BIDDING THE FOUR FAREWELL - AN INTERVIEW WITH THE FANTASTIC MIKE WIERINGO

[Alex Groff]

<A HREF="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/marvel/0305/FF524.jpg" TARGET="_blank"><IMG SRC="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/marvel/0305/FF524_T.jpg" hspace=10 ALIGN="LEFT" ALT="Fantastic Four #524" WIDTH="100" HEIGHT="150"></A>by Patrick James, Comixfan Staff Writer

Starting with a 9-cent issue isn't generally something that would send the message that a company has faith in their creative team's work. However, it was that inexpensive issue that gave launch to the most well-received run on Fantastic Four in years, with the superstar team of Mark Waid and Mike Wieringo. Having recently completed his memorable run on Fantastic Four, Mike Wieringo took some time to talk about the soon-to-be classic run and give some insight as to what made him want to work on the upcoming Spider-Man title with Waid.

Comixfan: Now that the last issue is out of your hands, are there any regrets about your run?

Mike Wieringo: Not too many, really. I wish I could have been a faster artist to be able to have drawn more consecutive issues, but in reality, I think I've drawn more issues in a row on a more consistent basis on Fantastic Four than on any other title I've ever worked on. And I worked on FF for a longer period of time than any other comic I've ever done. I regret not taking more time to come up with what could have been a creepier design for Doom's armor for the Unthinkable story arc-- but we have to work within certain time considerations, unfortunately... it's the nature of monthly comics. I also wish that I could have channeled a little more edge or darkness in my work for that same story, but I can't seem to fight against my own artistic sensibilities. And the fanboy in me really wished I could have had the opportunity to draw more of the Four's rogue's gallery-- like the Mole Man, Impossible Man and a few others, but I understand why Mark wanted to stay away from all the major villains except for Doctor Doom and Galactus.

Comixfan: And why would that be?

Wieringo: I think that Mark wanted to put his own stamp on the Fantastic Four mythos and legacy by creating new characters and situations for them to encounter. He's as much a huge fan of what Kirby and Lee did in their creation of this wonderful comic book-- and I don't think he felt like re-hashing what had come before was something he felt he wanted to do, or felt like he could do and measure up to what came before, so why try? If I'm not mistaken, the only character he really wanted to take a crack at was Doctor Doom. And he did an amazing job with the Unthinkable story arc. I think that the Galactus usage was mandated from on high. I think the 'powers that be' wanted us to go out with a bang using 'The Big G' as a huge sendoff. Personally, I would have preferred to stay away from Galactus, because there is absolutely no way to top his first appearance and the introduction of the Silver Surfer and all that amazingly imaginative splendor that Kirby and Lee concocted. But it was fun to draw him just the same.

Comixfan: It is hard to top an amazing story like the original Stan and Jack story. But I couldn't agree more about Unthinkable; it left perhaps the most memorable mark of your entire collective run. So, personal favorite moment of the run?

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/0304/FF511.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/0304/FF511t.jpg" align=right alt="Fantastic Four #511"></a>Wieringo: That would have to be the scene when the Four meet the Kirby/Creator character at the end of Hereafter. It was so much fun and such an honor to be able to draw Jack Kirby. He's such a personal hero of mine, as he is to so many comic book artists working today. Without Kirby, there wouldn't even be a Marvel Universe, so to be able to draw something that was as much as tribute to him as a clever end to the story was a real treat and an honor.

Comixfan: I figured that would be your answer. Needless to say, I think that was the highlight of the run for many of the readers. It was simply a stunning moment in comicdom.

Wieringo: I thought it was so incredibly imaginative on Mark's part.... and frankly, I was impressed, that as a writer, he was inclined to use Jack Kirby instead of Stan Lee. Mark's never vocalized to me how he feels about how the legacy of each of these two men have played out in the public eye over the years. Personally, I'm in the camp that feels that Kirby has been given short shrift in every regard as to his contribution to the Marvel Universe. Because Kirby died over a decade ago now, and the fact that he wasn't the bombastic showman that Stan Lee is, he's never gotten the credit that he deserves for what I feel is the majority of the creative effort that went into creating the Marvel U. And now, most kids don't even know who Jack Kirby is and what he means to comic books. So I'm thrilled that the final scene in Hereafter played out as it did...

Comixfan: I thought it was a great choice, too. And it worked very well, given what needed to come about as a result of it; changing Ben back to Thing, giving Reed his face back, etc. Truly an inspired choice, and beautifully rendered. Which FF member will you miss drawing the most?

