The Marvel Comics title that would become Tomb of Dracula appears to have been in the works for quite some time prior to its first issue reaching stands in November, 1971. Perhaps the first inkling comics readers had of its development had come by way of a vague reference on the Marvel Bullpen Bulletins page appearing in comics published that March; in the midst of a news item explaining the moves of several artists from one title to another, the following statement appeared:
By “another 50¢ mag labeled M”, the anonymous Bulletin scribe meant that Marvel was planning a companion to Savage Tales, a black-and-white comics magazine intended “for the mature reader” whose first issue had gone on sale in January.
The next month’s Bullpen Bulletins offered more details — including the new magazine’s title (or at least the leading contenders for same):
According to an editorial that ran a couple of years later in Dracula Lives #1, the idea for Marvel’s second b&w title originated with its publisher, Martin Goodman — a fact which may surprise those familiar with Goodman’s actions in regards to editor Stan Lee’s previous attempt to crack the magazine-sized comics market, The Spectacular Spider-Man. (Back in 1968, Goodman had forced Lee to change the format of that title from black-and-white to color after the first issue, then cancelled it after the second.) The publisher’s newfound enthusiasm for the format didn’t last very long, however; Savage Tales wouldn’t see a second issue,* and by the next time the Bullpen Bulletins mentioned Tomb of Dracula (evidently,Tomb won the coin toss against House; or maybe someone at Marvel remembered there had already been a 1945 movie with the latter title, and wanted to avoid rights issues), in July, it was being referred to as a color comic (albeit a giant-sized 25-cent one). Perhaps recent changes in the Comics Code Authority played a part in the decision-making here as well; prior to the adoption of new guidelines which went into effect on February 1st, Marvel wouldn’t have been able to bring out a Code-approved color comic about Dracula (or indeed any other vampire); afterwards they could, and this approach may have better suited Goodman’s comfort zone.
In any event, Tomb of Dracula continued to face delays. The same Bullpen Bulletins column that confirmed its new color-comic status also suggested that the first issue would be coming out imminently, but July came and went with no ToD #1, as did August. The latter month’s Bullpen Bulletins explained that “the sudden increase in the volume of pages” resulting from Marvel shifting nearly its entire line into a 25-cent/48-page format had compelled the company’s “panic-stricken printer” to ask them to hold off on launching any new titles.
But even before the month of August came to a close, Marvel’s extra-length 25-cent comics had by and large passed into history. By the time its “breathlessly-awaited DRACULA book” finally did come out — in November — it was as a standard-size, single-feature comic, at the new standard price of 20 cents. (Ultimately, that meant that the “Tomb of” part of the title ended up not making nearly as much sense as it had when the book was supposed to be a black-and-white anthology, or even a 48-pager with room for an extra feature or two — though “Tomb of Dracula” was probably still easier to trademark than the single name “Dracula”, or even “Count Dracula”, would have been,)
As you might imagine, November’s Bullpen Bulletins didn’t let the long-delayed release of Tomb of Dracula #1 go unhyped:
While my fourteen-year-old self was looking forward to Marvel Premiere #1 featuring Warlock (and fear not, you’ll be able to find out what I thought about that book in just one week; how’s that for a shameless plug?), I’m pretty sure I was even more keen to read ToD #1. As I related in my September 18th post about the debut of the Code-approved Marvel monster series that ultimately beat Tomb of Dracula out of the starting gate — i.e., “Werewolf by Night”, in Marvel Spotlight #2 — 
over the previous year or so my pop culture consumption had primed me to go all-in on the burgeoning monster-horror trend in American comics. And by mid-November, 1971, I was even more avid. By then my local TV market finally had a weekly late-night “creature feature” program on which I could actually catch Dracula (1931). Frankenstein (1931), and other such classics (as well as many rather less distinguished films, of course). I may also have by that time purchased (and read straight through) a terrific book — Drake Douglas’ Horror! (Collier, 1969) — which devoted individual chapters to virtually all of the classic movie monster types, and gave thorough historical overviews of each. Talk about being primed — this book was my literal primer, making me what I presumptuously considered to be an “expert” on movies I hadn’t even seen yet, not to mention books (again, like Dracula [1897] and Frankenstein [1818]) that I hadn’t yet read. (It’s probably just as well that I had few, if any, people I could talk to at the time about this stuff, as I would likely have been an insufferable little snot about it all.)
