Monday, 27 March 2017


All hail the magnificence of the stunning
JESSICA ALBA.  Think I'll use her legs as
a tunnel and push my diecast DINKY cars
through them.  Just stand right where you
are Jessica, while I go and fetch them.

(And doesn't Jessica do a good
Cote de Pablo impersonation.)


Images copyright DC COMICS

It was meant to be an ongoing series, but it lasted for only three
issues, making it easy for interested Criv-ites to obtain a complete
run to add to their comics collection.  You've already seen #s 1 &
3, so here's the middle ish for you to paste your peepers 'pon.

No, don't thank me - it's all part of the (free) service.

Sunday, 26 March 2017


for cripes' sake.  You think we're all perverts 'round
here or something?  Sybil Fawlty - huh!  ('Though
now that I think about it...)

Saturday, 25 March 2017


Image copyright MARVEL COMICS

Here's a good one for you.  You come home from
work one day to find that your wife has given away your
prized comic that you've had since childhood to the Church
jumble sale, which is on the following afternoon.  Next day
(after checking on your wife in hospital), you rush down to
the sale the second it opens to buy back your treasured
periodical, but when you get there, guess what?

There's another issue of the same comic, but in almost
pristine condition, whereas your own is really rather tatty.
You have only just enough to buy one or the other, as you've
only got £2 on you (yours costs 50p, the other is £2), and
a snotty kid is beginning to show an interest in them from
further down the table so you'll have to move fast.

Neither copy is worth much on the collectors'
market, the comic is only of sentimental value to you,
and that pristine issue reminds you just as much of your
childhood as your battered old copy.  So have a think
and then tell me - which one would you buy?


Kind of chilly to be going out like that, JEN.
Better throw on some proper clothes before you
go and fetch me my morning paper and bacon
buttie.  Hurry back now, luv, I'm starving.


Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

There's no messing about on this blog - here's part two of
our FURY cover gallery, so that you can all gape at CARLOS
EZQUERRA's action-packed artwork.  Little did I realise when
I was buying these comics back in 1977 that just 8 years later I'd
be lettering his STRONTIUM DOG strip in 2000 A.D., which
was only a few weeks old when Fury first went on sale.  It's a
small world, eh?  Right, let's go!

Friday, 24 March 2017


Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

FURY was an odd mag for MARVEL, in that it tried to emulate
the appeal of rival weeklies like VICTOR, HOTSPUR and BATTLE,
and steal a slice of the U.K. war comics market for itself.  It never really
caught on 'though, consisting of a hodgepodge of reprints from Marvel's
back-catalogue of various war-themed stories, and lasted for a mere 25
issues before being merged into MWOM (And take two demerits if
you don't know what those initials stand for.)  On the plus side, from
issue #3, the covers were drawn by CARLOS EZQUERRA, so
let's look at the first 'dirty dozen' of them right now!


Until a few years ago, a handful of JAJ/PYREX cups,
like the one in the photo, used to reside in a cupboard in the
kitchen.  I think they occupied a kitchen cupboard in just about
every house I've ever lived in, but I associate them with two in
particular - this and the previous one.  At some indeterminate
stage they disappeared (given, I suspect, to a relative), but
I recently acquired a replacement set on eBay.

Just looking at them brings my childhood back to me in
a rush, and I'm once again a 10 year old boy in the kitchen
of the house I lived in at the time;  or a 14 year old teenager in
the home I currently occupy.  It's almost a mystical thing, this
sense of 'time-travel' on such occasions, and I'm sometimes
amazed at how even one item can conjure up memories
of entire periods of one's past life to mind.

So I've had a cup of tea in one of my 'new' cups, and
lingered in yesteryear for a spell.  Is there any specific item
from your youth that you'd like to have again, to help recall
a particular period in your life with a keenness and clarity
that, somehow, only a tangible object can bestow?

   The comments section awaits.    


JOLENE BLALOCH smoulders sultrily
on the stairs, getting in my way as I rush up to
the loo.  Later, Jolene, later - turtle's head
we're talking about here, lass - so move!


Images copyright DC COMICS

Well, I said I would and now I have.  At least in part, in that
here's the first issue of DC's The MASTERWORKS SERIES
Of GREAT COMIC BOOK ARTISTS, featuring the artwork of
FRANK FRAZETTA.  The second issue likewise showcases FF's
work, and it'll be appearing here fairly soon - on CRIVENS!, ab-
solutely the best blog you've ever seen in the last 30 seconds!

Thursday, 23 March 2017


Okay, so here's a question for all of you, prompted by
the previous post.  First of all 'though, let me set the scene.
You're part of a group of six that works for a small business,
and one day someone suggests setting up a Lottery syndicate.
"We'll each pay £12 into it every month in advance, and if
ever there's a winning ticket, we'll split the amount be-
tween us in equal shares."  So that's what you do.

Remember, this syndicate is only open to employees,
not outsiders.  One month you pay in your £12, and a few
days later, you give a fortnight's notice because you're sud-
denly offered a higher paid job elsewhere.  Shortly after, your
former colleagues strike it lucky with a huge Lottery win and
you rub your hands with glee because the ticket was one
of the ones you helped pay for before leaving.

