GH: IRON MAN #171

Goodbye, Hello

There was a relatively brief period of time during which IRON MAN was a crackerjack reading experience. After more than a decade of mostly just floating along not being especially inspired, David Michelinie, John Romita Jr. and Bob Layton made the Armored Avenger into a real player. They put him up against more major threats, had him grapple with human foibles, and just made the whole of his world more fun and polished and interesting. With their departure, though, IRON MAN began to backslide. His adventures became more pedestrian, his themes regurgitated. Until finally, I dropped the book as part of my buying list purge, right at the point where a bit of a sea change was happening.

BHOC: SON OF ORIGINS OF MARVEL COMICS

I first encountered Iron Man in the copy of SON OF ORIGINS OF MARVEL COMICS that I borrowed from my local public library. That book was a gateway into the Marvel Universe, but Iron Man wasn’t specifically all that enticing to me. His first story, written by Larry Lieber and drawn by Don Heck, was all right but very much steeped in the Cold War, so it felt more like a war comic to me than anything. And while SON also included a more recent follow-up adventure, it was one in which Iron Man was pretty much flat on his backside for almost the entire story. He memorably recharges his depleted armor from a cigarette lighter outlet in the seat of the car in which he’s being transported to A.I.M. headquarters. So I wasn’t in any great rush to sample more modern stories featuring the character. (I did think the painted depiction of him on the front cover was super-cool, though.)

BHOC: IRON MAN #111

But sample them I did eventually, starting with this issue, #111. And I didn’t love it. It was right in the middle of an especially strange space adventure that writer Bill Mantlo had embroiled the character in ,and so wasn’t really a typical Shell-Head outing at all. But something about it must have been appealing because I began reading the title regularly at this point. And my patronage was rewarded, as it was only a handful of issues later that the aforementioned Michelinie, Romita and Layton came on board and transformed the moribund series.

After that trio of creators left, IRON MAN drifted for a little bit, aimless. It eventually came under the authorship of Denny O’Neil, one of the most storied writers in the history of comics. Denny wasn’t all that much of a super hero guy–he preferred more non-powered characters such as Batman. With his abilities coming from his technology, Tony Stark seemed like he’d fit that bill completely. But one of the things that was important to Denny was his sobriety. He was a recovering alcoholic, and so he could relate to Tony Stark wrestling with similar demons. But he felt that Michelinie, Romita and Layton had too effortlessly had Stark overcome his alcoholism, Having walked that path himself, Denny knew what he was talking about.

So Denny decided to have Tony fall off the wagon once again and then put him through the absolute hell of an alcoholic’s experiences before he’d eventually emerge out the other side having faced and at least momentarily conquered his demons. But needing an Iron Man during this period (as Tony was not going to be in any condition to be donning a suit of armor and flying into battle) O’Neil passed on the mantle to Tony’s longtime friend and pilot Jim Rhodes. This is something that hadn’t really ever been done at Marvel, a new character taking over the identity and the lead of a series that had been featuring somebody else. Today, it’s a situation that happens routinely, but not so in 1982.

O’Neil was joined in this endeavor by artist Luke McDonnell. McDonnell’s work was very attractive–he gave Iron Man some Gene Colan flavor, which appealed to me. But he was a bit hampered, I expect, by the common wisdom of this period, that pushed to have multiple panels on every page and to show figures in their entirety. A lot of medium shots, in other words. So the visuals were good, but never quite as impactful as they might otherwise have been.

As a reader, though, I felt as though the strip was repeating itself, and not in a good way. The original “Demon In A Bottle” storyline had become something of an instant classic, and this felt to me an awful lot like rehashing the same material, only making it far more dire and dour in the telling. O’Neil’s heart was in the right place, and these sequences are a lot more true-to-life than the earlier storyline. But they didn’t grab me the same way. I’d never been through what O’Neil had been, so my ability to relate at this point was minimal. I also felt like, in Denny’s hands, Rhodey began to act differently, his personality shifted in a way that I didn’t really like. It was just the difference between one writer’s approach and another’s, but it meant my enjoyment of the series was on the decrease.

I don’t know that this was the case for most of the readership, though. There are plenty of people who really seemed to enjoy this entire period, even if i walked away from it. It’s certainly gained some luster looking back on it in retrospect.

So when the time came to pull the rip cord on IRON MAN, I wasn’t especially bothered by it. I still had a fondness for the earlier work, but there was clearly something missing in the current series for me.

So what brought me back to IRON MAN? The return of Michelinie and Layton, of course. The pair was convinced to return to teh series on which they’d made their Marvel bones with issue #215, aided by penciler Mark Bright. And while I never truly warmed to that oversized “Silver Centurion” armor that Tony Stark was wearing in this period, all of the hallmarks of when I’d enjoyed the title immediately came back. That said, Michelinie and Layton’s second run on IRON MAN ended in a bit of a bust, with them leaving the book mid-storyline over what they felt was difficulties with Marvel editorial. By that time, though, I was on staff and getting the book in my weekly Marvel bundle, so I kept on reading it.