But, getting back to Tomb of Dracula #1… the comic bears a cover by Neal Adams, which I think is interesting to compare with the one he’d turned out (with inker Tom Palmer) for the aforementioned Marvel Spotlight #2 (see left). To begin with, like that earlier cover, ToD #1’s sets its core illustration within a bright red frame — probably intended to suggest the bloodiness of the horrific events within (though, of course, under the Comics Code, the depiction of actual blood was still almost entirely out of bounds). More significantly, however, both illustrations (excellent as they may be) are quite generic; indeed it’s accurate to say that, in the same way Adams and Palmer’s Werewolf by Night bears only a rudimentary resemblance to the creature depicted in Mike Ploog’s interior art for MS #2, Adams’ Dracula hardly resembles the one represented within ToD #1’s pages, a version designed and rendered by Gene Colan.** It’s hard not to conclude that, in both cases, Adams was working with minimal direction — e.g., “draw a werewolf”, “draw Dracula”, etc. — and didn’t (or couldn’t) make reference to what the artist responsible for the story’s visualization of the title’s star attraction was up to. In the end, of course, it probably doesn’t matter — they’re both still highly effective covers, and I doubt that anyone picking up either of these books were more than momentarily bemused by the discontinuity between their covers and their interiors.
Beyond the cover, of course, Tomb of Dracula #1 is all Gene Colan — and I do mean all Gene Colan, as it features one of the rare instances of the artist inking his own work. This almost didn’t happen, according to the introduction provided by Roy Thomas (then an associate editor at Marvel) to Marvel Masterworks – The Tomb of Dracula, Vol. 1 (2021):
…though Gene almost never inked anything for Marvel back in those days, he had cajoled Stan into agreeing he could do full-art chores…something Stan really wasn’t wild about. When a guy was as valuable a penciler as Gene, Stan preferred he spend all his time in that one capacity and never pick up a pen or brush. But Gene was uncharacteristically adamant. So Stan agreed he could ink at least that first story…
[Later] I was in Stan’s office… when he was on the phone with Gene, who was objecting because Stan had just informed him that he wanted to have someone else ink that first issue so Gene could pencil something else. I could hear Gene plaintively reminding Stan that he had promised him he could ink that issue! The reply was classic Stan: “Gene, if you’re going to hold me to that, I’m not going to be able to promise you anything again!” Or words pretty close to those.
Anyway, Gene won the argument…
Unfortunately, the gray ink wash tones Colan is reported to have used in his finished art, with the understanding that it would be reproduced in black-and-white, didn’t really translate well to the final color version. Nevertheless, it remains a rare pleasure to see the unfiltered vision of the notoriously difficult-to-ink Colan (though I’m just as happy that Tom Palmer eventually ended up as the series’ regular, permanent inker).
While the early Bullpen Bulletins about Marvel’s new Dracula book had touted the involvement of both Stan Lee and Roy Thomas as writers, the first issue’s splash page gave scripting credit only to Gerry Conway (though Lee’s name as editor came first anyway, of course). Still, according to all reports, both Lee and Thomas did play a role in developing the story, though Lee’s was essentially limited to coming up with the basic premise. From that starting point, Thomas crafted a several-page synopsis, which Colan used as the basic for his graphic interpretation; only then did Conway come in to script the captions and dialogue. As the latter writer told Tom Field for Back Issue #6 (Oct., 2004): ““I tried to bring to it a kind of an eerie, dark, misterioso style of writing and dialogue—pretentious, let’s say… I mean, I was 19 years old—what did I know, really?” (Your humble blogger has some thoughts on that subject, actually, but I’ll refer you to my “Mister Kline saga” post from earlier this month for them.)
Evidently, this village is so remote and isolated that fashions in dress haven’t changed since the 19th century — though that probably wouldn’t have come as a surprise to any 1971 reader whose knowledge of Transylvania (assuming they had any) came primarily from classic vampire movies. I’m pretty sure it didn’t faze fourteen-year-old me, in any case.