Wieringo: I'll really miss drawing Ben Grimm-- THE THING-- the most. He is such a wonderful character. As with so many of Kirby's amazing designs, he's really so perfect - and so much fun. With his rocky exterior made up of those interlocking plates of stone... and his huge size and massive feet and hands, he's just a delight to draw. The rest of the team was fun as well, but when they're not manifesting their powers, they're just ordinary folks in long blue jump suits. Ben wears his powers for all to see all the time. It's what makes up his personality as well as his appearance-- and so he's the most interesting all the way around.

Comixfan: Do you have any input in stories or plot details, or are you strictly the artist?

Wieringo: I was pretty much strictly the artist on Fantastic Four. There was really never much opportunity for me to have much, if any, input. There were a few scattered moments when I was able to make suggestions that would help to facilitate something logistically that Mark wanted to do in a particular story-- but for the most part, I was just a pencil jockey, really.

Comixfan: Pencil jockey; that's funny.

<A HREF="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/image/1204/TOT03.jpg" TARGET="_blank"><IMG SRC="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/image/1204/TOT03t.jpg" WIDTH="100" HEIGHT="150" BORDER="1" ALIGN="LEFT" ALT="Tellos #3"></A>Wieringo: Art monkey; Wrist-for-hire; Have pencil-will travel--- there's a ton of them. But I think these terms stem from the fact that the trend has been for quite a while now that the 'vision' for the comic book is strictly that of the writer, and the art team is simply there to make that vision real on paper. The 'Marvel method' of creating comics has gone the way of the Dodo, really. All scripts done for Marvel are now, like at DC, done in full-script form, so unless the writer is feeling generous enough to bring the penciler in on the initial writing of the story (and there's little or none of that happening), then the penciler is relegated to the status of 'flunky', in my humble opinion. And for someone like me, who spent his childhood writing and drawing his own stories-- and who has been in a very collaborative relationship on a creator-owned project as I was with Todd Dezago on Tellos, it's a bitter pill to swallow to have to return to being relegated to nothing more than (fill in the blank with any of the aforementioned terms). Frankly, it's taken much of the joy of drawing comics out of the process for me.

Comixfan: Back in November when Mark Waid announced you'd be leaving the book together, he said it was because you'd swayed him to this other project. So, what is it about Spider-Man that piqued your interest enough to leave a great gig like FF?

Wieringo: Well, I'm not sure if that's entirely the most accurate representation of what happened in why our run on Fantastic Four came to an end. I got a call from Joe Quesada last summer, and he was of the opinion that in today's market, in order to keep a certain amount of heat on a long-running title, it's best to rotate in new creative teams occasionally to keep reader interest piqued. I had been sort of feeling the same way, and had even voiced that to Tom Brevoort some time before Joe called me-- I suppose that maybe I was itching to work on another character or set of characters after a couple of years on FF. I tend to like to jump around and work on varied projects. It's difficult for me to sustain a huge enthusiasm for one project for more than a couple of years. So Joe's call really came at the right time. And the fact that he was offering the shot to launch a new Spider-Man title as the 'carrot' to facilitate stepping away from FF just made the decision that much easier. It's why -I- decided to leave.

Comixfan: Should fans think of the Spider-Sense arc as a kind of template for the way you and Mark will portray the character?

Wieringo: It's the template for what I'd like to see happen in the Spider-Man book-- but if that ends up being the case or not remains to be seen.

Comixfan: You fought a lot of criticism going into your gig on Fantastic Four about your style being too 'cartoony.' Do you think you've finally silenced the critics? And is Spider-Man the kind of title where your style will be more accepted, do you think?

<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/0404/FF_512.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/0404/FF_512t.jpg" align=right alt="Fantastic Four #512"></a>Wieringo: I have heard from a great many people over the years I've been on Fantastic Four that they were very apprehensive about me drawing the title because my work tends to be more on the lighter and more 'cartoony' end of the spectrum-- but that after seeing what I did, they really enjoyed it. There were also, though, almost as many folks who had their worst fears confirmed, I suppose. I think that the vast majority of the remaining fanbase for comic books prefer their comics to be, a) serious and b) drawn in a realistic style. I think that long gone are the days when superheroes were seen as fun, escapist material that could transport you to other worlds and help you forget your hum-drum every day life. Now, more often than not, the superhero comics of today are just a reflection of the angst and turmoil of every day life. And yet, those characters going through those seemingly mundane daily struggles must be wearing long underwear and capes for them to be taken seriously. It's a real conundrum that's unique to the comics' fan base. I think that Spider-Man has the ability to transcend that limitation, though. He's a character that's really like the Bugs Bunny of the Marvel Universe. Fans are very willing to enjoy him in fun, energetic and somewhat absurdist fare, because it suits the character so well. And yet, he also has enough interesting pitfalls in his every day life to keep the modern fan interested as well. So I think my work would be much more suited to Spider-Man than, say, X-Men or Punisher.

