A cascading cornucopia of cool comics, crazy cartoons, & classic collectables - plus other completely captivating & occasionally controversial contents. With nostalgic notions, sentimental sighings, wistful wonderings, remorseful ruminations, melancholy musings, rueful reflections, poignant ponderings, & yearnings for yesteryear. (And a few profound perplexities, puzzling paradoxes, & a bevy of big, beautiful, bedazzling, buxom Babes to round it all off.)
Tuesday 24 March 2020
CRIVENS' CLASSIC COMIC COVERS - SUPERMAN #279...
13 comments:
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.
Never had this issue as I think by 1974 I wasn't into Superman comics anymore, which is strange as only a year and a bit earlier (around around 1972/3) I was a massive fan of that comic - strange how things can change in such a short period of time. Saying that I always really liked that cover (Mr Cardy I assume) and would certainly pick it up if I saw it (for a decent price)
ReplyDeleteI suspect, McS, that once Curt Swan's art was no longer being inked by Murphy Anderson, then Superman lost his shine to a lot of readers. Curt was a good solid storyteller, but Murphy was like Joe Sinnott on Jack Kirby's pencils, and great as Curt was, Murphy made him better.
ReplyDeleteOh, and no need to assume in the case of Cardy, McS. He signed the cover and I credited him under it. You're reading this blog on your 'phone again, aren't you?
ReplyDeleteI never though of that but I think your right as I do recall as a kid (teenager)thinking that the art had lost its appeal. As much as Curt Swan was an amazing artist with Anderson they were indeed exceptional
ReplyDeleteDC even had a name for the team - Swanderson. Says it all, eh?
ReplyDeleteWhile i was collecting Comics at the time, mainly American Marvel, i never bothered with DC for some reason, they always seemed inferior to Marvel, well to me at the Time anyway,Weird that, because in recent years I've enjoyed reading DC Especially Superman & Batman 60's & &70's issues more than some of the Marvel ones.
ReplyDeleteThese days, most Marvel and DC comics (with occasional exceptions) don't do much for me, RD. My future collecting will probably consist mainly of old back issues.
ReplyDeleteThat's all i Collect and read, i don't bother with new comics at all.
ReplyDeleteI get the occasional new comic, but it's got to hold the promise of something special. And aren't most covers boring now, being nothing more than pin-ups?
ReplyDeleteI Just Don't Like the computer generated looking Art & Style, There's no Feeling or Soul in it for me, i don't feel like I'm looking at something created by Hand, from a real person.
ReplyDeleteI suppose it depends on who's doing it, RD. I quite like some of the classic stories when they're recoloured as it gives them extra depth, but some are overdone. Same goes for some of the new mags as well.
ReplyDeleteOoo digital coloring . Don’t get me started. I do appreciate cleaned up reprints and bold bright colors of the trade paperbacks, but I’m not a fan of digital re coloring if you know what I mean. good spot blacks give me the effect of shadow and make an image pop. Digital color with its ability to put many shades of blue into Superman’s costume - in fact makes the image more confusing. I’ll try and find and example but I think you know what I mean.
DeleteFrom what I've seen, PS, some computer colouring works better than others. However, I quite liked the recolouring job on Lee & Kirby's Tales Of Asgard strips as it gave them extra depth and made them look 'new'. I've got both versions, old and new, so I don't mind it so much.
ReplyDelete