 |
| Copyright DC COMICS |
It sometimes amazes me to realise that I'm still 'completing' collections over half-a-century after 'starting' them (even if I wasn't then aware of it) back when I was a kid. For example, in the '60s I bought Superboy #146 and World's Finest #178, which were the first instalments of two-part continued stories that I never saw completed. What's more, the two issues of each individual title were interrupted by 80-Page Giant reprint numbers totally unconnected to the continued stories. That must've been a 'bummer' at the time for readers eagerly awaiting to find out how each tale concluded.
I don't remember which issue I bought first, nor did I obtain them on the same day; they were probably purchased months apart and not necessarily in sequential order - though the Superboy mag was published a few months before World's Finest. In the UK there often seemed no rhyme or reason as to when US comic mags appeared in newsagents, so it was often 'pot luck' as to what was available to you at any given time. However, I never kept my original issues, but obtained replacements for them quite a number of years ago now, which I've owned far longer than their predecessors.
A few years back, I managed to acquire the wrap-ups to each tale, and Superboy #148 seemed slightly familiar to me. Previously, I'd always believed I'd never read the conclusion, but I found myself wondering if I'd perhaps read it out-of-sequence to the first part in #146. As part two wasn't an obvious 'follow-on' from part one (read them and you'll see just what I mean), if I'd read part two first, I may not have recognised it was a follow-up to part one when I eventually bought and devoured it (figuratively-speaking of course). Not that any of that will be of interest to you, but you know how such mysteries fascinate me.
Anyway, a while back I obtained World's Finest #179 (the Giant reprint ish) and today I received Superboy #147 (again, the Giant reprint ish), which means I now own three sequential issues in a row of each mag, bringing to an end something started way back in the '60s when I was a mere primary school kid. Ah, the sense of achievement that fills my soul! But hold! That's not just what this post is about.
No, check out the cover at the top of this post. Pencilled by Curt Swan, it's actually inked by Neal Adams (McS is sure to pop-up at the echo of that name), but when this issue was reprinted as a 'Replica Edition' some years ago, the cover was redrawn/re-created by Jerry Ordway. That's the cover below, and as you can see there are a few minor differences; mainly, the colours are 'flatter' and don't have the same depth and subtlety of the original. I bought the replica when it was first published (2003), so I've read the stories, but I wanted the 1968 original for the ads and the smell of the paper. (Perv!)
Anyway, all that preamble was mainly an excuse to show you a Neal Adams cover that you may not have realised he was involved with. Sure, Curt Swan pencilled it, but it's still (at least) 50% Adams. Any comments will be most welcome, so don't be shy now!
I have that Superboy 80 pager but had no idea Adams had any involvment in the cover. On a closer look though I can see his style is a bit more evident in the characters flying behind Superboy.
ReplyDeleteI must confess I was also unaware of Adams' involvement until I received the original comic, McS, as I only had the Replica Edition until now and Jerry Ordway's style has mostly negated any hint of Neal. I Googled the original for some information and that's when I learned who the inker was.
ReplyDeleteThe differences between the covers is quite subtle, but the loss of the different flesh tones on the faces does make the whole thing flatter, as you say, Kid. Adams did a lot of the colouring, or at least creation of the colouring guides, for many of the comics he drew in the 1968-1972 period, and IMHO his choice of colours really added to the dynamism of his pencils and inks.
ReplyDeleteThat '3D' style of colouring gave a real boost to the art, B, whether by Adams (or under his direction) or other colourists. Why DC made the Replica Edition so 'flat', colour-wise, is beyond me. If it weren't for that, the fact that the re-created cover is by Ordway and not Swan/Adams would be less apparent.
ReplyDeleteOn a completely different subject - this week is exactly 40 years since I first had a letter printed in the Radio Times, the issue dated July 21st-27th 1984.
ReplyDeleteDon't leave it there, CJ. What did your letter say?
ReplyDeleteKid, I'm sure you remember the long-running programme called Nationwide which was broadcast on weekday evenings? In 1983 it was cancelled and replaced by a new nightly show called 60 Minutes which only lasted for 12 months before it too was cancelled. My letter asked why 60 Minutes had been scrapped when it seemed fine to me.
ReplyDeleteI sure do remember Nationwide, CJ. Michael Barratt, Sue Lawley, and Richard Stilgoe, etc. Were you given an answer as to why 60 minutes was taken off?
ReplyDeleteNo, there was no answer because they didn't know I assume. In December 2014 Radio Times printed a second letter (email) of mine and I've only sent 3 letters in total to RT so that's 2 letters printed out of 3 attempts which is a pretty good success rate.
ReplyDeleteKid, do you remember the BBC2 horror double-bills during the summer months in the '70s and early '80s? I recently watched two horror films on BBC iPlayer called Cat People (1942) and I Walked With A Zombie (1943) and I wondered if either film had ever been featured in those BBC2 double-bills so I did some research and both films had indeed been featured and they'd even been broadcast on two consecutive weeks - Cat People on July 4th 1981 and I Walked With A Zombie on July 11th 1981.
By the way, your comments section now looks different or does it just look different from my laptop for some reason?
Can't remember whether I remember or not, CJ, but it rings a faint bell in memory's belfry. Unless there was a specific title for the double-bills (like STV's 'Don't Watch Alone'), then I may have watched the films without realising they were a regular feature. Yes, my comments section looks different at my end too, don't know why unless it's just Blogger making unnecessary changes again.
ReplyDelete