A MESS THAT DIDN'T MAKE MUCH SENSE? SOMEONE'S SURELY LOST THE PLOT...

When MARVEL announced the release of FANTASTIC FOUR - THE LOST ADVENTURE a couple of years back, I was quite excited. After all, how could it be anything other than interesting to see what the legendary JACK KIRBY had originally intended for this tale before STAN LEE revised it into a flashback scene, bookended by new JOHN BUSCEMA artwork? And it WAS interesting - but it certainly wasn't the blockbusting, overwhelming experience we were all led to expect.

John Morrow, in his introduction, says that Stan and John's version was "a real a mess that, quite frankly, didn't make much sense". I have to disagree - if anything, it was Jack's version that was somewhat lacking in that department. It's no secret that Jack wasn't trying too hard in his last few months at Marvel, and was content to produce entertaining, but less than earth-shattering, one-off, basic stories as he marked time 'til he moved to DC COMICS. The coincidence of a bust of JANUS being unearthed at almost the same time the FF battle a villain of the same name is a tad too contrived. Stan could no doubt have diluted this aspect with a bit of clever dialogue, but instead of running with a one-off tale, he made better use of the character and used the story as a prologue to a two-part adventure in the Negative Zone.

Also, by editing out the twin that Jack introduced, Stan's clever twist in the tale of the "brother" being the evil manifestation of Janus himself is more in keeping with the "two-faced" aspect of the name, and resulted in a more satisfying resolution to the episode. Sure, it would have been nice if Jack had drawn the complete issue, But Big John B's input isn't too distracting, thanks to JOE SINNOT'S inks.



Jack's story wasn't bad - but Stan's version had more depth, more characterization, more drama, more conflict - and, ultimately, was far more entertaining - not to mention satisfying. At least, that's how I see it, but I suppose it's really rather subjective as to which presentation is better. In the final analysis, the most that can be accurately - and objectively - claimed is that the two versions are merely "different" - and only slightly at that. Stan and Jack might not always have agreed on which direction a story should go, but neither of them ever produced a "mess" in their lives.

In volume 11 of FF MARVEL MASTERWORKS, JON B. COOKE suggests in his introduction that Stan's decision to delay the story may have been due to "spite from a hurt ex-partner". I confess that I was surprised by this comment - and even more surprised that Marvel printed it. To introduce this unfounded and unwarranted speculation from out of nowhere is recklessy irresponsible. In what way would the printing sequence of a one-off story have affected Jack - by that time an ex-contributor? The idea is ludicrous and clearly without merit; there is not the slightest evidence to suggest that Stan's decision to delay the story is attributable to anything other than taking the time required, as editor, to work on what he saw as problems with the plot.

One can never be dogmatic in speculating how history may have been altered had certain aspects been different, but it's not entirely unlikely that, had Jack never left Marvel, the story may well have seen print more-or-less as it appeared with Stan's revisions - but illustrated by Jack from cover to cover. After all, Stan often asked Jack to redraw panels and pages to accommodate his ideas for the direction of the plot, so there's no reason to assume that it would have been different on this occasion. Therefore, perhaps the only difference Jack's departure made to the finished result, was that the revisions were rendered by John Buscema instead of Jack Kirby.

However, there are other issues raised by this landmark story. To read what they are, click on the link below:

http://kidr77.blogspot.com/2010/08/kirby-has-left-building.html