Tuesday 17 July 2018

MIGHTY MARVEL MISTAKES...


Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

When The MIGHTY WORLD Of MARVEL was launched in 1972, pages were slightly resized from their US dimensions to accommodate the weekly periodical, which, I suppose, was using UK comics like VALIANT and LION, etc., as a template.  This meant that panels were trimmed and, where necessary as a result, 'rearranged' a bit.  Above is a page as it appeared in FANTASTIC FOUR #6, and below, as it was presented in MWOM #13.  Take a moment to compare them and see if you can spot a rather glaringly-obvious mistake.
  

See the 3rd panel in the 2nd tier?  It was trimmed (as were the two preceding panels, as well as the 3rd tier) and JOHNNY STORM was moved up a bit, but whoever did it has placed Johnny's hand in front of the tiny 'GRABBER', which now appears larger than it's supposed to in comparison to The TORCH's five digits.  Johnny's hand, of course, should be obscured by the grabber, which would retain the intended perspective.  It would actually take more time and care for whoever 'reworked' the panel to position the hand in front of the grabber than it would to cover the hand, so the mistake is hard to fathom.  It's when I see clumsy alterations like this that I wish the pages had been left alone, as none of the changes were ever an improvement.  Compare the panels side-by-side below.


Just for fun, see if you can come up with a 'NO PRIZE' explanation that would account for Johnny's hand being where it is in the reworked panel.

10 comments:

  1. Johnny has just discovered a power he didn't know he had - as well as being the Human Torch he can also shrink like Ant-Man. For some curious reason this new power never occurred again.

    Do I get a No-Prize?

    ReplyDelete
  2. No - 'cos you haven't explained why he seems to be looking at the grabber while standing in front of it. Next!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Johnny isn't looking at the grabber - he is obviously fascinated by something out of shot that we can't see.

    No-Prize?

    ReplyDelete
  4. No - because you haven't explained why he seems to be standing in front of the grabber when it's supposed to be in front of (and above) him.

    Next!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hmmm. Just what is Ben staring at in that first panel?

    ReplyDelete
  6. He's staring into space, lost in thought, and not seeing Susie's cute blue tights.

    Actually, as to what you're hinting at, I think that might be down to JK's 'flexibility' when it came to the positioning of characters. Ben seems to be off to the side of Susie (towards the reader) at first glance, but the placement of her feet makes it look as if she might be standing directly in front of him. Jack did this kind of elastic composition a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Johnny tried to stop the grabber because it came out and could possibly harm someone so he decided to run front of it, flame on, and try to grab it ( no pun intended) and bring it back from space as fast as he can.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nah, 'cos if he ran in front of it, it would be smaller than him. No 'No-Prize' this time.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Same guy from before, I asked a friend, and he said that Johnny is using his peripheral vision to look at it. While trying to run toward the grabber to stop it. It's getting bigger because it's coming closer as well as Johnny, but Johnny was in front of the gadget to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  10. But the size difference between Johnny and the grabber is still disproportionate. If Johnny is in front of the grabber, he should be much, much bigger than it, yet his hand which is 'in front' of the grabber is much smaller in comparison. Next!

    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.