 |
| Copyright MARVEL COMICS |
I've posted before about the Anniversary of The Mighty World Of Marvel #1 (several times over the years), so I'll spare you a repeat of what I said on those occasions and just show the cover of the comic that hit newsagents' shelves on September 30th 1972 - 53 years ago - to mark the event. Honest, I recall buying it as though it were only yesterday. Did you have this comic back in the day? Then share your memories in the comments section.
26 comments:
I have got this one but no idea how I acquired it. I certainly didn't buy it on the day it came out as I was only 3.
Today is International Rescue Day, the 60th Anniversary of Thunderbirds. I heard that on the radio this morning when I should have been working.
Jumble sale or charity shop maybe? Yeah, I've been receiving emails about the 6oth Anniversary of Thunderbirds for ages now. I won't be buying the Blu-ray or 4K versions as I think the DVDs are as good as they need to be.
Interestingly, Thunderbirds didn't appear in TV21 until January '66, while Lady Penelope's strip appeared right up until then. As she and Parker would've been seen on TV from September '65, I wonder if any kids were confused by their appearance on the show as the Thunderbirds connection hadn't really been spelled out in the strip at that time.
I also still recall where and when I bought MWOM #1. - I also remember how excited I was to get home and read it. So hard to believe it was 53 years ago .
You're telling me, McS. 53 years seemingly gone in a blink of an eye. If only I could say here's to the next 53, but I don't think either of us have that option.
Yeah but we've lived through some great years for comics, music and film.
That we did, McS, but I wish our futures could last a bit longer.
I've mentioned this before, Kid, but it's only because of your blog that I know Marvel characters appeared in British comics in the '60s. Before I discovered Crivens I just took it for granted that MWOM #1 was the first ever appearance of Marvel characters in a British weekly!
Today is the 90th birthday of Julie Andrews and yesterday was the 70th anniversary of James Dean's death.
Well, it was the first time Marvel characters had appeared in an actual UK weekly published by Marvel themselves, CJ, so you were nearly right. Before that, they were licensed to other publishers and appeared alongside non-Marvel characters.
I'd better send a belated birthday card to Julie, though I suppose James would prefer not to be reminded he's dead.
Seeing that cover always brings a rush of memories back - Dad coming in and handing MWOM #1 to me as a surprise, Mum setting up the ironing board to iron the Hulk transfer onto a T-shirt for me, my reading and re-reading the superhero Holy Trinity - Spider-Man, Fantastic Four and The Incredible Hulk. 53 years on, the iconic images from those strips have stayed with me.
I bailed on MWOM when the ol' web-slinger got his own comic but I treasure the time I spent with the first proper Marvel weekly.
Excelsior!
Spidey was only in MWOM for the first 19 issues, PG, so did you start buying SMCW when it came out in February of '73? I have vague memories of ironing the transfers onto t-shirts, but I'm not 100% sure whether I actually did or not. (I may have just imagined it.)
Kid, I sent a comment to your prostitute post this morning but it seems to have got lost. I only wanted to mention that the term "prostitute" is outdated nowadays and has been replaced by "sex worker".
Well, it definitely never came through, CJ, or I'd have published it. Yes, 'sex worker' - typical woke pish, trying to give it a veneer of respectability by not calling it what it is.
I'm not sure that "sex worker" sounds very respectable!
It's better than prostitute, whore, jade, doxy, tart, etc., CJ. It sounds similar to care worker, and any other kind of 'worker' you can name. Being a worker is respectable, so prefixing the word sex to it is designed to place it within the category of other industries. So like I said - a veneer of respectability, though perhaps I should have placed the word within apostrophes.
Oh, I forgot strumpet - another good word.
I've never heard of jade and doxy before but if a woman sells sex for money is she really a whore or a tart? Surely that's a woman who screws around for fun but if a woman sells sex for money she's no different to a porn actress which is a legal occupation as I mentioned earlier. Anyway you're clearly not going to change your mind so we'll have to agree to disagree :)
A lot of prostitutes are married or in a relationship, CJ, and some of them even enjoy sex with lots of other men, so going by your definition, doesn't that make them tarts? As for porn actresses (and actors), they're having sex for money, so if prostitution is illegal, shouldn't porn films be also? Okay, it's not the person they're having sex with who's paying them, but they're still getting paid. And surely what you mean is that YOU'RE not going to change YOUR mind, despite me having demonstrated the flaws in logic of your argument?
The Amazing Spider-Man! The Incredible Hulk! The Fabulous Fantastic Four!
Wasn't it enough to say 'The Fantastic Four!' One too many superlatives me thinks.
You know Stan, M - he loved to go overboard with the alliteration.
I remember well the MWOM #1, I liked the cover art and was disappointed that the story art inside was so crude in comparison. I did not buy another issue until the summer of 1973.
The cover was by John Buscema, the interior strips (from the '60s) were by Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. It's a shame you didn't buy the subsequent early issues as the comic was at its best then.
And harlot as well. Any more?
Yes, jumped ship as soon as SMCW - would have loved to have had the pocket money to buy both mags, but I had to make a choice. Fortunately, one of my friends still bought MWOM, so we could read each other's issues...and then another friend started getting The Avengers later on in '73, so we could share that as well!
MWOM and SMCW were great comics to begin with, PG, but (not talking about the strips) I was disappointed with the reproduction quality of The Avengers as it was a murky mess that obscured the detail of the art. (As were the other two when the colour disappeared and they got glossy covers.) Took them a while, but Marvel sorted it out in the end.
Had it loved it. My memory is getting a bit fuzzy though because most of Marvel Uk comics were bought from the newsagent near the A3 however! I’m fairly certain Marvel UK started publishing when we still lived in Wimbledon and for the life of me I can’t remember which newsagent I got my comics from then.
At one time, PS, I could remember which newsagent's I bought every '70s comic I had, UK and US, but my memory is a bit more vague on occasion nowadays on account of some of them having similar interiors to one another. Some days I'm sure about some of them, other days it eludes me.
Post a Comment