Published

25 thoughts on “GH: IRON MAN #171”

  1. I think some of the problem with Iron Man is that a couple of the creators had gotten a bit more ambitious than there plotting skills supported in 1971-1975.

    Gerry Conway did “Mr. Klein” in 4 books (including Iron Man) and seemed to have bogged down fairly rapidly

    Mike Friedrich was a good writer but the fusion of The Contest of the Supervillains with his attempts to make Firebrand a major Ironman bad guy. had confused readers.

    It was not a bad run, he and Starlin introduced Thanos and his reinvention of Firebrand itself was somewhat interesting,

    However, Friedrich also loved obscure bad guys people were not into, like The Masked Marauder and Dr. Spectrum (Dr. Spectrum in about half a year of stories).

    Momentum was not there and did not build,

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

      4. And when Electro assembles the Emissaries of Evil as a knock-off Sinister Six — well, as a friend says, when Stilt-Man isn’t the worst villain on the team …

        Like

    2. I became an Ironman fan during Friedrich’s run in the mid-70’s around issue #71. There’s some solid isolated issues in this period but I agree that storyline conclusions generally lacked oomph. I think the title improved somewhat around issue #90 and was already a pretty entertaining book when Michelinie/Layton took the reins.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  3. Well for me it was a story at the right time. My father was struggling with his alcoholism and I found it as a parallel journey.

    At this time I am trying to save up for the Marvel Masterworks reprinting the storyline .

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

      1. Unfortunately he was not able to overcome his addiction after several attempts at rehabilitation. He passed away in 1989.

        Like

  4. The War of the Super-Villains [ Iron Man#70 ( September 1974 ) – 77 ( August 1975 ) reprinted in the Iron Mam Epic Collection #6 ( 2013 ) comics.org — Iron Man#80 ( November 1975 ) flashback has it starting here ] — to bad modern Marvel doesn’t have a real War of the Super-Villains, after all they do different Contest of Champions & Secret Wars. Long before their were any Iron Man movies I wrote a letter to Marvel pointing out that TONY STARK IS IRON MAN ( meaning the MAN/ENGINEER not the Technology ) and Iron Man#150 ( September 1981 ) is the reason for the revelation in me. Cause had it been Happy Hogan, Eddie March or James Rhodes in that armour when Iron Man & Doctor Doom got transported to Camelot by Doom’s Time Machine by a vengeful Dr. Gert Hauptmann, Doom would had to cannibalize the technology from both their armours himself and he would have either rigged it to send only himself back to present or something risky like rigging it to send a feedback to the Iron Man armour after he was sent back to his correct time. I wasn’t a fan of Luke McDonnell’s art.

    Like

    Reply

    1. I wasn’t a fan of Iron Man#250 ( December 1989 ) the sequel to Iron Man#150 because I never bought that Doctor Doom would have let himself become that cybernetic thing, instead of creating clone bodies [ Fantastic Four#199 ( October 1978 ) Victor von Doom II his clone “son” — don’t know why Doom didn’t see the end result of trying to turn his “son” into a human version of the Super-Skrull by including the Thing in the process instead of either using a human looking super-strong hero or improving the XZ-12 machine he used to give Bull Brogin of the Terrible Trio his strength ] and use his Ovoid ability to transfer his mind into the new bodies.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  5. I dunno… I think McDonnell got the job done and his work is distinctive… but I thought he and Mitchell weren’t the best stylistic fit on IM. It was as if a Frank Miller mood was attempted without the dynamic flourish. The backgrounds are generally sparse and feel generic… there’s a heavy use of zip-a-tone patterns…. which in and of itself isn’t a problem but they were very obvious.

    I can’t say I’d put the reliance on full figure shots on editorial directive… there were plenty of Marvel books on the stands that didn’t seem hampered visually.

    While O’Neil’s approach to Stark’s alcoholism was no doubt more realistic due to the length of time given to Stark’s decline and recovery… it begs the question whether it’s a great recurring storyline for a super-hero comic. For my money…. these were dreary comics with a lot of clipped dialogue, full of antagonists with warmed over motivations.

    It is a distinctly different flavor than the the Michelinie/Layton run and probably a decent jumping on point for folks who don’t care much for a rich womanizing munitions manufacturer so I understand why it has it’s fans.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  6. As someone who was a big fan of O’Neil’s writing at DC, I remember feeling disappointed that he couldn’t seem to find his footing at Marvel. Even on IRON MAN and DAREDEVIL, books that ought to have been squarely in his wheelhouse, the stories just never “clicked” with me. I don’t know if that was due to the different editorial structure at Marvel, or O’Neil evolving as a writer, or me getting older and wanting different things from my reading material (perhaps a bit of all three).

