Monday, 2 June 2014

THE SUPER HEROES COVER & IMAGE GALLERY - PART THREE...

Images copyright DC COMICS

Here we are again with the next part of The SUPER HEROES cover gallery, for which you've all been wishing your very lives away.  Just look at the above image - an absolute stoater, wouldn't you say?  Okay, perhaps it's not clear exactly where the Kryptonian bad guys are aiming their heat vision, but that aside, it's a belter.  One of the best pieces of artwork featuring the late CHRISTOPHER REEVE I've ever seen, as well as being a ruddy good painting in its own right. 

However, that's enough chit-chat from me - I'll let you get on with savouring the iconic images awaiting your attention.  And don't forget to return for part four.  You'd hate to miss it!

















at

8 comments:

  1. John Pitt2 June 2014 at 21:20

    It sure is a belter of a cover, but then again they were ALL good paintings.It's about time this underated mag got the recognition it deserved. Of course I'll be back for the next part - it's like you're giving me them back again!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kid2 June 2014 at 23:20

    Glad you're happy to see them again, JP. The years just fall away when I look at them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown3 June 2014 at 11:56

    Dear Kid. Thanks for posting The Super Heroes I once bought the series but had to sell everything to pay the rent they are sweet and cool and seeing them again brings back the love cause they weren't tinkered with and wrappepin beautiful paintings which you are given fully on the back covers an. Insane trip of a treat. The series was and still is. A joy I'd still buy them again. I emy. look for the day those paintings put in a collection. Oh wait. That s what you're doing. You're an absolute miracle. Thank you very much. I was wondering if you could post a request from one of the stories. In Colour. Superman. Clark Kent Hero Superman Public Enemy. I'd so love to read that again. My fortunate. Gratitude. Forever. Thanks. Still love your Blog.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kid3 June 2014 at 12:09

    Thanks for the kind words, AK. I'm not sure if I've got the colour printing of that particular tale you mention, but if I find that I do, I'll post it just for you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. TC14 July 2014 at 03:16

    I had second-hand copies of #7 and #10 that I bought in a local comic book store in the 1980's. I've no idea how they got from the UK to the US.

    Interestingly, "The Mightiest Team in the World" is reprinted with its original foreword unchanged from its first printing (Superman #76, 1952). When it was reprinted in World's Finest #179 in the late 1960's, the foreword was edited. That is, the statement that Superman and Batman had never met was changed to say that they did not yet know each other's secret identities. That's probably because WF #179 also reprinted another story that had a different version of their first meeting.

    I believe that, from about 1968 through the Bronze Age age, DC canon was that the story in World's Finest #94 was the first time Batman and Superman met, and that "The Mightiest Team in the World" was when they learned each other's secret identities.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kid14 July 2014 at 11:28

    I remember reading about those changes some time back, TC. In fact, it was mentioned in a previous post a couple of years back. Strange, 'though, that DC would have issued two different versions of the same event with no regard for continuity, isn't it? I guess no one was paying much attention at the time and whatever seemed like a good story idea got the go-ahead - even if it contradicted an earlier tale.

    ReplyDelete
  7. TC14 July 2014 at 15:56

    That's very true. In the 1950's, comics were generally bought, read once, and then thrown away. There was little concern for continuity and consistency, because most customers were casual readers, not long-term collectors. And publishers tended to assume (with considerable justification) that the readership turned over completely about every 5-7 years. So a kid buying a comic in 1958 would not know that its story contradicted something published in 1952.

    Similarly, Stan Lee probably figured that it didn't matter if Captain America's revival in Avengers #4 contradicted the postwar issues of Captain America Comics. Later, the market was taken over by collectors who demanded continuity, so Marvel published a retcon explaining that the late 1940's Cap and Bucky were impostors.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Kid14 July 2014 at 16:11

    I think it was easier for Stan to ignore the later '40s Cap tales because they were a bit of a failure, TC. And I'd say that Cap and Bucky were retconned more as officially-sanctioned stand-ins than impostors, but I know what you mean. (I think that was Cap Annual/Special #6.)

    ReplyDelete

ALL ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL BE DELETED UNREAD unless accompanied by a regularly-used and recognized
name. For those without a Google account, use the 'Name/URL' option. All comments are subject to moderation and will
appear only if approved. Remember - no guts, no glory.

I reserve the right to edit comments to remove swearing or blasphemy, and in instances where I consider certain words or
phraseology may cause offence or upset to other commenters.