 |
| Images copyright relevant owner |
So there I was, sometime back in 1981 or '82, sitting in my local cinema (now gone 30 years) watching DRAGONSLAYER. The movie was okay, nothing brilliant, but a pleasant enough way in which to while away an hour-and-a half-or so. I'd bought the MARVEL SUPER SPECIAL MAGAZINE (#20), though I no longer recall with certainty whether I got it before or after seeing the movie, but I think it was before. At some (again forgotten) stage, I got the two issue regular comicbook size versions of the mag, which I still have after all this time.
As for the magazine, at some point in the '80s I inadvertently inflicted some damage on it, so I removed the front cover and used it as a pin-up on my bedroom wall. I have an idea it was while I was still living in my present abode, before my family moved to another house for just over four years, though possibly it happened in our new residence. Then again, it may not have been pressed into service as a poster until we returned to our previous (and my present) home in August 1987. It's hard to remember after all this time, and I must confess that my fading memory sometimes gives me cause for concern. At one time I could recall such trivial details with startling clarity, but no longer, alas. Not with everything anyway. (Update: Old photos of that other room suggest it was there that it became a 'poster'.)
As regular readers will perhaps remember, I've been replacing old, faded, rippled and mottled posters and pin-ups that have adorned my bedroom walls for up to 43 years in some cases, with new, freshly printed replicas. With some, I've scanned the original images and then restored them by means of digital technology, but that can be extremely time-consuming and the results can be variable. With others, I've scanned duplicate editions that were purchased at the same time as the issues I mutilated for use of their covers, and in some instances I've just recently tracked down replacements to scan and print.
Such an example is the issue that sits at the top of this post. A few days ago, I noticed that the Dragonslayer cover on my wall was looking a bit faded, so I removed it, scanned it, tweaked it, and then printed out a fresher copy. However, after affixing it to the wall, I decided to buy a replacement copy of the 1981 magazine to add back to my collection. I got it from QUICKSILVER COMICS and they lived up to their name. I ordered it on Wednesday and it arrived today, so well done them. However, I was surprised at just how colourful and vibrant the cover was, compared to my original cover and even its home-produced enhanced facsimile.
I knew the cover that had been on the wall was faded, but I hadn't realised just how badly until I laid eyes on the mag that arrived today. Take a look for yourself. That's the replacement above, the original I bought back in '81 is below. Well, there was only one thing for it - I immediately scanned the cover of the new mag and printed out a copy to replace the one I put on the wall only two days ago. What a difference it makes. Incidentally, the contents of the mag were illustrated by the recently departed MARIE SEVERIN, so it's good to have it for that fact alone.
The cover (and my memories) may fade with time, but the lustre of the legendary Marie Severin never will.
And in case you were wondering, below is the 'enhanced' copy I made from my original. As you can see, it's still a poor copy in comparison to the almost pristine one which opens the post.
4 comments:
Marvel had some of their top talent working on their movie adaptions at one time: John Buscema drew Labyrinth and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Al Williamson pencilled a beautiful Blade Runner and I believe Gene Colan drew The Deep, as well as Marie Severin on Dragonslayer as you mention, Kid. The film tie-ins seemed to become less prestigious though, and by the 90s seemed to feature less well-known artists- not sure why this was though, maybe sales of comics versions dropped when video tapes became more widely available?
Well, there'll probably be different reasons why people buy a movie adaptation in comicbook form, DS. One person might buy it because it's drawn by his favourite artist, while another might buy it because he loved the movie. Then there's the guy who just loves comics and will buy anything he sees if he can afford it. Of course none of these reasons are mutually exclusive, and some people would fit all three of them. It may well be that they became less popular when videos became more widely available (and less expensive), because some people will always prefer watching the movie to reading it in comic strip form, but some people would want both. For whatever reason though, they probably sold fewer copies of the adaptations, which is perhaps why lesser known artists were then used; Buscema and the other artists you mention would have been on the top page rate, less famous artists would've been cheaper to use, so it was all a matter of keeping the cost down. That, of course, has an effect on sales, because less well-known artists will maybe shift even fewer copies, and from then on in it's a downward spiral.
I barely remember posting my previous comment here, I was half-asleep at the time! Good point about the page rates and a pity that the adaptations seemed to become lesser-regarded as time went on- Jerry Ordway's art on the 1989 Batman adaptation is great.
I often revisit posts on other people's blogs, DS, and am surprised to find a comment from myself that I didn't recall making. Yeah, I've got that Batman adaptation - great art. Why Jerry Ordway isn't being employed more by the main companies these days is beyond me.
Post a Comment