YOWZA! PART TEN OF THE TITANS COVER COMPARISONS - FANTASTIC FOUR #98...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Aha, not only has it been redrawn, it's been done so in reverse, just to keep all of us on our toes in regard to FANTASTIC FOUR #98 and THE TITANS #41 - in this, the latest in our series of cover comparisons.  Well, you know the drill by now - if you'd like to air your thoughts, theories, or observations on these two images, then our comments section awaits your input.  Why not avail yourself of its facilities and share your wisdom with Crivendom? 

BABE OF THE DAY - JANE RUSSELL...

Stunning good looks, sheer

class, elegance, and sophistication.  But

hey - that's enough about me!!  JANE

RUSSELL ain't too bad either.

RUPERT ENDPAPERS BY JOHN HARROLD...

Copyright EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS & DREAMWORKS DISTRIBUTION Ltd

Back in the late 1980s when I was freelancing for IPC, sometimes when I was in the main post office sending off work to London, the assistants would enquire of me (on sighting the name 'EAGLE' or 'WHIZZER & CHIPS' or '2000 A.D.' [or whatever] on the package of artwork I was posting) "Do you know the RUPERT BEAR artist?"  The first time it happened I assumed they just thought that anyone involved in comics must know one another, but after a short while they explained that artist JOHN HARROLD posted his Rupert strips from the very same post office.  Turned out that he lived in my home town, just a short walk down the road from me.

Eventually, while in Glasgow one day, I was introduced to Rupert's illustrator in AKA BOOKS & COMICS by comics fan and historian JOHN McSHANE, and we both later found ourselves sharing the same train carriage back home.  He invited me to drop in for a cuppa and chat some time, and repeated his invitation whenever we ran into one another, but I was always busy with work back then and never got around to taking him up on his kind offer.  Eventually, John moved down to England somewhere, and then to Paris, and I've no idea what he does now as he no longer draws Rupert, and hasn't for a long time.

However, one of his endpapers from an earlier Annual is reprinted (or so I assume - maybe it's new) in this year's Rupert book (along with a couple of his strips), and I thought you might like to see it.  Maybe I should put in a bit of time and effort and digitally remove the spine-line down the middle, but why should I always do all the work?  I'm sure if you all try hard enough, you can imagine it isn't there.  Very evocative, eh?  (Oh, go on then - I've included a line-free version below.)

Incidentally, this 2018 Annual's contents are all reprints from earlier books, going right back to 1939, including strips by ALFRED BESTALL, so it's a nice little collectors' item.  I've no idea if this is a 'one-off' event, or whether the books have been all reprints for a while now, but perhaps a knowledgeable 'Crivens!' reader can enlighten me?  Ta muchly.

Enjoy!  Did you read Rupert as a kid?  Let's be having your reminiscences in the comments section.

RUPERT HAS A DANDY TIME AT THE BEANO ANNUAL EVENT...

Copyright EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS & DREAMWORKS DISTRIBUTION Ltd

Managed to pick myself up a few bargain books the other day, which surprised me, because I thought there'd be none left in the shops.  All four books cost me a grand total of £6.96, averaging £1.44 per book.  (If I'd had to pay full price, they'd have cost £38.96, so that's a saving of £32.)  In the case of The BEANO and the RUPERT Annual, they were the very last ones in their respective shops, so had I wandered in a mere half-hour later, they might well have been gone.  What, if any, Annuals did you get for 2018, readers, and how many years have you been getting them?  Go on, don't be shy now - give us their names.

Copyright D.C. THOMSON & Co., Ltd

BABE OF THE DAY - RAQUEL WELCH...

Ravishing RAQUEL WELCH

shows how to be amazing without even

trying.  Few people have mastered this art,

Raquel and myself being two of them.  Yes,

she considers my humble self ravishing also,

and that's good enough for me.  (You think

it's easy writing this p*sh?  Give it a try

sometime.  It's moider!)

THE TITANS COVER COMPARISONS PART NINE - FANTASTIC FOUR #96...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

"Hell's bells!  Is there no end to this cover comparisons series?" you may be asking.  Well, to be honest, no - not quite yet.  Isn't it fascinating though, to see these covers 'side-by-side' (you know what I mean) and see where they match and where they deviate.  I think that in some cases, even if you'd once owned the US issues, you'd probably have just assumed that the 'new' covers were simply rearranged layouts of the originals, not completely redrawn versions.  Unless you were a die-hard KIRBY fan, you'd really need to see them both at the same time to spot the differences between them - and that's the purpose of these palpitating posts.  So here you are - FANTASTIC FOUR #96 and The TITANS #39 - have fun looking.    

COME IN NUMBER 3, YOUR TIME IS UP - MAJOR MATT MASON'S MOON SUIT...

Around 25 years or more ago, I bought an unopened blister pack of MATTEL's 'Man In Space' MAJOR MATT MASON's Moon Suit from a UK toy dealer.  The suit was in pristine condition, never having been played with - so what did I do?  I promptly (though carefully) opened it and put it on display, and you've probably seen it in photos I've posted over the years of some of my collection.  However, contact with the air gradually decayed the 'rubber' arms until they just dried up and disintegrated, leaving Matt's nifty wee protective space shell bereft of its flexible appendages.

In the past, some enterprising folks have manufactured and sold replacement arms for the Moon Suit, but no one seems to be doing so currently, placing me in the position of having to make my own.  I haven't tested them to see if they work like the originals, but I doubt it because the rubber is quite heavy.  However, they're mainly for cosmetic purposes so that I can have the suit on display in my room and until I can secure 'proper' replacements.  Doesn't look too bad though, does it?

Did you have Matt Mason when you were a kid, readers, and any of his accessories like the Moon Suit?  Relive your childhood in the comments section.

Update: Finally managed to track down a pair of replacement arms.  That's them below, attached to the same Moon Suit in the first photograph.  Nifty, eh?  They're not as thin as the originals and don't operate in the same way, but they'll last a lot longer, and are mainly for cosmetic display purposes anyway, not playing with.

CAN YOU SPOT THE CLUE WITH ZIP NOLAN?

Copyright REBELLION

I'd be 'LION' to you (ho-ho) if I said the following ZIP NOLAN strip is the pinnacle of perfect reproduction, 'cos it certainly isn't.  However, I've tried to compensate for the faint line work by digitally enhancing a few spots where it was particularly bad, but there's a limit to what I can do short of printing out the pages and drawing over the 'ghostie' parts.  This is the way it appeared in the 1980 Lion Holiday Special, so they must've used an extremely poor source for these reprinted pages - obviously they'd have been much sharper when they were first published in the weekly periodical.  Anyway, it's either these scans or you don't get to read them at all I'm afraid, so you'll have to be thankful for small mercies.  

WOW! PART EIGHT OF THE TITANS COVER COMPARISONS - FANTASTIC FOUR #95...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

And here we go again with another entry in our cover comparison series, this time FANTASTIC FOUR #95 and The TITANS #38.  This one actually works quite well, with no obvious drawback to the different dimensions of the new version.  At least, that's what I think - you may have another opinion entirely.  Tell you what, why don't you share it with the rest of us?  Go on - you know you want to.

BABE OF THE DAY - JULIE EGE...

Well, when in Rome, do as the romans

do.  Budge up, JULIE, and make room for

 me on that couch.  I could do with a kip.

KID KLASSICS: MORE LOOPY LAPSES IN LOGIC...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS.  Cover art JACK KIRBY

Over on Amiable Al's MARVEL In The SILVER AGE blog, the debonair host talks about a certain romance artist's one-off superhero tale back in the '60s.  It reminded me that I'd once turned my attention to that very issue (back in 2011) and it occurs to me that now would be the perfect time to resurrect my post for another outing.  Be sure to jump over to MITSA (by clicking this link) and read that post too, as it's extremely detailed and interesting.

******

To many (if not all) mighty MARVEL readers, by far the worst THOR story ever drawn was most likely JOURNEY Into MYSTERY #90's 'The CARBON COPY MAN!' (March '63), illustrated by AL HARTLEY.  Apparently Al was mainly a romance artist who was pinch-hitting for KIRBY, who drew almost everything else that Marvel was publishing at that time, superhero-wise.  (With the exception of SPIDER-MAN.)

It probably is the worst Thor adventure ever to appear, but for reasons other than just the art - like the plot for example.  Basically, it's a re-working of FANTASTIC FOUR #2's 'The SKRULLS From OUTER SPACE' storyline, but without the hypnotism angle at the end.  (The Skrulls transformed themselves into cows, and were then hypnotized by REED RICHARDS to prevent them from thinking of changing back to Skrulls again.)

A bunch of evil aliens from the planet XARTA land on Earth and impersonate key figures in government, with the intention of making foolish laws which will throw citizens into a state of confusion and panic.  (Isn't that what most politicians do anyway?)  Apparently this will soften up the planet enough to leave it vulnerable to invasion.  They've chosen America as the first stage in the pursuance of this plan, with the intention of conquering the rest of the world when the good ol' U.S. of A. has fallen.  (Always pays to get in a bit of practice first.)