    (I will say that I quite enjoyed his brief run on AMAZING SPIDER-MAN.)

    Like

    Reply

  7. From Tom: ” That said, Michelinie and Layton’s second run on IRON MAN ended in a bit of a bust, with them leaving the book mid-storyline over what they felt was difficulties with Marvel editorial.”

    Michelinie/Layton’s last issue was the #250 anniversary with Dr. Doom and it gets wrapped up.

    The next issue and subsequent issues with fill-ins is a new storyline: Acts of Vengence… which they may not have liked, but what storyline did they leave in the middle of exactly?

    Like

    Reply

  8. Am I misremembering or did Rhodey take over as Iron Man around the same time Len Wein replaced Hal Jordan with John Stewart in Green Lantern? Another in a long line of comic book coincidences I suppose.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  9. I really liked the book when they pulled Mark Bright. He’s such a great penciller and was wonderful on Power Man and Iron Fist as well. I think Byrne drew the best version of the Silver Centurion armor (in the Hulk) and the second place would go to Mark Bright. Story wise, I really enjoyed the Michelinie and Layton runs, just wish I had been able to track them down to read them all at the time!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  10. I don’t remember the # of my 1st issue of “The Invincible Iron-Man”. I think I was 5 or 6 years old. I re-read it until it fell apart. Then I cut certain drawings of IM out to fight equally combative poses of Swan’s Superman from the Master-Jailer arc. But I remember it was the 1st part of IM vs. Ultimo, near the Washington Monument in DC. And IM got wrecked. I was so into the action, I acted it out with my father, & we wore face paint to play the hero & villain, He was in light blue , & my face was in gold. I also remember IM’s gauntlets & boots in opposite sides of a briefcase that was too thin to hold all that armor.

    I didn’t get another issue until # 163, I think. IM vs. a knight on that flying mechanical horse, with the anti-gravity spheres where it’s legs would’ve come out. Stane’s name might’ve been mentioned, but he was the mystery villain menacing Tony’s IM. It was the 1st time I’d seen Luke McDonnell’s work. I think it was his 3rd issue on the series. The letters pages mentioned Paul Smith issue from a few previous. I’d finally see & really admire Paul’s work in Uncanny X-Men (# 172 was my fave of his, & one of the best looking comicsI’ve ever seen). IM # 163 was good, not great. But I was interested in seeing the character again. I was a little older to appreciate some of the other story elements besides the fights & mass destruction they brought.

    But them in ’84, I think. I got IM Annual # 7. And I was hooked. Whatever else can be said about its writer, Bob Harras, that issue had one of the best comicbook stories I’d read at that point in my young life. Rhodey was IM now. And Goliath was a seriously dangerous foe, trashing him, Hawkeye, & Wonder Man. I loved the references to Marvel history, and the wider continuity. And the art, man. McDonnell inked by Ian Aiken & Brian Garvey. I think by then I’d seen their inks over Sal Buscema’s “Rom”, & had been really into it. Now I was seeing their slick polish on the Armored Avenger. And it was great.

    McDonnell drew 1 of my fave versions of IM. The helmet, especially. That gleam. The light glinting off of it. Those eye & mouth slits. There’s only 2 other iterations I enjoyed more. The 1990-91 run, 10 issues, of JRJr’s return to IM. Which were just so primal & raw in the power, despite the technologically advanced subject. And Adi Granov’s, who finally made the armor make sense to me, and look like bona fide, world-class science-fiction.

    Anyway, Steve Mitchell’s done a lot of good work over a long career. I thought he & Luke had several very fine panels. Overall, I’d say most of their work together was a little sketchy, in the literal sense. A little rough. I consider Steve part of the “Giordano school”, but far looser. Maybe my fave inker is Klaus Janson, another of the “Giordano school”. But Steve didn’t bring that cinematic lighting sense of Klaus’s. Or that inked finish that looked as hard as wet slate that Klaus could give. Steve had a similar effect on Breyfogle. I’m thinking he’d do well over Denys Cowan’s stuff (there must be an example of that somewhere).