En route to Castle Dracula, the guy with the carriage, Otto, speaks dismissively of his fellow villagers’ superstitious beliefs — but, as it turns out, even he’s not willing to take our travelers any closer than shoutin’ distance to their ultimate destination…
As his reverie continues, Frank Drake recalls how Jeanie stood by him despite his swiftly blowing through a million dollars — even as most of his well-heeled pals turned a deaf ear to his subsequent requests for a modest loan. Only Clifton seemed willing to give him the time of day; unfortunately, Cliff was pretty low on scratch himself…
This page suggests (though it doesn’t expressly state) that Dracula first became a vampire a couple of hundred years before the time of the story; it also indicates that Bram Stoker didn’t get the circumstances of the Count’s dispatching at the hands of Abraham van Helsing precisely correct (though you’d have to be familiar with the details of Stoker’s novel to pick up on that, of course). As Marvel’s Dracula mythology developed over the next several years (primarily in the black-and-white companion title to ToD, Dracula Lives), this backstory would be considerably modified; we readers would learn that Count Dracula was in fact one and the same as the historical personage Vlad Dracula, “the Impaler”, who ruled Wallachia (a neighboring territory to Transylvania in what’s now modern Romania) in the 15th century; we’d also learn that Stoker hadn’t done much fictionalizing at all, but rather just collected and edited the letters, diary entries, and other documents that make up his epistolary “novel”. But, hey, this’ll do for the time being.
As Frank Drake’s recollections continue, we learn that he was pretty freaked out by what he’d read in his family history, but that Clifton convinced him that turning Castle Dracula into a tourist attraction would be the answer to all his problems. (Considering that Transylvania was under a Communist regime at the time this story was produced, I’m not sure that would have been quite as easy as the script indicates… but never mind.) And so, Frank, Clifton, and Jeanie soon embarked together on their present expedition… “And not once did Drake wonder… why was Clifton so helpful — after all Drake had done to him?”
Once inside the castle, the trio soon discover that they’re not its only current living inhabitants…
Gee, do you think Jeanie’s silver compact might play a significant role in the story later on? (Yes, that’s a rhetorical question.)
Surely Clifton isn’t going to do something as stupid as yank out the wooden stake from Dracula’s skeleton. I mean, no matter how much of a rationalist you consider yourself to be, why take chances? Besides which, the stake isn’t even of any use to him…
Crap, the idiot did it.
Colan based his visual interpretation of Dracula on the actor Jack Palance. As he explained in 2001 for a Comic Book Artist interview:
Jack Palance in the 1968 TV movie The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
Jack Palance in the 1974 TV movie Dracula.
…I had seen him do Jekyll and Hyde for television, and right there and then I knew that Jack Palance would do the perfect Dracula. He had that cadaverous look, a serpentine look on his face…. And he did play that role, eventually, on television. So, I took him on as a character, and [when drawing Dracula] I’d sit before the television screen with the Polaroid camera, and whenever there’d be a still image of him on the screen, I’d photograph it in different positions, so I could use him. That’s how [the Palance look] came about…
As we’ve discussed in a previous post, Colan’s Dracula was the third comic book villain to debut in a little over a year’s time whose look was inspired at least in part by Jack Palance, following Jack Kirby’s Darkseid and Gil Kane’s Morbius. There was just something about that face, apparently…
But to return to our story: Frank and Jeanie go looking for Clifton, and eventually find the hole in the floor he fell through. Before they can investigate further, however, a big, black bat comes flying up out of the hole. “Frankie — keep it away!“ screams Jeanie…
C’mon — you knew from the start that the saucy barmaid wasn’t going to make it, didn’t you?
The young woman’s blood-drained body is quickly discovered by her fellow villagers, who comprehend the full significance of this event almost immediately. You know what comes next, I’m sure. Cue up the march-on-the-castle-with-torches scene!
