2025 FACSIMILE EDITION OF THE 2018 FF #1 FACSIMILE EDITION - OR IS IT? (EH?)

2025 Facsimile.  Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Above, is the latest Facsimile Edition of The Fantastic Four #1.  Look at that barcode box in the corner; far too big and intrusive compared to the 2018 edition, below.  Why do Marvel do it?  I'm talking about unnecessarily obscuring part of the cover in this way.  At least with the 2025 edition they've got the date right (November) as opposed to August on the previous version.  I should point out, though, that back in 1961, although the issue was cover-dated November, it actually went on sale in August (8th, I think), and the 2018 incarnation was, I assume, merely reflecting this fact.

2018 Facsimile

At least this time they've included the 'Continued After Next Page' tagline before the ads, which they neglected to do last time.  I also note that although the 2018 facsimile placed the indicia under the ad on the inside front cover (as did the 1961 original), it's now been moved to under the splash page.  Again, why?  Okay, the 2018 indicia had fewer lines than the latest one, but as the 2025 splash page was reduced in size to accommodate it, why couldn't they do likewise with the ad and put the indicia where it should be?  (Seeing as how it's meant to be a 'facsimile'.)

2025 Facsimile

This latest edition doesn't have the 16 extra pages of bonus material that the last one did, which is something I actually approve of as I prefer it to be more like the 1961 printing.  If they'd only reduced that barcode and had the indicia under the ad, the whole comic would've been perfect.  However, there's some good news. The upcoming foil variant cover version has placed the barcode on the back cover (like DC now do) so that's an improvement.  Why Marvel didn't do so with their 'standard' facsimiles is beyond me, but all the mags will likely be reissued again in the future, so we can only hope that then they'll do things right.

2018 Facsimile

I've heard that the barcode is destined for extinction anyway, before too long, so that's something to look forward to if it means its defacement of comicbook covers will soon be a thing of the past.  Anyway, if you want a relatively inexpensive copy of FF #1, despite my observations this is one of the better ones.  Buy it as soon as you can, effendis - you know it makes sense.  And below is an old photo of another issue of #1 in my collection, which is currently tucked away in a safe place, and not at hand for scanning.

BABE Of The DAY - DENISE MILANI...

Would you look at that - Denise Milani

hasn't yet taken down her Christmas tree, the

lazy lass.  Better get to it, Denise, before Easter

is upon us.  Then you'll be too full of chocolate

eggs to want to do anything but sleep.

FRED FLINTSTONE - A SPY-TYPE GUY... (Updated)

Well, Crivs, do I have a treat for you!  No, that isn't a question, it's a statement, as I'm now about to unleash on you the Gold Key comic strip adaptation of The Man Called Flintstone movie from 1966 - including some clips from the film itself.  See if you can spot the plot flaw that suggests that not a lot of thought was put into the story.  Either that or Hanna-Barbera's writers were making some of it up as they went along.  Don't worry if it passes over your head, I'll spell it out at the foot of the post.  Enjoy!

And now - the plot flaw.  As Triple X is the Green Goose, he clearly would've known that Fred was standing in for Rock Slag and therefore be unable to supply him with the information he was looking for.  Which, as he was a government agent himself on the same case, he wouldn't have had to look for as he'd surely have known from the beginning when the Chief gave him his mission instructions.  H-B didn't think it through, did they?

Or maybe they did.  I've just noticed that the Chief introduces Fred to Triple X as Rock Slag, not Flintstone, so maybe X/Goose didn't know that Fred was a stand-in.  However, he still surely would've known the overall details of the case he (Triple X) was on, going on whatever his mission instructions were, and just what info the Chief and Slag were looking for about him.

PART SIXTY-ONE Of FAVOURITE COMICS Of The PAST - AMAZING ADVENTURES #17...

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Around 20-25 years back, an acquaintance gave me a beat-up copy of Amazing Adventures #17.  When I say 'beat up' I mean it, as the cover was hanging off, the spine was rolled, and it had multiple wrinkles.  I only accepted it because I'd once owned the issue back in the early '70s and thought it'd be nice to have again.  The replacement lay neglected for a few years, 'til one day I spruced it up a little to make it slightly more presentable.

It consists of edited-together reprints of back-up tales in the X-Men mags of the '60s, with a new splash page and end page by Jim Starlin, as well as the cover.  Truth to tell, it's hardly a classic, but I remember having it back in the day, so owning it again made that particular period of my life seem not so far away.  However, I always intended to acquire a better condition copy, though the rather extravagant prices some dealers were asking deterred me for a while.

Anyway, I recently saw a very nice condition copy (VF) on eBay for a few paltry quid, so I snapped it up right away, and that's its cover image at the top of the post.  I've also included the first and last pages so you can enjoy Mr. Starlin's complete contribution to this usually (though surprisingly) expensive back issue - unless you get lucky like me.

