 |
| Images copyright DC COMICS |
Above, the cover of SUPERMAN'S PAL JIMMY OLSEN #146 as originally inked by MIKE ROYER, and below, the published version, with the Man of Steel's face redrawn by MURPHY ANDERSON. Mike had probably 'fixed' JACK KIRBY's Superman face, as Jack could never get the hair right, but I have to say I prefer the published version. How about the rest of you pantin' Criv-ites?
5 comments:
Murphy Anderson face and Flippa-Dippa's foot! (Oh, and I assume I'm not allowed to have the seven and a half 'p' Thorpe and Porter stamp
Yeah, Murphy's face is better, but I ain't pantin'!
Flippa-Dippa's foot hasn't been redrawn 'though, NB, it was just the wrong colour on the published version. And the price stamp doesn't count because DC didn't do it. Which face did you prefer?
******
Rubbish, JP, all people our age pant. It's part of the job description.
I'd say leave Kirby alone, but fully understand how DC protected Supes' image at that time. I wonder if there's a modern reversal of this practice? When one thinks of Miller's Batman one wonders how that rendition of Batman got published.
I think Kirby benefitted from his work being given a 'polish', NB. Besides, Mike Royer also corrected Kirby's Superman faces because JK could never keep the hairstyle consistent from one panel to another. Supes even looked as if he had a 'comb-over' in some panels (in stats of the original pencils). If you look at the cover in this post, Supes' head is far too low, making him look smaller, whereas Murphy Anderson's 'correction' is better positioned. And you can bet your boots that the Royer-inked head is not exactly as Jack drew it anyway. As for Miller's Batman, well that's supposed to be an older Batman in the future, so that's probably why allowances were made. Anyway, I think DC abandoned any attempts at consistency in characters quite a while back now. Thanks for joining in, NB.
Post a Comment