Take a photo of a barcode or cover
refe's review against another edition
3.0
This book became something of an addiction for the couple of days it took to read through it. It moves at a brisk pace and never hangs around any particular character or situation long. That made it both a lot of fun, and a bit tough to track with. So many names come and go and return and disappear again throughout these 420 pages that it would take a spreadsheet to really keep track of who's who. In the end, Marvel itself is the main character, with the publishers and creators and editors that pass through its doors relegated to supporting roles. Which, if you take Howe at his word, is a lot like how Marvel itself was run.
squaresville's review against another edition
4.0
A must-read for any Marvel Zombie, this book provides insight to inner workings of the Bullpen and how some of the most notorious editorial decisions were made. My only complaint is the relative lack of info on the current era, understandable given those in the know still have viable relationships with the company. Still, a little dirt on the Disney Era would have been fun
marmoset737's review against another edition
5.0
This is absolutely fascinating and a dense/action-packed history of Marvel - a must-read for comic fans.
mschlat's review against another edition
3.0
Here's my takeaway from this book: Marvel has a long history of bad management, both at the editorial and administrative levels. Sean Howe covers every fiasco, from Kirby quitting and having to fight to get his art to the painful agony of the Spider-man Clone Saga. Along the way you get the rotating editor-in-chiefs of the 1970's, the micromanagement of the Jim Shooter years, and the debacles surrounding the fights for Marvel ownership (including the wonders of multiple covers for a single comic and the ridiculous acquisition of Heroes World). And by the way, there's the running problem that Marvel, almost from its infancy, can't get a decent movie made about its characters. (The history ends in 2012 with the premiere of the Avengers movie.)
A lot of this stuff I knew before, and if you read a lot of The Comic Journal or other 80's/90's comics journalism you probably know it too. What Howe does is package it all together in an engaging but somewhat depressing format. After the coverage of Marvel's early days (and the early Lee/Kirby/Ditko creations), you get a few glimpses of Marvel's heights (the writers in the early 70's, Claremont and Byrne, and finally Frank Miller on Daredevil), but most of the rest of the book covers the troubles.
A lot of this stuff I knew before, and if you read a lot of The Comic Journal or other 80's/90's comics journalism you probably know it too. What Howe does is package it all together in an engaging but somewhat depressing format. After the coverage of Marvel's early days (and the early Lee/Kirby/Ditko creations), you get a few glimpses of Marvel's heights (the writers in the early 70's, Claremont and Byrne, and finally Frank Miller on Daredevil), but most of the rest of the book covers the troubles.
jammasterjamie's review against another edition
2.0
I bought this book because a couple of the reviews I read for it said that it was full of stories about the Mighty Marvel Bullpen and how counter-culture and crazy the creative teams were back in the day. Instead, I was provided with a lecture about how to succeed in business with your head up your ass. Hardly a full paragraph on the drug-induced creative bursts, but instead pages and pages of in-fighting and bickering between writers, artists, and editors. Seriously, I get it! Kirby is pissed off that Lee rarely shared creator credits and Gerber didn't want to lose control of his Duck.
Also, through no fauly of Sean Howe's, this book would have benefited greatly from including pictures. It's a book about art, right? So, how's about a couple of visuals? Or, no, that would make too much sense, I guess. Howe's editors really let him down by not fighting to include some of the art discussed in the book, and probably cost themselves a lot in sales. I know how expensive getting the image rights would be, but it would have been worth it. The book is incomplete without them.
Now down to Howe's writing. He's not bad, a little inconsistent on the pacing and grammar, but all in all it was an okay read. However, it was occasionally hard to keep track of time-lines in the book as he jumped around a little, but always within the same general era so it never got overly confusing. I would have liked to have read a mention about when Marvel originally foled the Epic line of books, but that was skipped until he said they relaunched Epic in the 21st Century. I also think that when talking about Shooter's New Universe back in the 80's, that Howe had taken at least a couple of sentences for that ridiculous NFL Superhero comic that was part of that line - even at 12 I thought that was a blatant cash-grab tie-in and wanted nothing to do with it, and, in fact, that one title turned me off of the entire New Universe line, so I think it deserved at least a sentence or two...
All in all, I wouldn't recommend this to any but the most die-hard of Marvel fans. Based on the reviews, my wife wanted to read it, but as she's fairly new to comics, I have to say she would find this to be an extremely boring read and a total waste of time.
Also, through no fauly of Sean Howe's, this book would have benefited greatly from including pictures. It's a book about art, right? So, how's about a couple of visuals? Or, no, that would make too much sense, I guess. Howe's editors really let him down by not fighting to include some of the art discussed in the book, and probably cost themselves a lot in sales. I know how expensive getting the image rights would be, but it would have been worth it. The book is incomplete without them.
Now down to Howe's writing. He's not bad, a little inconsistent on the pacing and grammar, but all in all it was an okay read. However, it was occasionally hard to keep track of time-lines in the book as he jumped around a little, but always within the same general era so it never got overly confusing. I would have liked to have read a mention about when Marvel originally foled the Epic line of books, but that was skipped until he said they relaunched Epic in the 21st Century. I also think that when talking about Shooter's New Universe back in the 80's, that Howe had taken at least a couple of sentences for that ridiculous NFL Superhero comic that was part of that line - even at 12 I thought that was a blatant cash-grab tie-in and wanted nothing to do with it, and, in fact, that one title turned me off of the entire New Universe line, so I think it deserved at least a sentence or two...