In the meantime, Dracula has winged his way back to the castle, where he finds…
Hmmm, I thought the whole “mirror” business in vampire lore was about detecting the undead fiend’s true nature (since they can’t be seen in it) rather than about repelling them. But, what the hell, it’s all make-believe anyway. And besides, it quickly becomes a moot point, since Frank ends up squandering his advantage by throwing the compact at Dracula. It smarts when it bounces off his noggin, sure, but that barely slows our Count down, and soon his cold white fingers are around Frank’s throat…
Thus concludes the first episode of The Tomb of Dracula. At the generous length of 25 pages (probably the result of its having been originally produced for a larger format than the standard color comic), it certainly delivers a lot of content for the reader’s 20 cents. I’m sure that fourteen-year-old me considered his money, as well as his time, well spent.
Looking at the comic from a more mature perspective, however, one might wonder why it took three different writers to craft this tale, seeing as how the plot boils down to not much more than a batch of vampire movie tropes strung together. Frankly, I believe it would be fair to assess the entertainment value of Tomb of Dracula #1 for a contemporary audience as residing mostly with Gene Colan’s wonderfully atmospheric art, which executes those tropes in fine fashion.
Beyond Colan’s art, the main thing that Tomb of Dracula had going for it at the very beginning was its basic premise, as simple as that was: a modern descendant of Count Dracula inadvertently becomes responsible for his resurrection, and then has to deal with the consequences. It’s a concept that could have easily led to an endless recycling of old tropes such as the ones holding up this issue, yet had the potential to be much more than that; it would all be up to the execution.
Fortunately, the series ultimately found the ideal creative team to provide that execution — though it had to go through another couple of writers, three inkers, and eleven more issues to get there. But once the title locked in Marv Wolfman as writer, Gene Colan as penciller, and Tom Palmer as inker with issue #12, fans could look forward to a decade-spanning, 58-issue run of some of the most consistently well-crafted comics of their era, in any genre — an epic streak which outlasted the horror/monster trend that spawned it by several years.
It was quite a journey, a half century ago — a journey which, of course, will be the subject of future blog posts, right here, a half century later.
*At least, not until the summer of 1973, by which time Goodman was well out of the picture.
**As hard as it may be to believe, considering what was to follow, Colan almost wasn’t the artist on Tomb of Dracula. According to his own account, as told to Tom Field for Comic Book Artist in 2001:
…I asked Stan [for Dracula], and he said, “Okay, fine,” and I let it go. I figured he said all right, so I can get it—all right! But then he changed his mind without me knowing it, and who was going to get it but Bill Everett? I called Stan up and said, “Stan, that’s not what you told me!” He said, “Well, Bill had it long before I told you that you could do it, and I promised it to him.” I knew he was double-talking me—I just knew it—so I sat down right away, and I worked out a whole page of Dracula’s character study, and all different poses in a montage…
Gene Colan’s “tryout” for Tomb of Dracula, ca. 1970-71.
I sent [the tryout] to Stan, and the next day he called and said, “You got it!” That was it!
Attack of the 50 Year Old Comic Books 
Great edition. Thank you.
I learned a lot. Love Gene Colan’s work on this and really anything Dracula. Much appreciation for what you do with this newsletter.
John Reskusich
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021, 12:07 AM Attack of the 50 Year Old Comic Books wrote:
> Alan Stewart posted: “The Marvel Comics title that would become Tomb of > Dracula appears to have been in the works for quite some time prior to its > first issue reaching stands in November, 1971. Perhaps the first inkling > comics readers had of its development had come by way of” >
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re very welcome, John.
LikeLike
This story was reprinted in black and white in the first two issues of the British Marvel Dracula Lives in 1974, and looked very good that way.