But no!  Your erstwhile colleagues protest that the
winnings are for employees only, and that, as you're no
longer an employee, you're not entitled to any share of the
prize.  "It doesn't matter that you were an employee at the
time the winning ticket was bought, fact is, you're not any
more so you're entitled to Jack Squat" they all say in a
smug manner.  "Employees only" they repeat.

Now, if you've even an ounce of sense about you,
I'm sure you can see the flaw in the argument of the lucky
but greedy winners.  If you're an employee at the time when
what later becomes the winning ticket was purchased, because
you contributed to it, you're entitled to your fair share of the
proceeds from it.  That's pretty much the same scenario I out-
lined in my previous post, so the same principle surely ap-
plies in both cases.  To suggest anything else is simply
absurd in my not-so-humble view.

Furthermore, if the ticket came up trumps before
you left your old job, but the syndicate wasn't awarded
its winnings 'til several weeks after you'd left, we wouldn't
be having this conversation.  Because it's screamingly obvious
what the fair, right, and proper thing to do is in a case like this.
Namely, give you the share to which you're morally, ethically,
and even legally entitled (unless previously established to
the contrary in the agreed and accepted terms and condi-
tions under which you worked), and cut the spurious
cr*p that you're no longer entitled to it.

The date of the prize presentation ceremony isn't at
all relevant in the matter of entitlement - only the point in
time when the prize was won is what counts at the end of
the day.  The presentation merely celebrates the already
acknowledged fact of the winner's right to the prize.

Your honour, I rest my case.

So here's the question:  do you consider the Lottery
syndicate to be correct in their reasoning, and, if so, do
you think you'd share their view if you were the former
employee?  The comments section awaits.

  (And waits...c'mon, Criv-ites, let's play.)  


I once knew a woman who feigned friendship with me
so that I'd help out in the little shop she ran.  If a man has a
weakness, it's to feel needed and appreciated by the so-called
'fairer sex', and many a man has been duped by such 'womanly'
wiles.  She was forever proclaiming what a lot she thought of me,
and wanting to hug and kiss me, and overwhelm me with her 'fem-
inine charms'.  It was obvious that this was only to make me more
amenable to her bidding whenever she wanted to use me in some
way, but don't get the wrong idea;  the friendship was merely
platonic, as she was a bit of a tomboy with some disgust-
ing habits that turned my stomach on occasion.

While I was in the shop for six months on my own, I
was visited by a 'mystery shopper', and as a result of my at-
tentive customer relations technique and charming manly-man
manners, I won a prize.  It was £100 worth of gift vouchers and
a bottle of champagne (or cheap equivalent), plus a certificate of
achievement to hang in the shop.  For some reason I now forget,
there was a delay in the presentation, and I'd left the shop's em-
ploy before the prizes were belatedly awarded to the winners.
However, there was a prior agreement between me and my
colleague to split the vouchers, with her also getting
the bottle of champers as I don't drink.

Thing is, she told me I wasn't getting my half as I'd
left the shop before the presentation, and, in her view, the
prize was for the shop, not the person who'd won it.  This of
course was total nonsense, as it had been my sole efforts which
had secured the privilege and plunder, with me being specifically
mentioned (not named, but described) in the mystery shopper's
assessment of why both I and the shop were considered worthy
of reward and award.  It was the equivalent of telling me that
because I'd left the shop's employ before payday, I wasn't
entitled to wages I'd earned before leaving.  Not that
she did that, but, logically, it's the same thing.

So I was robbed of £50 - by a so-called 'friend', who,
once I was of no further use to her, pretty much abandoned
any pretence of friendship past the most superficial of nods in
its direction.  You all know your bold host isn't the sort of per-
son to tolerate such an injustice lying down 'though, and without
going into the specifics, I made sure her act of theft (for such it
was) did not go unpunished in some (legal) way.  She was a liar,
a thief, a cheat, and a fraud, given to devious manipulation in
pursuit of personal benefit, so she's certainly the type of
'friend' I can easily and happily do without.

Have any of you ever had such a 'friend'?  Feel free
to unburden your soul in our confessional comments sec-
tion.  Go on, spill the beans to your fellow Criv-ites.


Images copyright DC COMICS

I acquired this magnificent tome yesterday (Wednesday - apt,
eh?) - WEDNESDAY COMICS - a collection of the strips which
appeared in the broadsheet of the same name back in 2009.  How-
ever, you don't want to listen to me witter on about it when you can
look at some of the pages contained therein instead, so here you are.
Available from your local FORBIDDEN PLANET and all good
comics shops.  And if your local store is out of stock, I'm sure
they'd be prepared to order you a copy.

Interestingly, the SUPERMAN strip is drawn by artist LEE
BERMEJO, who, as far as I can ascertain, isn't related to LUIS
BERMEJO, who drew JOHNNY FUTURE in U.K. weekly comic
FANTASTIC in the 1960s.  However, it's somehow apt that Luis
drew Johnny Future and Lee drew The Man of Tomorrow,
as according to a certain theory by moi, the two heroes are
related.  Click this link and discover in what way.

However, back to the book for a mo.  As well as the strips
on view here, there's also KAMANDI, DEADMANGREEN
sample pages of PLASTIC MAN and The CREEPER, not
included in the broadsheet.  What's not to like?

Run out and buy one today!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...