 |
| Images copyright MARVEL COMICS |
It might sometimes seem like it takes forever, but I eventually get around to things I said I'd do - and this is one of them. So, at last, here's part three of the TALES Of SUSPENSE Cover Gallery for you to paste your pulsating peepers 'pon. We'll start with issue #59, in which the mighty CAPTAIN AMERICA received his own series. I suspect the figures were repositioned to allow for the lettering blurb above Cap's bonce, because he's too low down and far too small in relation to IRON MAN, who's introducing him. Artist JACK KIRBY could sometimes be a little bit elastic with perspective, but this time it may not have been his fault. Anyway, enjoy these 5 covers and keep an eye out for the next instalment in this stupendous MARVEL series.
Any reminiscences you'd care to share? Feel free!
17 comments:
I am currently reading the Captain America parts in an Essentials Edition.
The version of his origin is wonderful.
I have almost every panel memorised.
I first read that version of his origin in Captain America King-Size Special #1 around 1972. Yeah, nice!
Iron Man on the second cover looks familiar - that image was used in the Iron Man corner box a few years later, wasn't it ? I always thought that pose looked a bit strange - now I know where it came from. I realize this is total heresy but I wonder how much longer Captain America's origin can be set in World War II - when he was first thawed out from that iceberg it was less than 20 years since 1945 but now it's 70 and the gap gets bigger every year. All the other Marvel characters have to be continually updated - I'm not sure if the current Nick Fury in the comics is white or black but he must be younger than me by now and his WW II Howlin' Commandos days long discarded. Perhaps a completely new origin for Captain America will have to be contemplated at some point. As I said - heresy, but it's just a thought.
I believe it was the same Iron Man image used in the corner box, but it was slightly altered, especially the left arm. I don't really see a need to update Captain America's origin, to be honest, CJ. Whether it's 20 years, 70 years, or 170 years, doesn't make much difference in my view. Captain America deprived of his WWII background would dilute the effectiveness of the character, I feel. Let's just hope there's not another world war anytime soon for Cap's origin to be updated to.
The idea of Steve Rogers as a product of the WWII era, and having trouble adapting to the present time, has become an intrinsic part of the character. I don't know if his origin could be updated without ruining it.
The first Iron Man movie updated his origin, but that's different. Iron Man was always intended to be contemporary. Presumably, if Suspense #39 had been written and published in 2006 instead of the 1960's, Tony Stark would have been injured in Afghanistan instead of Vietnam.
The Captain America movies (wisely, IMHO) kept the WWII background, and had Cap revived in the present time instead of in 1964. I suppose the comics could follow suit if they want to do a retcon or reboot to keep Cap relatively young.
Nick Fury was kept from aging with the Infinity Formula, whatever that is. There was a 1990's Christmas special or annual where he was in a bar muttering about having been a squad leader in WWII, and the other veterans there didn't believe him, because he looked too young.
That's the original version of Fury, the white guy who led the Howlers in WWII. I don't know what Marvel canon is now.
And if Stan had known that the comics would still be around more than half a century later, he probably would not have made Reed Richards and Ben Grimm WWII veterans, either.
There's consistency, and then there's foolish consistency, hence Ralph Waldo Emerson's famous quote "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." I think the reader should be smart enough to realize that, for example, Superman's WWII stories happened because they were written during the war, and the fact that he's still the same age nearly 70 years later is one of those things we ignore about a fictional character. Regard them as "Inaginary Stories" - "What If Superman had lived during WWII?"
As you say 'though, TC, Cap's WWII origin's seem intrinsic to the character (especially with a baddie like the Red Skull), so the time lapse between him being frozen and revived needn't be limited. Of course, in another hundred years, there won't be any bystanders in the strips saying things like "I remember seeing Cap during the WWII!" because everybody who lived through it will be dead by then. (Except the Red Skull of course, who will presumably have partaken of a 'longevity pill'.)
Great covers - I have totally lost any idea of what is happening in the Marvel universe now, I think the Falcon (Sam Wilson) is not Captain America, and Cap (Steve Rogers) is an old frail man but they have kept the WW2 origin (which does not really address how Giant Man , Iron Man know him, not that its important, its onyl a comic book ). As to Nick Fury I haven't a clue what his situation is altohugh I do like both versions as I ve seen the traditional version reently in Avengers comics and the new one in Spiderman etc. And I hear there is a new Hulk soon????
Same as me, McS. Not only have I lost any idea, I've also lost interest. Comics seem aimed at a different kind of reader nowadays. I liked to get my fix in around 15-20 minutes per comic, usually complete in one issue (with continuing subplot), but now it takes around a dozen issues to tell a story. The only one I enjoy at the moment (as previously mentioned) is the Daredevil reprints in MWOM.
Kid this link in entirely unrelated but I think you should post it and ask people - I don't get it! It's about Scotland sort of.....http://dochermes.livejournal.com/2035069.html
Took a look, Phil. I think the joke is that a so-called 'Bypass' takes longer to reach the destination than the route one assumes it was built to shorten. Anyone got any other ideas?
I think it is based on the lyrics to the song "The bonnie bonnie Banks of Loch Lomond" ie " Ye'll tak' the high road and I'll tak the low road and I'll be in Scotland afore ye" ie in the cartoon the high road is 23 miles to Scotland and the low road is 17 miles to Scotland etc
I just didn't get it. I kept thinking is this a joke about Scotland that I'm missing cultural context?
You're most probably right, McScotty, but it's a bit of a weak joke if that's all there is to it. I suppose it could also be making an ironic point about 'bypasses' while, as you suggest, tying in to the song. (That gives it a bit more depth I think.)
******
See, Phil? Education AND entertainment on this blog.
It might be about the ruddy massive new bypass roads works at Hamilton up until Glasgow (9 miles) that last month had a sign saying "Expect delays until May 2017" !!!
The New Yorker tries to be quaint and smart (ar*ed) in their jokes, but this one is not really funny but maybe there was an article it related to that was not include in the blog - possibly about the Independence debate of last year etc
Again, you're probably right, McS. All I know for certain is that something's missing from the equation in order to fully understand it. Either that or it's just a weak joke.
Oh that's right getting to Scotland first! Egad sometimes cartoonists are too smart for us peons but hey a Scotsman didn't get it either so I don't feel so bad now.
But a mere illustration of a line in a song (which I'd imagine most Americans aren't too familiar with) is hardly a joke, Phil, so it surely must be more than that - like some ironic comment on the nature of 'flyovers' or 'bypasses' making journeys longer. If so, then both me and McScotty were right. So what I'm saying is that you should still feel bad because neither option occurred to you. (Hee hee.)
Post a Comment