Sunday, 31 August 2014
Okay, so I lied - about being 'true' I mean. What you're looking at
is a fictional account from the TV CENTURY 21 Annual for 1969
about how the 'newspaper' came into being. It gets its facts wrong from
the start, saying that the first edition rolled off the presses on January
27th 2065 - even 'though its clearly dated January 23rd. Note also
the bit about the periodical being expected to be selling in the same high
numbers in ten years as it did initially - 'though it was highly likely to be
showing signs of falling circulation at the time this piece was written.
So, not much truth about it, but interesting nonetheless. Like to
see more from the TV21 Annuals? Then let me know, pilgrims!
Saturday, 30 August 2014
Posted by Kid at Saturday, August 30, 2014
|Images copyright MARVEL COMICS|
Alas, DONALD DOGFLY makes his last two appearances in this latest The THING Is BIG BEN Cover & Image Gallery. Drawn by HUNT EMERSON, I don't think Donald has appeared anywhere since. It would be interesting to learn who currently owns the copyright, as it would be nice if Hunt could revive the character.
Looking back, the comic wasn't too bad, but the name was a bit naff and the masthead wasn't exactly eye-catching or memorable. It's interesting to speculate as to whether the mag would've enjoyed greater success if it had been called something else - something like, I dunno - POWERHOUSE, or something along those lines.
Now there's an idea! See if you can come up with some good names for U.K. MARVEL mags that might've resonated better with the readers. Go on - you know where the comments section is!
Posted by Kid at Saturday, August 30, 2014
Friday, 29 August 2014
Many years ago, I was on nodding acquaintance with a
girl who was practically the double of actress JACQUELINE
BISSETT (apart from her hair style). If her character was half
as impressive as her looks, then whoever eventually married her
was a very lucky man indeed. That applies to both women,
it goes without saying. (So why did I say it?)
Going by the embarrassing clips I've seen, ALAN MOORE's new film appears to be a low-budget, badly acted and poorly directed piece of amateurish nonsense. I can't see myself rushing out to join the end of a cinema queue to see it any time soon - or buying the DVD. The bearded writer claims that Hollywood "clearly hasn't had an idea in the last two or three decades" and that it can "only recycle things that have already been done, or adapt things from media where they weren't intended as films."
This from a man who has made a career out of recycling other people's characters, and, in many cases, adapting them from books for use in comics. Surely a prime example of adapting something from one medium for use in another for which it wasn't intended? Apparently, according to a recent CHANNEL 4 news item, "Alan Moore...is often described as the best graphic novel writer in history." Presumably by himself, as it's not something I've ever heard said about him. Sure, he's written a few good superhero yarns, but he's also written a pile of dreary, pretentious, self-indulgent p*sh.
I really wish that someone would call a halt to the relentless publicity machine that continually seeks to present Mr. Moore as some kind of literary genius. He isn't. He's an affable enough bloke (when he's not slagging off STAN LEE) who's had his fifteen minutes of fame, but who now seems desperate to prolong his time in the spotlight. Go back to writing comics for teenage boys, Mr. Moore. It's something you can actually do when you have a good editor who isn't afraid to say no to some of your wilder ideas.
Or at the very least, give us all a break from your increasingly silly, self-serving pronouncements.
Thursday, 28 August 2014
|Characters copyright relevant and respective owners|
It seems, looking back through the mystical mists of time, that it was in the small hours of the morning when my father woke me to present me with the first issue of a new comic that had just come out. In actuality, it was probably only around 10 o'clock at night after he'd come home from work, and he'd no doubt purchased the periodical from a shop earlier in the day, or from a street vendor after finishing his shift. I'm not sure why he didn't simply wait until morning to announce its pro-curement - it's almost as if he was as excited by the comic as he expected me to be.
I could see it was really a comic for girls, but expressed delight on receiving it so as not to disappoint him. And perhaps I was even delighted to a degree - after all, it was a new number one. Perhaps he'd recognised the FAB 1 Rolls from THUNDERBIRDS, or saw the name of The MAN From U.N.C.L.E. on the cover and assumed it was for boys, but I'm unsure whether I ever bought another issue (though perhaps I did). I do recall though, my brother almost having a fit some months later when my mother embarrassed him by asking if he wanted 'Lady Penelope' in a newsagent's while we were looking for a comic to buy.
However, enough of my dreary personal reminiscences - you no doubt have your own memories of this comic if you read it back in the day. (Yeah, I know - your sister bought it - heard it.) So, take a trip back in time to an earlier point in your life, and live again those seemingly more innocent, halcyon days when the world was a bigger, brighter and better place that it often appears today.
On the page below, note that Lady Penelope being an inhabitant of the 21st century is ignored, and she's depicted as a contemporary of characters from the 1960s.
Oh, go on then - you can even have the free gift.
Posted by Kid at Thursday, August 28, 2014
Wednesday, 27 August 2014
|Copyright relevant owner|
Here's a story from the very first FIREBALL XL5 Annual. Curiously, none of the four Annuals by COLLINS had an identifying year on the cover, only a copyright date inside, which may well represent both the issue date and also the year the book was meant for. If so, it would be unlike most (but not all) Annuals, which are traditionally copyright dated the year before the one on the cover. Fireball was first broadcast on U.K. TV on October 28th 1962 until October 27th the following year (there must have been a break in the run as there were only 39 episodes), so it would've made sense to release the first Annual while the show was still 'hot' on TV, in order to capitalise on children's interest in it. If anyone knows for sure, I'd appreciate you letting me know.
The art is either by EDDIE PAUL or GERRY EMBLETON - if you can identify which one it is, feel entirely free to demonstrate your superior knowledge in the comments section.
Posted by Kid at Wednesday, August 27, 2014