    But it was Aiken & Garvey’s inks over McDonnell’s drawings that kept me coming back for more IM. It was just too brief. Luke also drew my favorite Bronze Age IM corner box art, starting w/ # 175. It STILL looks great to me. I did get the Vibro issues inked by Steve. Not long after, Luke was drawing Vibe in JLA (JLD), with the same FX for his powers as he’d drawn for Vibro. Luke left IM after #195, I think. Aiken & Garvey stayed on. I thought Rich Buckler’s 2 issues were stellar. Even more fundamentally sound than Luke’s, the figure work was really high quality. The faces more so. And A&G’s inks kept the feel very consistent. I’d’ve stayed longer if Buckler had done more (it didn’t look like karaoke sounds to me, Mark). 😉

    I was there for # 200. Which didn’t move me as much as I think it might’ve if Luke or Buckler had drawn it. I liked Mark Bright’s drawing on Hawkeye in “Solo Avengers”, inked by Joe Rubinstein, I think. And on a really fun (West Coast?) Avengers Annual written by Englehart & inked by Geoff Isherwood. I’ve never seen Mark’s drawing look better than in that annual. So his IM didn’t keep me. My last issue was #206, which was a rematch (of sorts) w/ Goliath. I couldn’t resist it. Denny succeeded in maintaining, maybe even increasing, IM’s heavyweight status.

    And as compelling as Tony’s struggle for sobriety was, I think Denny may have drawn it out a few issues too long. But I did enjoy Rhodey as IM. Maybe I just wanted to a little less of destitute Tony. But I applaud Denny’s not wanting to end it too quickly, to lessen the destructive impact the disease of alcoholism has had on countless lives. Another misstep to me was having Rhodey not face off against Namor. I mean, IM vs. the Sub-Mariner is one of the most storied superhero rivalries in comics. And Denny had him undersea, fighting other Atlanteans. Ugh.

    So I stayed away for years, until JR,Jr. returned on # 256. And then started his too-brief run w/ #258. I friggin’ loved it. I missed out on his earlier, legendary & lengthy run w/ Layton’s inks. But The ’09-91 run was a revelation. Not quite on the level of elegance as his Daredevil run, inked by the unsurpassed & amazing Al Williamson. But it had a different kind of pull w/ the slick sheen of Bob Wiacek’s inks. IM armor looked hard, tough, & powerful, with a bulky but streamlined design.

    But when JRJR let, I did, too. And I stayed away, at least another bunch of years, until “Heroes Return”, when I had to check out what Kurt Busiek & Sean Chen were gonna do. And it was good. But didn’t last long enough. And the series could’ve keep up what Kurt started. And the art took backslides. It’d be a few more years before a different creative team was as hard to resist.

    It was Adi Granov’s futurist mechanical engineering study, that was the amor design in “Extremis”. Warren Ellis’s sci-fi horror story. I took Tony more seriously. And marveled at Adi’s armor. With Tom Cruise as Tony. I’ve already praised it earlier. But Adi showed how IM could work in live Action. I’m glad the movie-makers thought the same. And if you’d’ve asked me in the late 80’s who’d play Tony in a motion picture, my indifference to the character, or even my disdain for his technocratic attitude, & sometime wooden personality would’ve had me answer someone as handsomely neutral as Timothy Dalton. Never did I ever imagine Robert Downey, Jr. But he reinvented the character. And I’d estimate he’d elevated IM to an unprecedented level or popularity & recognition.

    And Marvel’s subsequent dedication to keep IM looking at a very high visual level means I periodically have to look in on the character. But honestly, Marvel nearly permanently sabotaged him in “Civil War”. He’s been tainted for me ever since. What a jerk he was in that, and its tie-in’s, especially JMS’s “Amazing Spider-Man”. So I can never fully embrace the guy since. Despite the charm of the movies. Maybe if Kurt came back…

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  11. FraserSherman said:

    And when Electro assembles the Emissaries of Evil as a knock-off Sinister Six — well, as a friend says, when Stilt-Man isn’t the worst villain on the team …

    Whoah! I loved EMISSARIES OF EVIL!

    Oh well, to each his own.

    Though I noticed even Colan couldn’t do much with Leap Frog a second time round.

    And nobody had a worse rogues gallery than Henry Pym.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  12. When the Epic Collection reprinted the IM comic that had Fu Manchu in one panel– said reprint being long after Marvel gave up the rights to the Rohmer character– did Editorial change that panel?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  13. I recall that in interviews O’Neil subsequently acknowledged that his alcoholism storyline in Iron Man went on a bit too long and might have benefitted by being half a dozen issues shorter, or words to that effect.

    Nevertheless, as someone who is a recovering alcoholic, I appreciate the intent of O’Neil’s work on the series, even if the execution was perhaps a bit flawed.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  14. The problem with McDonnell’s art on Iron Man maybe was due to Shooter’s dictates?

    Shooter put super-clear storytelling before dynamism. It’s obvious is the few stories he drew and famously in a comparison of Gene Colan’s art before, during and after Colan’s Avengers run with Shooter.

    For the youngs, Shooter did some very good things but also some pretty bad things. So, it’s complicated.

    But his opinion on good comic book visuals…

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment