.jpg) |
| Images copyright relevant and respective owners |
I don't know about you, but when I buy a facsimile edition of a comicbook, I don't expect (nor do I want) footnotes from publishers prominently posturing in a politically 'correct' way and thereby compromising a mag's historical 'integrity'. Look at that caption under the splash atop the indicia in the above example - no, Marvel, no! The 2019 facsimile didn't have it, so why does the 2023 version need it? Newsflash! It doesn't, and I just wish Marvel (and anyone else) would cease trying to convert us to whatever the current woke fashion in thinking happens to be.
Hitherto, Marvel have trumped DC in (at least) one important way with their facsimiles, and that's with the reproduction quality of the ads. In most cases, DC scan their ads from published comics of the past, and they look faded and just a bit rough, whereas Marvel (and don't ask me how they do it) usually manage to reproduce their ads in such a way as to make them look brand-spanking new and as sharp as they first appeared. In the recent facsimile of The Flash #105, the ads have curved corners in some instances, indicating that they were either scanned from a comic with spine roll, or a bound volume, but DC need to do better in this department.
Having said that, look below at the same ad from a recent DC facsimile compared to a Marvel one; surprisingly, the DC example is of a much higher quality than Marvel's, so at least DC is improving and may yet overtake their rival's replica editions when it comes to the reproduction quality of the adverts. Anyway, thought you might like to see the covers of some more recent facsimiles from the top two comics publishers so feast your eyes, effendis! And if you have any thoughts and observations you'd like to share with your fellow Crivs, feel entirely free to do so in the comments section.
Marvel facsimile ad DC facsimile ad
.jpg)
.jpg) |
| The new 2024 printing - it was also published in 2021 with the original 12c cover price |
.jpg) |
| The 2023 printing - it was also published in 2019 (when it was only $4.99) |
.jpg) |
| Click to enlarge, then click again for optimum size |
9 comments:
Incidentally, I'm every bit as miffed by them not always including the 'Continued After Next Page' line before the ads, and them deleting the Comics Code box from the cover - as they've done with GS X-Men #1, Hulk #1, and Amazing Fantasy #15 (and maybe others). It diminishes the evocation of the period when they make arbitrary changes like that.
Nothing to say on Andrew May's blog, Kid? The place isn't the same without you!
I've not been leaving any comments on a few blogs for a while, CJ, as it's hard enough churning out the occasional post for my own. I'm now categorised as disabled and my energy levels are particularly low-to-non-existent, plus I'm still trying to get a care home to do its job properly and I'm just about dead with the hassle of it all. Besides, I got the impression that AM was beginning to find my comments annoying so he'll likely be enjoying a rest from them.
Sorry to hear about your health problems, Kid, and your troubles with that care home which I recall you mentioning previously (didn't you plan to speak to a newspaper reporter about it?) but you're wrong about Andrew being annoyed with your comments - in fact his latest post includes something he'd hoped would interest you as it mentions (well, sort of) a character from the '60s Wham! comic. Anyway Andrew is planning a break from blogging for a few weeks to catch up on other things.
Yes, did speak to a newspaper about the situation and they contacted the care home who declined to comment. The paper ran the story anyway, but nothing much has improved. The home couldn't organise an orgy in a brothel and it's wearing me down at a time I don't have the energy to devote to it. The stories I could tell you...
What "negative content" are they talking about in the first place? All I can imagine is that someone thought that Marvel would get blowback if one or more of the POC characters wasn't a 100% nice guy? But so what if Thunderbird and Sunfire were a little snotty? That made them more real to me, and such minor faults didn't make them less heroic. Maybe someone didn't like Thunderbird wearing a feather in his hair? What a bunch of losers work for Marvel these days.
Considering the bad guys in '60s Marvel were the 'Reds', are these stories now going to carry such notices whenever they're reprinted? The world gets crazier and crazier, GP. I'm not so much against such 'advisements' in collected editions if they're discreet at the bottom of publishers' info pages (in small print), but not when it comes to facsimile editions where they're plastered over the art. (As in the case of Tales Of Suspense #39). When will the madness end?
Your reportage on this politically correct facsimile dovetailed perfectly with an essay I wanted to write about the general topic of appropriation, just finished here:
https://arche-arc.blogspot.com/2024/05/the-appropriation-hustle-pt-3.html
With a link to this post, of course.
Had a read of it, GP, extremely interesting. I'll leave a comment when I've mulled over it for a while.
Post a Comment