A perfect duplicate?  Betcha he can't turn into THOR though, huh?

Thor eventually defeats the aliens in combat, then commands them to transform into trees, on the grounds that, as the Xartans take on all the traits of whatever they impersonate, and as trees can't think, the idea of changing can never occur to them. Er, how's that again?

Firstly, Thor couldn't possibly know whether this was true or not, and secondly, on what system of logic is he basing his assumption?  For example, if Xartans take on ALL the traits of whatever they impersonate, they surely wouldn't have been able to change back from human form (regardless of whether the idea could occur to them) - because humans CAN'T DO THAT.

See, that's the fly in the ointment - taking on ALL the traits of whoever or whatever they impersonate.  They've already demonstrated that they DON'T.  They merely mimic the outward physical appearance of whatever form they adopt, not the intellectual or mental limitations of that form - so they should be able to change back to Xartans any time they wanted, whatever shape they happened to be.

Gosh!  Some of those classic tales from yesteryear sure don't stand up to scrutiny.  (Or am I just being too pernickety?)  But what the heck!  They were fun.

For more Loopy Lapses in Logic, click here.

THE TITANS COVER COMPARISONS PART SEVEN - FANTASTIC FOUR #94...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Anybody tired of this series yet or do you still want to see more?  While you're making up your minds, take a look at FANTASTIC FOUR #94, then compare it with The TITANS #37 - whaddya think, frantic ones, does the copy cut the mustard?  (Right now you're probably thinking "Hah, Kid has made a mistake - it's 'cut muster' or 'pass muster' - though the definite article [that's the word 'the'] is sometimes also included.")  Actually, you're misinformed - 'cut the mustard' is a legitimate expression in its own right, and, contrary to what used to be believed, does not derive from the 'muster' saying.  (So who said this blog isn't educational and informative?)

Right, English lesson now over, back to the comics.  Let's hear your views on just how well (or not) you think the copyist has done.  You never know, he might be reading this and appreciate your observations.

REMEMBERING THE COVER OF THE MIGHTY WORLD OF MARVEL #2...

Image copyright MARVEL COMICS

So why the cover of The MIGHTY WORLD Of MARVEL #2 at this moment in time?  It's another one that came down from the wall (in the early hours of this morning) after being there for almost 30 years.  It was faded, rippled, discoloured, and decayed, and the time had come to replace it.  Surprisingly, the area of wallpaper behind the cover was bright and new, revealing my suspicion that the page's condition was caused by dampness coming through the wall to be mistaken.  The effects of entropy had been caused from inside my room, and I realise now that it's probably down to me not opening my window often enough.  That's because the room is the coldest in the house, being an end one at the front which catches Caledonia's inclement elements more severely than the others.

Anyway, it's now been replaced with a bright new doppelganger, freshly printed out specifically for the purpose of filling the space on the wall.  I've printed it on card, so hopefully it'll last longer than its predecessor, which was given a traditional 'Viking funeral' after its many years of loyal service.  So all that remains for me to say is...

"Make Mine Marvel!"

CRIKEY! PART SIX OF THE TITANS COVER COMPARISONS - FANTASTIC FOUR #93...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Once again, Happy New Year to all you cavortin' Criv-ites.  2018, eh?  Seems like only last week to me that it was 1968.  Anyway, here we are with yet another in our series of cover comparisons, this time FANTASTIC FOUR #93 and The TITANS #35.  There's no doubt that the landscape format restricted the impact of the cover artwork, but it's a valiant attempt to emulate JACK KIRBY - even if it isn't quite in the same class.

When you think about it, the landscape idea was a strange one in that it used up more material than a standard weekly comic, wasn't entirely popular with newsagents, and as I said, restricted what could be done with the cover image.  On the plus side though, it gave readers value for money, and its difference probably generated more attention than a standard comic.  (For a while at least.)

Did you buy The Titans back in the day?  If so, what did you think of MARVEL's 'sideways' comic?  Do tell.

BABE OF THE DAY - IMOGEN HASSALL...

Here's the lovely-looking IMOGEN

HASSALL looking, er - lovely.  So, does

exactly what it says on the tin then.  (No, I

don't know what I'm talking about either.

Let's just pretend that we do though.)

OBSERVATIONS ON 'COINCIDENCE'...

"Hur, hur!  Fooled 'em all!"

