mixed the panels in his art to mess with Stan Lee's head. Wood didn't care for The Marvel Method of Lee's credit taking for the stories he didn't write. Lee was so happy when Wood resigned from Marvel.
By the way, the saying, "With great power comes great responsibility," which was added to the last panel of the first issue of Spiderman by Stan Lee was even plageriized from Winston Churchill. Look it up on Google.
nope try again
So, who came up with the idea of the character?@@misterpinkandyellow74
@@wiseguymaybeDitko hated flawed characters yet the reason Spider-Man is popular because he is a flawed character.
Marvel heroes are popular because they are flawed people with imperfect lives while also being superheroes.
Kirby cared more about writing God characters and Ditko cared more about writing Objectivist characters. Stan Lee brought more humanity and relatability to superheroes by making them flawed and imperfect people.
@@petermj1098 You are going to tell me that Stan the Conman stood over Steve Ditko's shoulder and directed him what panels to draw? Baloney, even by Stan's own words in the book The Origin Of Marvel. He himself said the artist's drew the panels, he did not give them any direction to follow, almost admitting that they did the stories, and he would add the words. Read it some time. Obviously Ditko would draw flawed characters that's the way he did the panels. The biggest direrection Lee would give is, "Let's bring back Doctor Doom" that's all he added. And past artists would tell you that. Jack Kirby is the main creator of the Marvel characters. in enterviews he will tell you he was the one that created the Fantastic Four, and never says he co-created it with Stan Lee. So somebody is lying some where, are you calling Jack Kirby a liar? Because I'm definately calling Stan Lee a liar.