.jpg) |
| Images copyright DC COMICS |
A mixture of Giants, Annuals and Samplers this time around, folks. You can just imagine all the goodies contained in such great magazines, especially the last two. The only thing I don't like about the two DC COMICS PRESENTS titles is that the pages are glossy paper instead of the matte paper used in the the FLASH, BATMAN, and SUPERMAN replica Giants. That aside, the contents of the JACK KIRBY one in particular are good.
One day I'll get around to showing you similar publications of this kind, except next time they'll be originals, not replicas. So remember - don't forget to "Keep up with Crivens!" - you wouldn't want to miss something great.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
6 comments:
Was there anything more ludicrous than Super Baby in full costume and the Legion of Super Pets, all dressed in capes of course! The Teen Titans too were ridiculous with their "kid" versions of everything - when I see this stuff it just makes me think thank god for Stan Lee and Marvel who saved super-hero comics from the total banality of DC, I know that might sound harsh but it's what I believe.
I tend to agree with you about the banality of DC's approach, Col, but that's an adult's perspective - the kids it was designed for would've loved it. Also, it was probably done to protect copyrights. After all, that's why Marvel's She-Hulk was created. But you're spot-on about Stan Lee.
Speaking as a kid of the 60's before I even knew of the existance of Marvel, I LOVED the DC comics and found nothing about them ludicrous iny child's mind.In the late 60's when I discovered Marvel (through Smash ) I was in my early teens so Marvel's more mature storytelling appealed to me more. BUT , I wouldn't have early DC any other way. Looking back that innocence is what appealed to us and turned us into a generation of comic lovers. Had they been as mature as Marvel we might not have gone back for more and may well have missed out on a lifetime of treasures?
You're right, JP, that to a child, DC comics would've seemed perfectly acceptable, but early Marvel wasn't so much 'mature' as just less silly. The DC mags could've been pitched at the same age group as they actually were, but without all the ridiculous super-pets and 'mini-me' versions of the heroes. As I said in my previous comment 'though, that's looking at things from an adult's point of view, not a child's. I think DC tended to 'write down' a bit to their readers, whereas Marvel 'wrote up' to theirs.
(Originally posted on 14 March 2014 at 18:24.)
My impression has always been that Marvel was aiming at a slightly older audience than DC in the Silver Age. Not adults, of course, but maybe teenagers. By the 1970's, DC began emulating Marvel (longer story arcs, more complex plots, more character development). By the 1980's, their house styles were so similar that practically the only difference was the logo on the cover.
-TC
You're not wrong there, TC. Marvel had kind of lost its identity by then, I think.
Post a Comment