Comixfan: What do you think makes fans want more realistic art than they did back when Kirby and Ditko were creating characters with Stan Lee?

Wieringo: Honestly? I feel like it's two-fold: a lack of imagination, and the aging of the comics fanbase. If you look back at what is considered the best of the Silver Age of comics, the stories are very simple and fun-- with very little by way of the dark, depressing 'realistic' subject matter that's the norm today. And the artwork was also simpler and left more for the imagination of the reader to fill in. I've looked through so many of the Essential collections I have, and there would be pages of fight scenes in those comics where not one panel had a background. But now, it seems as though the fans want ever nut and bolt drawn in or else they decry the lack of detail in the artwork. I can't paint the whole of fandom with that brush-- but I certainly think the vast majority falls into that category. And many of the creative folks working today want to bring that dark sensibility to their work and that sense of anal detail (for the artists part). The fans want it all spelled out, and the creative folks want to do that spelling. That's why I'm so thankful for someone like Darwyn Cooke, who brings the wonderful sensibilities of the Silver Age to his work. He's my hero.

Comixfan: Peter Parker is often described as comics' everyman. What do you feel you have in common with Peter?

<A HREF="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/covers/marvel/SENSSM17.jpg" TARGET="_blank"><IMG SRC="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/covers/marvel/SENSSM17_T.jpg" ALIGN="LEFT" ALT="Sensational Spider-Man #17" WIDTH="100" HEIGHT="150"></A>Wieringo: I'd have to say not much anymore. Peter used to be a character that was so very easy to identify with for so many fans, because he had so many of the same problems that we young men had. Money woes, problems with relating to girls, a feeling of being a total outsider...these were all things that a young male comic book fan could readily identify with. In recent years, Peter has kind of moved away from all those things that made him accessible to the 'everyman'. He's a world famous photographer with a best selling book of his work, he's married to a gorgeous actress/model, and he doesn't seem to have any problem with his cash flow anymore. I think a lot of what was the essence of Peter Parker has been lost over the years...but that's progress for you, I suppose. I guess no character can remain stagnant.

Comixfan: Do you plan to work with Mark to bring back some of that "everyman" quality? Or has the character transcended his origins by becoming so iconic?

Wieringo: I think that the character has to go the way that the editorial staff decides. And so far, it's been their view that he be less the everyman and more the stud. It remains to be seen if they'll change that in the near future...

Comixfan: I wonder if Stan and Jack would cringe at the thought of Peter Parker being called a "stud"...Anyways, Spider-Man has one of the most extensive, eclectic rogues galleries in all of comics. Are there any in particular you're hoping to get to draw?

Wieringo: Well, The Looter is and has always been my favorite Spider-Man villain, which is why Todd Dezago and I used him so many times during our run on Sensational Spider-Man. He's got one of those wonderfully goofy/bizarre origins that only Steve Ditko and Stan Lee could concoct...a scientist getting his powers from the gas inside a meteor and deciding to use that power to rob banks. It seems as though a lot of the basis for evil in the early Spider-Man mythos was science. So there's great villains like Doctor Octopus, The Lizard, and many others. I really like The Vulture, The Shocker and The Gibbon as well. I guess I gravitate toward the sillier of Spider-Man's rogue's gallery.

Comixfan: Nothing wrong with some fun Spidey stories. Thank you, sir, for the great interview. I guess we'll be seeing you around these parts more often.

To chat with Mike Wieringo yourself, please visit his new creator forum here at Comixfan! Or you can visit him on his personal homepage at www.mikewieringo.com.

[Kevin Sutton]

A very enlightening interview. Weringo's comments about artist's contributions and the stylistic desires of the modern audience were a little depressing though...

[Toga]

Good interview, its nice to see an artist view on the state of comics, when so many times we get an interview with the writer and all the ideas stem from the writer and they give no credit to the artist about ideas. but i guess if thats the way it needs to be done, then theres no reason to argue with it.

I loved Mikes early spider-man stuff, and his FF run turned me into a die hard fan, so maybe its time to start eading spider-man again.

[Mitch Brown]

Originally Posted by Alex Groff

But I think these terms stem from the fact that the trend has been for quite a while now that the 'vision' for the comic book is strictly that of the writer, and the art team is simply there to make that vision real on paper. The 'Marvel method' of creating comics has gone the way of the Dodo, really. All scripts done for Marvel are now, like at DC, done in full-script form, so unless the writer is feeling generous enough to bring the penciler in on the initial writing of the story (and there's little or none of that happening), then the penciler is relegated to the status of 'flunky', in my humble opinion. And for someone like me, who spent his childhood writing and drawing his own stories-- and who has been in a very collaborative relationship on a creator-owned project as I was with Todd Dezago on Tellos, it's a bitter pill to swallow to have to return to being relegated to nothing more than (fill in the blank with any of the aforementioned terms). Frankly, it's taken much of the joy of drawing comics out of the process for me.