I have the X-Men Masterworks and Omnibus editions reprinting the original separate tales of which the contents of AA #17 consists, which were rather heavily re-edited and, in some instances, resized in order to fill the required panel dimensions.  The image below shows one panel which was 'drawn up', and as you can see, whoever did it neglected to add Cyclops' body past where the original (and now invisible) lower border line cut it off.  Take a look - Cyclops' torso appears to be floating in mid-air with no visible means of support.  (I haven't checked, but I suspect this may've originally been two panels combined into one.)

Then there's the panel below, where whoever added to it drew The Beast's right foot too small and without any toes.  I don't know why some people don't seem to take pride in their work.  Blowing my own trumpet for a moment, when I resized panels for IPC Pocket Libraries I never stinted in giving them my all, so that the 'joins' were never visible and the added parts looked as if they'd always been there from the start.  Sadly, not everyone has my desire (or skill - laugh if you want) to do things properly.

So yet another Marvel mag has joined my merry throng of comics, and it seems as though it's never been away.  If you had (or still have) this comic, feel free to record your memories or thoughts about it in the comments section.

AND NOW, AN IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT...

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL CRIVVIES EVERYWHERE!

(And Lang May Yer Lums Reek!)

PERCEPTIONS AND PROJECTIONS DEPT - HOW THINGS ARE, OR HOW THINGS SEEM TO BE?

 

Back in 2014, I published a post that received only one comment (in 2015).  Maybe the football was on telly that night, but I thought it was such an interesting subject I'd have another go.  Why don't you lot have a go at leaving a comment this time, cavortin' Crivs?

******

This is going to be a difficult one to express because it's kind of a nebulous concept, but I'm willing to give it a go if you are.  Ready?  Do houses, neighbourhoods and places have a particular 'ambiance' all their own, or does it all depend on the 'eye of the beholder'?

Oh dear, lost your interest already?  I'll persevere.  When I was about 13, the area I lived in had a particular 'feel' about it.  When I moved house in 1972, aged 13 and a half, that 'atmosphere', 'feeling', 'mood' - call it what you will - continued in my new home and street, and I've wondered over the years whether that was something to do with both houses sitting atop a hill.

You see, when I'd come out of either of those houses, I'd stand at the top of a hill and view the horizon in the distance, giving me a feeling of being 'master of all I surveyed'.  As I walked down (literally) either of those streets, the horizon became less visible on the descent, and it's only natural to wonder if my similar experiences of both places is what resulted in my parallel perceptions of them.

Or was it nothing to do with that?  Was it just where I was 'at' in my head at that particular time in my life, and was it me projecting my own subjective perceptions onto both neighbourhoods that accounts for how I regarded them at the time, rather than how they objectively were?  In short, was it how I imagined them rather than how they really were that determined my perceptions?

Had I lived in either of those houses at different times in my life than when I did, perhaps I'd have 'sensed' and responded to those surroundings in another way; perhaps the ambiance, as it appeared to me, would have been different at 19 than it was at 13, who knows?

Perhaps we just 'see', 'sense', 'feel', 'experience', etc., things in particular ways at different times in our lives, irrespective of how things happen to be.  Could it be that we project our own sense of a place onto it, rather than respond to how that place actually is?  All I know is that, these days, whenever I walk down either of the two streets mentioned, although I can remember how things 'used to be', I'm all too painfully aware that they seem different somehow, in ways that I can't fully articulate.

Of course, other contributory factors must be considered, one being that at the foot of the first hill was a school I attended as a boy in the 1960s.  At that time, WHAM! comic was reprinting the adventures of The FANTASTIC FOUR, and on winter afternoons after school I would see the building interiors lit up in the darkness as the cleaners set about their business.

From the top of the second hill (but farther away) I could see another school of a similar design, which, when viewed in the same wintry conditions, reminded me of the school in my previous neighbourhood.  At the time (early '70s), The MIGHTY WORLD Of MARVEL was reprinting those same FF tales, so perhaps the 'deja-vu' type sensation created in my subconscious can hardly be considered surprising.  Then again, maybe not.

   

When we look back on our childhoods much later in life, summers always seem to have been longer, skies bluer, winters whiter, Christmases snowier, etc. - but were they?  Or is it simply the case that's only how we viewed things at the time (or imagined them later), rather than how they actually were?  Time changes all things, alas, but oft-times far too quickly.

Anyone got any thoughts on the matter?  (Presuming, of course, that I managed to express my thoughts in any way resembling a coherent one.)

BABE Of The DAY - DENISE MILANI...

I always make sure the heating is on full

whenever Denise Milani drops in for a visit,

as it doesn't take very long until she gets down

to her underwear to try and cool off a bit.  Am

I a scheming rascal or what, eh?

MARX TOYS IRON MAN... (Updated)

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

I thought I'd shown this Marx Iron Man on my blog before, but I can't find it - though it may be among other toys in a picture of one of my rooms.  I'm posting it now so that McScotty can see it, as he's just posted his own newly acquired one over on his own blog.  So McS, just for you - The Invincible Iron Man, painted by myself.  (Excuse the dust.)  Will you be painting yours?