Believe it or not, Dracula’s castle did become a tourist attraction in Romania in the 1970s, though it was run by a state agency, not an American descendant of Vlad the Impaler.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Just happened to wake up at 3:30, in the “dead of night” in the wee hours of a Saturday morning. Couldn’t get back to sleep, and my pc beckoned me to check my emails and came across your latest and eeriest entry, Alan! I missed Drac’s Marvel debut but came in shortly after Wolfman started leaving his scent on the series, and just in time to get the introduction of Blade for 21 cents. In late ’71, by which time I was 9 years old, I’m not sure if the name Dracula would have meant much to me yet, but then I can’t really remember when or how I first became familiar with the classic Big Three of classic Universal horror films, Dracula, Frankenstein’s Monster and the Wolfman. I remember seeing the Frankenstein, Jr. and the Groovie Ghoulies cartoons, which were likely my weird introductions to the ideas of the characters, and I also recall one of my teachers playing the Monster Mash in class one day, maybe on Halloween in 1972. I believe it was in 1972 that I stayed up late one Saturday night while my parents were out, and caught the local (Salt Lake City) Creature Feature show, which happened to be Godzilla. Afterwards, our whole family would stay up late for the Creature Feature, pulling out the sofa-bed, my brothers and I getting into our pjs, and having a big bowl of popcorn and settling in for the thrills and chills, and soon enough I was caught up on the classic Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff and Lon Chaney, Jr., horror flicks, and eventually also caught Lon Chaney, Sr.’s silent-era classics. Strange to think now that when I was watching films from the 1930s in the 1970s, those were only 40 or so years in the past then but now its edging on 50 years in the past since I first saw them!
And although now I’m familiar enough with all those tropes dredged up in Tomb of Dracula #1, in 1971 they would have been entirely new to me. Now, seeing the scene of Clifton Graves (oh, what a name!) pulling the stake out of Drac’s skeletal chest, I can’t help but think, “don’t do that, you idiot!” But if I’d read it brand new back then, I wouldn’t have thought much about it until seeing Dracula magically coming back to life – or “unlife”! And poor Jeanie and the lovely, saucy barmaid, the sacrificial victims of Drac’s resurrection celebration. Couldn’t help wondering if this Jeanie was named after Roy’s wife of the time, introduced to comics readers through the Rutland Halloween parade tales.
As to the art, Colan’s depiction of Dracula is for me the gold standard. Anyone else’s rendition just doesn’t quite look “right”, although even if Adams’ cover was drawn without reference to Colan’s interior art, his Dracula looks similar enough to Colan’s to pass muster. Colan’s art always had a very dark, shadowy atmosphere, even on standard super-hero fare, such as Daredevil, Iron Man and the Avengers. Tomb of Dracula seemed tailor-made for his particular artistic skills. He shined in this series, as well as in Howard the Duck, in my estimation.
Just some of my ruminations on this issue and your own observations and the memories they conjured up for me, typing with a big black cat, Miles, lounging on chest, needling his claws into my shoulder!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here’s hoping you (and Miles) got back to sleep eventually, Fred. And didn’t have any nightmares!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, got back to sleep. No nightmares but a weird dream in which I was late for a job I had quit over 20 years ago! Now it’s time for my Siamese cat, Smokey, to snooze on my legs as I peruse my emails (I have 4 cats altogether).
LikeLiked by 1 person
I read the novel Dracula for the first time during the summer of 1977, I think, when I was working as a counselor at Camp Alpine in north Alabama and it scared the crap out of me. Literally, the only book I’ve ever read in my life that I refused to read at night. Absolutely chilling. In film, I’ve enjoyed the Frank Langella and Gary Oldman versions of the character and a few others as well, but horror comics have always left me cold. For this reason, I didn’t read Tomb of Dracula when it came out in 72 and have never read it until this truncated version here today. I’m afraid I’m not impressed.
First, from a technical standpoint, I’m not a big fan of Colan’s work on this one. The art doesn’t have any of the inherent grace of Gene’s work on Daredevil and other books and parts of it seem unfinished. Perhaps this is because the book was meant to be produced in black and white, perhaps it’s because Gene inked himself for a change or perhaps it’s from some artistic reason that’s been lost to time. I dunno, but I’m not a fan.
Then, there’s the Conway of it all. I know we dump on Gerry here, but keep in mind, he did publish a novel with a major publisher at age 19…how many of us can say that…so obviously he had some talent, but this script is such a cliche-ridden cobbled-together mess, it’s hard to see it and even harder to believe that three different writers wanted to take credit for it. Not being Catholic, I’m not sure, but in order for a cross to be referred to as a “crucifix,” doesn’t it have to have a representation of the body of Christ on it? A plain cross is just a cross, right? Not that this matters, because according to lore either cross or crucifix will do for Mr. Tepes, but it’s annoying that Gerry kept referring to a crucifix when Gene was clearly drawing just a cross.Also I find it interesting that the silver compact becomes the weapon Frank fights Drac with instead of a cross or holy water. Was there an editorial attempt being made at the time to remove the religious incongraphy from the legend? I don’t know, but it surely seems that way.
