Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Joe Kubert's Darth Vader?

Could be. This ad appeared in comic books in the Spring of 1978, nearly a year after STAR WARS unintentionally revolutionized the American movie-going experience. Credited to the then new Joe Kubert School, this sure looks to me as though it's done by DC's ace war artist himself. The off-model Darth Vader was more than likely drawn that way on purpose as the ad states that the Sith Lord costume consists of mask and cape (with hood, perhaps?) After all, you don't want the kids expecting a helmet when all you're sending them for their hard-earned GRIT-selling money is a cheap mask and a thin cape with a hood. If this is a legitimate ad, and it almost appears to be in spite of the lack of any 20th Century Fox trademark indicators, why then is the lightsaber referred to as a SST Lazar (sic) Sword?


  1. I remember seeing another Star Wars ad with Luke/Leia in the famous poster pose which looked exactly like Joe Kubert's work (or is this common knowledge anyway?)

    I had an official Star Wars lightsaber in the early 80s and can remember proudly swinging it around my front room the day I received it, with all the curtains closed so it was properly lit up. It broke later that day.

    It was rubbish.

  2. Anonymous1:27 PM

    This is something that has been bugging me for years, I always thought alot of the ads in the old Marvel and DC comics that were selling super hero themed toys (like Mego dolls) looked like sloppy, rushed Kubert art.
    I assumed these might have been extra work assigned to students who attended his school.

  3. Anonymous7:15 PM

    In retrospect, I believe the whole "Star Wars" 'revolution' has been a disappointing sham. Talk about revisionist history, political correctness and double-dealing. The 'Force' is a farce. CGI my arse!

    George Lucas is a rich, rich man. That is all that matters.

    No wonder most movies suck so much today.

  4. I never said that STAR WARS revolutionized movies. If you look, you'll see that I said it revolutionized the American movie-going experience. Before SW, you could go in in the middle, then sit through the picture until you got to the point where you came in. After, with SW getting major repeat business, this practice was quickly dropped in the hopes of increasing income from other features in the same manner.I feel that SW and the huge budget "summer movies" it spawned helped speed the growth of impersonal, out of town multiplexes and geared most mainstream movies toward a certain demographic ever since. I don't necessarily LIKE all these changes (although I love the first STAR WARS) but it's hard to deny a revolution came out of it. Thanks for your comment.

  5. Anonymous9:40 PM

    I sincerely apologize if my comments came out in such a harsh manner.

    I meant no no knock against you, and am in agreement with you about the changes in the business model that have followed in the wake of the first SW.

    Again, I am sorry if you thought my remarks were at all directed towards you.

  6. Anonymous10:26 PM

    Oh, and sorry I veered so far off of what you had said in your post.

  7. Hey, not a problem, Jim. No need for apologies at all. I was just clarifying in case my point had gotten lost. To some extent, I agree with YOUR point!

  8. Anonymous3:03 PM

    I had an SST Lazar Sword - as I recall, it was one of several unlicensed lightsaber knockoffs that did not use the Star Wars name (but were obviously meant to appeal to undiscriminating Star Wars-obsessed kids like me). I don't remember who made it, though.

    Thanks for dredging up some great memories!