All in all, I wouldn't recommend this to any but the most die-hard of Marvel fans. Based on the reviews, my wife wanted to read it, but as she's fairly new to comics, I have to say she would find this to be an extremely boring read and a total waste of time.
canadianoranges's review against another edition
4.0
If you don't know the history of Jack Kirby and his ilk, you might find this to be a soul crushing story of artists getting taken advantage of. Loyalties lost. Businesses ruined. Still, an interesting telling of the story behind what has now become a multi-billion dollar IP generator for Disney.
mattgoldberg's review against another edition
3.0
I'm conflicted on this one. On the one hand, it's a valuable overview of what Marvel went through over its various decades. It's a solid history of the company and its books changed, and the book is at its best when it provides insights into how creators crafted plot lines or how various business demands shaped the output (reading about Marvel in the 90s was like someone finally explaining to me why I could never get into comics as a kid even though I adored the X-Men and collected Marvel trading cards).
The flip side is that "The Untold Story" requires you to have familiarity with the told story. Because I didn't grow up reading comics and have really only read selected arcs from Marvel's history, I was usually at a loss with all these writers, artists, and editors. There are large sections where you feel like you're getting some hot piece of gossip or an axe to grind between participants, but it falls flat because you have no investment in these people beyond what you've read in this book. I learned that a lot of people didn't really like Jim Shooter, but I have no feelings on Jim Shooter one way or the other, so the conflict doesn't really land.
Nevertheless, I'm glad this book exists and that I read it because I now feel better prepped to dive into 'True Believer'.
The flip side is that "The Untold Story" requires you to have familiarity with the told story. Because I didn't grow up reading comics and have really only read selected arcs from Marvel's history, I was usually at a loss with all these writers, artists, and editors. There are large sections where you feel like you're getting some hot piece of gossip or an axe to grind between participants, but it falls flat because you have no investment in these people beyond what you've read in this book. I learned that a lot of people didn't really like Jim Shooter, but I have no feelings on Jim Shooter one way or the other, so the conflict doesn't really land.
Nevertheless, I'm glad this book exists and that I read it because I now feel better prepped to dive into 'True Believer'.
eoghann's review against another edition
4.0
If you are any sort of fan of american comic books then this is a must read.
Starting from the very beginning, before Marvel Comics was Marvel Comics, it takes us all the way up to the present day. And while calling it the Untold Story might be a slight stretch (there are elements that are commonly known) there's a lot of detail in here. A lot of less well known information and a lot of good interview material.
One of the things that stands out to me is just how cyclical the comics industry seems to be. Not just in terms of the never ending cycles of boom and bust, but in other ways too.
Right from the beginning there was friction between the creators and the corporation. Again and again people came in, created something and then were upset to lose control over it.
Time and again an new Editor In Chief came in with grand plans and to regenerate the line... only to over-reach himself. And owner after owner with grand plans of making Marvel a mini-Disney.
Then then there were the creators and editors. Very few of them came off looking very good in truth. Egotism and unprofessionalism almost seems to have been the norm. Editors in shouting matches, writers quitting because their stories were changed. Insults being snuck into issues of comics. Writers becoming proprietory about characters that they knew they didn't own. It leaves you wondering if these were adults or children.
The only reason this isn't a full on five star book is that while the earlier decades are deeply researched with input from lots of key players, the last decade is skimpily covered. Perhaps it's difficult to get people to talk about the current owners and editors?
Even so this is a book that's well worth reading and I'm really hoping that Sean Howe goes on from here to write a history of the entire industry.
Starting from the very beginning, before Marvel Comics was Marvel Comics, it takes us all the way up to the present day. And while calling it the Untold Story might be a slight stretch (there are elements that are commonly known) there's a lot of detail in here. A lot of less well known information and a lot of good interview material.
One of the things that stands out to me is just how cyclical the comics industry seems to be. Not just in terms of the never ending cycles of boom and bust, but in other ways too.
Right from the beginning there was friction between the creators and the corporation. Again and again people came in, created something and then were upset to lose control over it.
Time and again an new Editor In Chief came in with grand plans and to regenerate the line... only to over-reach himself. And owner after owner with grand plans of making Marvel a mini-Disney.
Then then there were the creators and editors. Very few of them came off looking very good in truth. Egotism and unprofessionalism almost seems to have been the norm. Editors in shouting matches, writers quitting because their stories were changed. Insults being snuck into issues of comics. Writers becoming proprietory about characters that they knew they didn't own. It leaves you wondering if these were adults or children.
The only reason this isn't a full on five star book is that while the earlier decades are deeply researched with input from lots of key players, the last decade is skimpily covered. Perhaps it's difficult to get people to talk about the current owners and editors?
Even so this is a book that's well worth reading and I'm really hoping that Sean Howe goes on from here to write a history of the entire industry.