The characterizations here were so obviously stereotypical as to be almost comical. Frank, the tragic hero, is obviously Jonathan Harker. Jeanie is obviously the Mina character, the virginal victim for Dracula to prey on and Clifton was obviously so despised by Frank and Jeanie, that I wondered why he was even allowed to come at all, except to put the story into motion. Does Cliff become the Renfield-type character in later issues? I found it hard to believe that Drac didn’t kill him straight away on awakening, considering how long it’s been since he’d had a meal. Oh, and the villagers? They were so clearly doomed from the outset, Colan should have just given them all red shirts to wear.
Anyway, didn’t read this in 72 and haven’t read a Dracula comic of any kind since unless it was a cross-over with another character in another book and don’t feel as though I’ve missed anything important. Thanks for this look into some comics I never experienced fifty years ago, Alan. When are we gonna get that Warlock post? I still own that one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, maybe you’ll like some of the later Wolfman/Colan/Palmer stuff better, Don. Or not — different strokes, and all that. Still, thanks for reading, as always.
Look for Warlock on Saturday, Nov. 27.
LikeLiked by 2 people
In Latin, crucifix does translate as “one fixed to a cross”. By the was “Tepes” was never a name the historical Dracula would have used but was an official nickname given to him which translated as “impaler” and by which he is known in Romania. Officially, he was Vlad III, Voivode (“local ruler”) of Wallachia. Dracula, meaning “son of the dragon” became his family name as his father, Vlad II, had been given the title Dracul (“dragon” or “devil”) due to his first class membership in a chivalric group called the Order of the Dragon established by a Hungarian king and later Holy Roman Emperor, Sigismund, to fight enemies of the Catholic church, mainly the Ottomans. There are at least two letters signed by Vlad III as “Dragulya” or “Drakulya”, so that was a name he did use to refer to himself, Dracula being the English variant. Vlad II was in exile in neighboring Transylvania when Dracula was born. There was much political turbulence during Dracula’s lifetime (as well as in father’s). During his youth, his Vlad II was forced to surrender Dracula and his younger brother, Radu, nicknamed “the Handsome”, to the Ottoman Sultan and for a time they were raised with the future Sultan, Mehmed II, later to be known as the conqueror of Constantinople. Dracula ruled Wallachia three times, forced out twice and killed during his third reign during a conflict against the Ottomans (he never ruled Transylvania). Reportedly, Dracula’s severed head was sent to Constantinople and displayed on a pike along the city walls. Mehmed reputedly had close, even sexual relations with Radu, who became a Janissary and fought for the Ottomans; he wasn’t too fond of the adult Dracula, however. Despite Dracula’s well-earned reputation for cruelty and impaling thousands of people, both his own subjects as well as Turkish soldiers, he is revered as a national hero in Romania.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks, Fred. I knew some of this already, but any day you can learn something is a good day.
LikeLiked by 2 people
More musings. Marvel introduced many new series in the early ’70s. Many didn’t last a year and most of the others were gone within 4 years. By late 1977, with the cancellation of Werewolf By Night, Tomb of Dracula became the last of the single-protagonist horror mags (if Ghost Rider isn’t regarded as “horror”) started earlier that decade and as far as I know was the longest lasting comic by either Marvel or DC featuring a protagonist who was unquestionably evil and regularly sought out and murdered innocent people, unlike, say Swamp Thing or the Hulk (if you want to consider that a “monster mag”). It was also one of the handful of Marvel titles launched in the early ’70s that lasted well over 6 years and starred a protagonist who was entirely new to Marvel, outdone only by Conan, Luke Cage (with or without Danny Rand), Shang Chi and Ghost Rider. The first few issues of ToD were rather shaky in the writing, but Wolfman put it on more solid steering and with Colan made it a worthwhile series, in my estimation.