******

Update: It seems obvious that the Marx figure was based on the pin-up below, which later appeared as an iron-on (no pun intended) transfer in the first issue of Terrific, as well as appearing on the cover.  I forget whether the pin-up was taken from the cover (corner box maybe?) or the interiors of a US mag or just drawn as a pin-up.  Can anyone remind me?

The b&w/grey Marvel Masterwork Pin-Up below is from SMCW #47 in 1974.

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL CRIVVIES...

Hope Santa was nice to you all!

THE MAN CALLED FLINTSTONE (THAT'LL BE FRED THEN)...

Copyright relevant owner

Well I said I would and now I have - show you my Flintstones comicbook adaptation of the 1966 movie that is.  It arrived yesterday from the States, which now means I have both the Yogi Bear and Flintstones film adaptations in comic strip form - so hooray for me!

Trying to get a decent condition copy of the latter can be difficult as well as expensive, but I bought the best (and least costly) one available on eBay, and then administered some tlc to make it look even better.  I've also digitally tweaked the above scan for maximum effect, so perhaps I've cheated a bit, but I wanted you Crivvies to see it at its finest.

The main thing is I've got a secure copy which isn't going to fall apart at the merest handling.  Now, who'd like to see the story contained within?  Then let me know, effendis, and I'll see what I can do.  Oh, and by the way - Merry Christmas!

CORGI REISSUE OF MATTE BLACK BATMOBILE...

Copyright DC COMICS

Back in 1966 when Corgi Toys issued their TV Batmobile, for around the first 6 months it was matte black (according to Corgi, though other sources claim it was only a couple or so).  The photos supplied to Corgi to start the project had a distinct matte finish, but the TV show's producers decided to make the car glossy just before filming began.  When Corgi execs saw the real car (or one of its doubles) while it was on tour in Britain to promote the new show, they realised the error and gave instructions to their Swansea team that the toy's paint job should be amended to gloss, which it was for the rest of its span.

Corgi Model Club have reissued this version of the car as a members only model, though in actuality it's not really matte, but more of a satin finish (as was the '60s toy).  That's my own car, recently received, and I've now lost count of just how many versions of the '66 car I now own.  I know I've got two originals, three gloss reissues, and now the matte/satin reissue as well.  On top of that, I have a Husky version, a Corgi Juniors, several by Mattel (in various scales), at least a couple by Jada, and quite a few by other manufacturers.  Like I say, I've lost count of precisely how many, but it's, well... many!

Anyway, only the matte/satin version is on show today (not any more, see below), but bear in mind my camera's flash may make it look shinier than it really is.  (As of typing I've not yet taken the photos so I don't know how they'll come out.)  However, there's no denying it's a thing of beauty every Batman fan should have, but you can't - unless you join the Corgi Model Club that is.  (Or know someone who's a member who'll buy one for you.)  So what's stopping you?!  Join up right away!  Meanwhile, in answer to a request from B, here are the the matte and gloss versions side-by-side.  Click to enlarge for a better view.

The AUTUMN LEAVES Of RED And GOLD...

Here's a re-presentation of an old pencil sketch from 1980, which I drew standing up whilst looking down at the subject - who, incidentally, was reading my then-brand-new copy of HOW To DRAW COMICS The MARVEL WAY*.  (Which I got autographed by STAN LEE 11 years later.)  However, lazy me couldn't be bothered drawing the cover, so I blacked it out to avoid having to include any unnecessary detail.  And even though I say so myself, it was a perfect likeness and everybody acquainted with him recognised who it was at first glance.

As you see, the chair is low and the subject rather gangly, so because of the angle I was observing from, it looked as if he was too big for the chair.  Perhaps I should've added some background detail to give a better sense of perspective, but I decided it could wait 'til I'd watched some paint dry.  It was drawn on the blank side of computer print-out paper, but I've cleaned it up to hide the lines of digits showing through the sheet.  Not too bad a pic for 10 minutes work.  In the photo below, you can see he was indeed rather lanky and the chair low, just as described.

Anyway, just learned this very afternoon that the subject passed away in September of this year due to issues associated with Alzheimer's, thereby drawing down the curtain on another aspect of my teenage years and mid-'20s.  Although I hadn't spoken with him since 1986 (he and his wife worked abroad for some years and then resided somewhere in England), it's still rather sad to hear of his demise.  Yet another leaf fallen off the tree, alas.  R.I.P. Paul Farrant.

*The book was actually mail-ordered sometime in 1979, but I received a note from Maya Merchandising (I think) saying they were out of stock and had ordered more in.  It was toward the end of '79 or the start of 1980 when I received a card from Royal Mail telling me it was awaiting collection from the main post office.  They must've tried to deliver it when no one was in.