Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I have read biographies of Hitler that were more sympathetic to their subject. You will hard pressed to find a single redeeming feature that Stan Lee possesses. No complement is given without an almost instant backhand slap or a search to find a self serving motive behind it. When I was a kid, in the 60s, reading Marvel and DC comics I could tell you who any Marvel artist or inker was because they got credit on the title page of any comic. With DC I only had the vaguest idea who was who, DC didn't give credit. Stan Lee was responsible for giving credit. How was this underhanded? What was his real motive? His crime... was that he got top billing. This is just one example of hundreds. No act is too tiny not to be second guessed. My favorite? Stan enlisted in the army during WWII, his short coming? He didn't enlist fast enough. Stan gets the blame for every short coming of the comics industry. Low pay, poor conditions, work for hire... all Stan's fault. The author seems to forget that while Jack Kirby didn't profit from the characters he created, neither did Stan. (Not that he really created anything.) Marvel owns the Avengers, Spider-man, Xmen, Thor, the Hulk etc etc. Stan sure didn't. Speaking of who created what. It is hard to imagine that Stan created every character without help from the Marvel artists and people he worked with. So much of any character is the fantastic design and look Jack Kirby game them. It equally hard to believe that Stan created NOTHING. It was all the people around him. I'll let you guess the side this book takes. Personally I think it was a collaborative effort. My proof? I don't think Stan was ever as good without Jack Kirby. And Jack Kirby was never as good without Stan. Who's Abbott without Costello? Who's Laurel without Hardy? What a chore it must have been to write this book, loathing your subject.