Its sad to hear that. I have similar conversations with an artist friend of mine from time to time who's been working with me on and off on a few projects. Its strange, from both him and others I've spoken to there's almost an antagonistic relationship between writer/artist.

I can see the benefits of the old Marvel-style scripting technique because it leaves almost all of the visual qualities of the book up to the artist. On the other hand though, there's often times in a script where the writer's vision of how a particularly page should be laid out becomes an intrinsic part of the book's communication, particularly from writers like Warren Ellis.

From my own experience and research, there's equal advantages and disadvantages to Marvel-style and full script format. I personally prefer full-script because it offers tighter control over a page's rhythm from the writer's perspective. On the other hand, when working with an artist I like to give them the artistic freedom to put their hand up and say "Hey, maybe it would be better if I did it like this..."

I don't know... writer vs. artist, full script vs Marvel-style...these are arguments that will probably never be resolved, and as a rank amateur who has yet to be published, what the hell do I know?

But still, if you want to be actively creating and steering a book, what's stopping Mike from pitching his own series as writer/artist? That would get start exercising those creative energies again, and I'm sure its something all the Wierengo fans would be eager to see

[Kevin Sutton]

I think the growing power of the writer over the creative process of a comic book is actually a pretty worrying trend. I'm not referring to dialogue or plotting of course, but rather the layouts and visual presentation.

Much like a cinematographer, the artist is supposed to control how the audience sees what the writer needs to show. When you start shoving the artist out of this process, you get artists whose only value is their ability to render incredible detail. Stylistic differences fall away, deadlines become harder to meet, and frankly; the presentation suffers. Writers get their jobs generally because of their gifts for plotting, dialogue, subtexts, etc... I trust someone who actually works on the visual to control the visual much more than the person whose gifts are literary in nature.

Movies are a close match for comics; and usually the control over what is seen lies with the director, cinematograhper, and editor more than the screenplay writer. This may be because their talents lay in the visual more, or it may be because they are the ones who can actually see the result as it happens. Either way, it a good comparison for how things should go with comics.

Maybe some of spread of writer control over layout is responsible for the menace known as 'decompression'. Perhaps some writers just don't realise that the huge empty panels they ask for don't aren't really interesting or necessary. I've often felt that stories felt quick not because the story had too little plot, but rather because they weren't efficiently using the space they had in each instalment.

Just as its a bad idea to give an artist with little experience in writing control over scripting or plotting, its probably not a good idea to give a writer with little experience in drawing control over the visual presentation. Except of course, if there's considerable communication between the two.

That, and it also makes the artist's job much less desireable.

Great interview! I totally agree with what Mike said about not being able to relate to PETER PARKER like I used to. I know that people grow and change, but I miss the days when i'd feel such a connection to Pete 'cause he was going thru so much crap in his personal life that I could relate to.
The last time that I REALLY connected with PETE on that level was waaaaaay back during ROGER STERN & JOHN ROMITA JRs' incredible run.

Once Pete got married to MJ his 'everyman' days (sadly) were over....




BAMF!

[Luke Heller]

Originally Posted by Alex Groff

Wieringo: Art monkey; Wrist-for-hire; Have pencil-will travel--- there's a ton of them. But I think these terms stem from the fact that the trend has been for quite a while now that the 'vision' for the comic book is strictly that of the writer, and the art team is simply there to make that vision real on paper. The 'Marvel method' of creating comics has gone the way of the Dodo, really. All scripts done for Marvel are now, like at DC, done in full-script form, so unless the writer is feeling generous enough to bring the penciler in on the initial writing of the story (and there's little or none of that happening), then the penciler is relegated to the status of 'flunky', in my humble opinion. And for someone like me, who spent his childhood writing and drawing his own stories-- and who has been in a very collaborative relationship on a creator-owned project as I was with Todd Dezago on Tellos, it's a bitter pill to swallow to have to return to being relegated to nothing more than (fill in the blank with any of the aforementioned terms). Frankly, it's taken much of the joy of drawing comics out of the process for me.

This is funny in a way. I remember the 1990's when the artist/penciller was granted full power over the comics and the writer was relagated to just "filling in the word balloons."

That was also during the reign of MacFarlane, Silvestri, Lee, Larsen, etc...

That was also shortly before Marvel went bankrupt.

[Jordan T. Maxwell]

i think it's important to find a good middle ground. the truly great comic book teams are a collaborative effort between writer and artist...not the writer dictating everything to the artist, and not the artist drawing pretty pictures and just having the writer fill in the blanks. find that middle ground, make it the standard for the industry, and we're golden.

...think i'll go help reform social security while i'm at it.