It's annoying that I have to start the New Year still addressing this topic, but I'm simply not prepared to let someone whom I've conclusively demonstrated on past occasions to be a liar get away with his latest disingenuous shenanigans unchallenged.

The facts: This individual recently published a post about how time-consuming scanning comics is and highlighted the fact that all his scans (with the exception of supplied publicity material) are from his own collection.  He has often been quite vociferous in his condemnation of people using scans that aren't theirs.  (And to be fair, if that's how he feels, he's entitled to say so.)  Not long after this, I received a sarcastic 'anonymous' comment to my blog, insinuating that the images I use are not mine, and that I am exploiting not only the hard work of others, but also benefitting from the money they spend on old comics.  Coincidence?  Maybe.

I publish a post about DOCTOR WHO, expressing my belief that the character's recent gender change is not only down to a desperate BBC attempt to be controversial in order to court publicity, but is also motivated by misandry and a feminist agenda.  He then publishes a 'tweet' taking a pop at grumpy old men who use 'phases' (phrases obviously) like 'misandry' and 'feminist agenda' in regard to Doctor Who changing gender.  Coincidence?  Unlikely.

I have on numerous occasions mentioned on my blog that the only two weekly comics to survive from the once vast selection during the (now gone) comic industry's heyday are The BEANO and 2000 A.D.  Not long after his above tweet, he takes another pop at 'grumpy gits' who say that there aren't any British comics apart from The Beano and 2000 A.D.  Incidentally, I have on quite a few occasions humorously described myself as a 'grumpy old git' on my blog.  Coincidence? Don't be silly.

He denies that his comments were in any way about me, although he now concedes that given our past online 'clashes' (all of which were instigated by him), he 'supposes' he can see why I'd think they might have been. And you can bet your entire collection of 1950s EAGLE comics that he knew I would when he made them.  Given that he was openly mocking the very opinions for which I and my blog are well-known, it would be remarkable if the likelihood of such a reaction had never occurred to him.

"But why would he want to stir things up again now?" you ask.  Well, it so happens that he's releasing one of his self-published comics this very month.  Or could the fact that he might benefit from an increased dose of attention and publicity be just... coincidence?  That's a hell of a lot of a coincidences.  And it's a 'coincidence' I actually predicted on this blog the last time he did this sort of thing when he had a comic to sell.

As GOLDFINGER said in the book of the same name: "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence.  The third time it's enemy action."  Yet still he sadly shakes his head as if a great injustice has been heaped upon him by a nasty, grumpy, paranoid 'troll' - while his sycophantic fans, desperate to bathe in the reflected (but faded) Beano glory of a contributor, lap up his every word and nod in eager acceptance of his protestations of innocence.  Not a thinking brain between the lot of them it would seem.

Right, done and dusted.  Anyone who can't (or won't) see the truth simply doesn't want to see it. That's why MICHAEL JACKSON fans still think he was a saint.

Coming next: A post about comics or nostalgia - or maybe even both!

MORE MOWSER ANYONE? THAT MEANS YOU TOO, VICAR... (AT LAST! THE DRUGS ARE KICKIN' IN.)

Image copyright relevant owner

What can I say about MOWSER that I haven't said already?  Loads probably, but even if there weren't, I wouldn't let that stop me.  Mowser was based on MAUSER, the cat of the Duke and Duchess of Marlborough, to whom artist REG PARLETT was distantly related.  He used to spend his weekends at their posh pile, and the humorous antics of their cat inspired him to suggest an idea for a new strip to his FLEETWAY editors, who jumped at the chance and, lo - Mowser was born.

Everything I've just written above on the origins of Mowser is, of course, complete invention on my part, but it sounds so good that it ought to be true, don't you think?

THE TITANS COVER COMPARISONS PART FIVE - FANTASTIC FOUR #91...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Still along for the ride, amigos?  Then let's not waste a second, as we peruse and compare the covers of FANTASTIC FOUR #91 and The TITANS #34.  It's clear that one inspired the other, but rather than being a slavish copy, the latter pays tribute to the former while still having something new about it. Not much point in asking you which version you prefer I suppose, as I guess your answer will be pretty obvious.  However, if you'd like to surprise me, feel entirely free.  The above issue of FF was the second in a four-part tale, considered by many as one of the best sagas of the MARVEL AGE of comics - and I'm one of them.

AND NOW A WORD FROM OUR SPONSOR...

A HAPPY 2018 TO ALL CRIV-ITES. 

(And don't let the b*st*rds grind you down.)