The Ghost Rider series of the ’70s, IMO, was a bit of an odd mix, clearly supernatural with elements of horror initially, but for much of its early run more of a standard super-hero mag before Michael Fleisher took it back into more horror and suspense stories during it’s last few years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t discover this series until after Wolfman came on and I’m glad. When I eventually read what I missed, I knew I never would have bought another issue. I’m not into horror, even this sanitized kind, but Wolfman showed the world his potential here. His hero comics were always tops but ToD showed he could do nuance and complex relationships like nothing before had shown. Colan elevated it further. The revamped Dracula from X-Men seemed pedestrian compared to this and failed to engage me. The Aaron version in Avengers? Shallow as a puddle.
BTW, would New Teen Titans or Crisis ever have been given a chance had Wolfman not had such a wonderful showcase in Tomb of Dracula?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Wolfman had also had good runs on Amazing Spider-Man & Fantastic Four (following Len Wein’s runs on both) and by the time he went to DC, Wein, a long-time friend, was a top editor there. But certainly his run on ToD was Wolfman’s chief claim to fame before he & Perez teamed up on the New Teen Titans, likely aiming to emulate the success of the revived X-Men, which Wein also had a hand in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I never knew that Berni Wrightson was supposed to be involved with the b&w mag. Once his King Kull story was published in poorly photostatted and recoloured form in 1971, he never drew another story for Marvel until the 1980s (aside from inking a few covers or assisting with interior inks here and there). Berni was livid at what he felt was a betrayal of trust.
LikeLike
That’s interesting, Chris — I’ve always wondered why Wrightson’s early ’70s stint at Marvel was so brief.
Can you give us your source for the King Kull incident? I’d like to read more about it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Berni spoke of it in an interview in The Berni Wrightson Treasury, published in 1975, in Berni Wrightson: a Look Back, published in 1979, in The Comics Journal interview in 1983, and in a Two Morrows Comic Book Artist interview which I believe you can read online.
Berni adapted Robert E. Howard’s “The Skull of Silence” for Tower of Shadows #10. He also drew the cover and a small Marvel house ad illustration. However, the title was suddenly changed to Creatures on the Loose, and another artist did the cover. Wrightson’s did not see print until Savage Tales #2 reran the Kull story and added the cover as a bonus.
Berni wanted to convey the skull sucking all of the sound out of the vicinity by having the colours in the story fade out within two pages, replaced by duoshade tones. On the following page the skull screams and there is a burst of vibrant hues. It was a brilliant idea. However, Stan decided, “We can’t have black and white in our colour comics,” and ordered someone to recolour those pages without Berni’s knowledge or consent. Wrightson said he was furious for three days and even cried when he saw what they did to his story, and how poorly it was printed at that. He said he would not do another story for Marvel after that.
Eventually he did, but many years later.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Here is the TCJ interview, conducted in 1982:
https://www.tcj.com/the-berni-wrightson-interview/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks, Chris! I think I probably have that TCJ issue in a box around here somewhere, but it’s a lot more convenient to read it online.
LikeLike
I had Gene Colan as an instructor at the School of Visual Arts in the late ’80s and he told he loved drawing ToD. He told us that he bought one of the early VCRs to tape Jack Palance’s Dracula and freeze the screen. In fact, he.showed us the movie in class. Also, Gene often inked his war, western and romance stories in the ’50s-early ’60s but almost never inked his superhero work from the mid-’60s on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, I can imagine that he must have been thrilled when Palance played the Count in 1974, three years after he’d already “cast” him! Thanks for sharing that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sometimes with comics art you can sense when the artist or writer really love what they’re working on vs just doing it for the bucks, and I got that sense from Colan’s work on ToD as well as on Howard the Duck. It seemed only an occasional thing on much of his superhero work. I can also understand Wrightson’s rage when he put a lot of thought & work into something only for it be changed without consulting him. At least Wrightson appeared to have been in a position wherein he could decide whether he wanted to do any more work for Marvel or not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is ironic that you mention Howard the Duck, because Berni Wrightson drew a presidential campaign button of Howard in issue #4, and subsequently it was announced Berni would be handling the art chores for the book.
One problem, though: the idea had been discussed, but not settled upon, so Wrightson was angry once again, and all bets were off.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ah, what might have been. It would have been great to see some more of Wrightson’s Howard — though I have to say I’m a big fan of Colan’s version (as well as Brunner’s).
LikeLiked by 1 person