I imagine most of you have seen this site before but I found a goldmine of old comic folks' interviews here:

https://www.nerdteam30.com/creator-conv ... oes-horror

Tom Palmer, talking about Iron Man had this to say:

Robert Downey, Jr. was just perfect as Iron Man, he pretty much played himself but captured the Tony Stark character perfectly. I understand that he does his best work when he has the freedom to have input into the character's development and the director, Jon Favreau, did just that. That really made a difference in the movie's huge success.

His point is made in exploring the idea that a good movie can take a second rank character and propel it to first rank status, with which I agree. But I have maintained for a long long time that Robert Downey did NOT play Tony Stark - at least not the Tony Stark from the comics. There, his character was arrogant but rather dour , rather than the wise cracking persona presented by Downey. So although we can agree that he was amazing in the role, it can't really be argued that he was perfect casting for Iron Man at that time, before the movies came out, if it was Marvel Comics' Iron Man that you wanted to see.

But great interview, and loads of others on there for your delectation and delight.

In the same interview, he has this to say about John Buscema:

That lead[sic] into working with John Buscema, one of the finest artists I've met. I didn't recognize how talented he was until he started doing breakdowns for me to work over. This was on the Avengers. He used a minimal amount of lines but everything you needed was there, all you had to do was build on them and then add light and shade. One of the most rewarding collaborations I have ever had. John spent years in an illustration studio and his talent ran deep, deeper than what the comic book pages he did showed.

I love stuff like this.

Agreed on both.

Well, WHATS THE POINT OF THAT?

Yeah!

I believe also was possibly one of the greatest movie stars and actors (both) of our time, but had his prime shaved a bit by his problems with substance. He could have been Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks added together in success, the great one of all time.

The MCU started right as we were all ready to say "Yeah, Robert Downey Jr. I know, right?" And they tailored it around his greatness. And the success of the whole thing can't be separated from his greatness. It was like having an underutilized Tom Cruise or John Wayne sitting on the bench, waiting for a franchise.

He'll now forever be associated with that comeback. But without his substance problems he would have been even bigger all along, and he'd still be just as huge today.

Agreed on that.

Hanzo's being entirely too agreeable....

I have to disagree.

That's more like it...

What a great interview - this is a really valuable find, Evans. Lots of fun to be had reading that stuff.

Cheers. Yeah as I say, I love this stuff.

One of the things that always strikes me as I read these things is the different levels of regard the guys working then had for each other, compared to the regard I as a comic fan had. I think/thought Mike Esposito is/was the very worst inker there ever was - vasly worse than Colletta, for example: his inks on anyone, but especially on my favourite artists whose work he could feckin wreck! Yet Palmer and many other professionals whose opinions I have read over the years hold him in very high esteem.

I recall that I preferred certain inkers working over certain pencillers when I was a kid, although the only comic book artist I really disliked was Frank Springer (inking or pencilling). His work always annoyed me. I wanted to like The Invaders, for example, but his artwork put me off it.

I'll have to look up some of Esposito's stuff from that era and see what I think of it.

Although, that site has a good interview with Frank Springer.

I'll read it eventually, just because I enjoy reading about that era of comics. He was probably a nice bloke, I just couldn't stand his artwork.

If only some hot young stud had linked you guys to this site earlier...

viewtopic.php?p=2951457#p2951457

IF ONLY

Well you did it instead, Hanzo...and you did it well.

If only I'd thought of that before the very first post where I said

IF ONLY

But I admit, Hanzo's thread is much more friendly for the user to find the good stuff.

The scary fiend.

Apology accepted.