I have been doing a semi-regular column for a few years now, and I tend to talk about comics or creators that I think fans should read or know more about. I seldom write anything negative, because there are so many fantastic comics to talk about.
While I do have opinions on certain things, like which Marvel character could beat the crap out of Superman, fans often have strong opinions that don’t change much. I respect everyone’s opinion and their right to have an opinion. But I think fans should at least understand other sides of something, even if it doesn’t change their opinion, because, like in life, not all things in comic books are black and white.
Last year, I wrote a series of articles on Stan Lee that I turned into a podcast, which examined different sides of complex and controversial issues that fans will argue over for years to come. Yesterday, I delved into another topic regarding possible plagiarism involving Bill Mantlo.
For a little context, I wanted to look at the same topic, but this time with Roy Thomas. For all you Thomas fans, this is not a Thomas attack. I am a big fan of Roy Thomas, and he has often faced criticism for a recent claim—which he receives no money from—about co-creator credit for Wolverine. For a different take, read Forbes’ article, and then Forbes also put out a piece with Wein’s widow, Christine Valada.
Back in 2024, I did two Roy Thomas episodes (which are still fantastic listens!). One, where I talk about how Thomas wrote Star Wars and how that comic saved Marvel from going belly-up. The other was about how what fans think about Thomas might not precisely match what happened. And, it gives a better idea of how Thomas sees things.
Now, did Thomas ever plagiarize? In the other column, on Mantlo, I think I did a fair job of possible things said about him. Still, it feels like apples and oranges to compare Thomas to Mantlo. Thomas has a larger volume of work, but Mantlo’s future was radically changed when, in the early 90s, he was struck by a car that left him needing assisted living care for the rest of his life. Thomas was Stan Lee’s protégé and editor-in-chief at Marvel.
Before going on, there’s a difference between giving homage, swiping, and outright plagiarism. Even Shakespeare was known to “borrow” from sources for his plays. He based Romeo and Juliet chiefly on Arthur Brooke’s 1562 poem, which itself drew on a long lineage of Italian and French tales of tragic young lovers. And let’s not forget the recent musical & Juliet, which doesn’t adapt Romeo and Juliet in any conventional sense. Instead, it deliberately rewrites the story, using Shakespeare’s play as a springboard for a feminist, comedic, pop‑music‑powered alternate timeline.
But I Digress… back to Thomas. The most frequently cited and well‑supported criticism of Roy Thomas’s early Marvel work centers on his very close paraphrasing—or, at times, direct borrowing—from earlier sources, particularly Golden Age comics, pulp fiction, and mythological retellings.
In several stories from the 1960s, his dialogue and narration tracked older texts with unusual fidelity, moving beyond broad influence and into near‑verbatim adaptation. These instances were not concealed; Thomas was openly committed to reviving obscure characters, plots, and forgotten corners of comics history. While this approach drew criticism at the time, it never led to formal disciplinary action.
Unlike Bill Mantlo, Roy Thomas has been formally criticized on the record for specific instances of overly close textual borrowing, particularly in the early stages of his career. The most frequently cited concerns involve direct or near‑direct prose lifting and uncredited adaptations of earlier pulp, fantasy, and Golden Age comic sources.
Thomas himself has acknowledged some of these critiques, framing his approach as consistent with the prevailing Silver Age editorial norms. Part of what makes Thomas a distinctive case is his background: he entered the industry as a scholar‑fan deeply immersed in pulp literature, mythology, and the full sweep of Golden Age comics, and this encyclopedic familiarity shaped both his strengths and the controversies surrounding his early work.
Unlike many creators, Roy Thomas has openly addressed these accusations in interviews, offering several contextual defenses. He has emphasized that comics of the era were produced under extreme deadlines, that editors frequently encouraged the reuse of existing material, and that many of the sources he drew from were widely assumed to be in the public domain. Adaptation, he argues, was simply part of Marvel’s creative DNA at the time. Thomas has also expressed regret about not always providing clearer attribution and noted that industry standards have evolved significantly since the 1960s.
One of my favorite Thomas series was All-Star Squadron, set on Earth-2 during World War II. Some critics often pointed to his heavy reliance on original Golden Age plots and his reuse of earlier story structures with relatively little transformation. Titles such as All-Star Squadron and Infinity, Inc. are frequently cited in this regard. Defenders of Thomas’s approach argue that these were intentionally revivalist projects, designed as acts of historical homage rather than exercises in radical reinvention. Critics, however, maintain that some of these adaptations hewed too closely to their sources without sufficiently explicit acknowledgment.
Again, I am providing some context. I have no opinion on the matter, and, like many creators, I respect Thomas’s contributions to comics. I do think fans need to be careful how they form their opinions and, again, at least have a more well-rounded idea of comic book history.
About Author
