(BOND) BABE Of The DAY - CAROLINE MUNRO...

Maybe it's time you had a

haircut, CAROLINE.  You should

always try and keep abreast of the

latest style.  (Ouch!  That's pretty

 feeble, even for me.)

ATLAS/SEABOARD COMICS COVER GALLERY - PART THREE...

Images copyright relevant owner

Anybody remember TV detective MANNIX?  Surely LOMAX was going for a similar-sounding name? Anyway, LARRY LIEBER, younger brother of STAN LEE, reminiscing about his time at ATLAS/SEABOARD, pointed out that owner MARTIN GOODMAN put him in charge of the black and white magazine side of things, while JEFF ROVIN, who'd filled that role at WARREN, was responsible for the colour comics line, which Larry had more experience in.

Did it make any difference to the end product?  I doubt it.  A comic's a comic, whether it's in black and white or colour, and the main problem Atlas faced (in my view) was that the line was launched at the wrong time, as comicbook sales were in general decline in the '70s.  DC suffered an 'implosion' just a couple or so years later, so it was hardly an ideal period for launching so many new titles and swamping the market.  Besides, Larry ended up in charge of both sides when Jeff Rovin left after only a few months.

Of course, another huge problem was that most of the stuff simply wasn't very good, being not much more than second-rate MARVEL knock-offs.  Disagree?  Then let's read what you have to say in the comments section so that we can have a rollickin' big punch-up over it.  It's good to fight - er, I mean talk!

More Atlas covers to come in future instalments, Criv-ite chums.  Be sure not to miss them or I'll come around to your house and push doggie-poo through your letterbox. (In a kind, caring and considerate way of course.) 

CHRISTMAS NIGHT With The STARS 1964 - The LIKELY LADS...

Here's a 1964 clip featuring The LIKELY LADS.  And guess what?  It's got a comic strip theme, so isn't that apt though but?  (As the lads themselves would say.)

PART TWO OF ATLAS/SEABOARD COMICS COVER GALLERY...

Images copyright relevant owner

Ten more ATLAS/SEABOARD covers for you to swoon over, frantic ones, in the continuing series of the short-lived run of titles from the mid-'70s. MARTIN GOODMAN decided to go toe-to-toe with MARVEL and DC, but he lost by a knockout - his own.  Some people think that Goodman started his new version of Atlas simply as a promising business venture, and not because CADENCE (to whom he's sold Marvel) didn't keep his son on as editorial director, but I think it's unlikely.

He'd sold his publishing empire just a few years before for some serious dosh, so why would he want to use that money to start another comics and magazine publishing company - unless, of course, there was also a personal score to settle?  It's said that he treated his son, CHIP, worse than a minion, but Cadence, in reneging on their verbal agreement, not only insulted his son, but, more importantly, treated Goodman Senior himself with contempt.  The gauntlet had been flung.

Given the results ten months later, he probably wished he hadn't been so impetuous and thrown all that money away.  Even if he could afford it, it's a certainty that, on reflection, he'd have preferred to put it to better use.  But his loss was our gain, in that, for a brief period in the mid-'70s, comic fans had something to get excited about - at least 'til we saw the results of what we'd so keenly anticipated in the run-up to Atlas unleashing their plethora of titles on an eagerly waiting world.

If only more of them had been worth the wait.

ATLAS/SEABOARD COMICS COVER GALLERY - PART ONE...

Images copyright relevant owner

I'm sure you all know the story, but I'll remind you anyway as there's nothing I enjoy more than the sight of my own words taking form on the screen in front of me, thereby allowing me to labour under the delusion that I'm writing something interesting that'll be the object of rapt fascination to others.

When MARVEL COMICS publisher MARTIN GOODMAN sold the company (along with MAGAZINE MANAGEMENT) to CADENCE INDUSTRIES in 1968, he secured a promise from the new owner that his son, CHIP (off the old block presumably) would continue as editorial director.  Four years later, after a long transitional period during which Martin acted as a consultant, he finally stepped aside, only to find that Cadence promptly showed Chip the door in favour of STAN (The Man) LEE.

Martin was not a happy chappie - and ATLAS COMICS was the result!  Created purely out of spite for the way his son had been treated (deservedly so, in the opinion of many), Atlas was the new kid on the block who was gonna kick Marvel's @ss.  Well, that may've been the plan, but it didn't exactly pan out that way.  Around ten months later, Atlas was gone, leaving behind nothing but the memory of various short-lived comicbooks and magazines that never quite made the grade.

And that's all the excuse I need to throw a cover gallery party.  So enjoy part one of this new Crivens series, and have fun trying to recall the Atlas titles you bought back in the day.  And don't be shy about sharing your reminiscences with the rest of us.  The comments section awaits you!

WHAT BECAME OF THE PLACES WE USED TO SEE...?

Here's something that fans of WHATEVER HAPPENED TO

THE LIKELY LADS will be sure to find interesting.  Take a look.

BABE Of The DAY - PENELOPE CRUZ...

I can't remember if I've ever seen one

of her films, but ain't she a darlin'?  Gents,

it's the striking PENELOPE CRUZ.

RECOMMENDED READING: NEW MARVEL EPIC COLLECTION - THE AVENGERS: BEHOLD... THE VISION...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Here's another belter of a book which every Crivvie should have in their personal library - The AVENGERS: BEHOLD... The VISION.  With art by the two BUSCEMAs, COLAN, SMITH, and authored by ROY THOMAS, what's not to like?  Get 'round to your local comics shop and remind yourself that life is still worth living!

   

RECOMMENDED READING: YESTERDAY'S MEN Of TOMORROW - TODAY!

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

I acquired the above dust-jacketed hardback volume the other day, and I'd be remiss in my responsibilities as a blogger of comics-related publications if I didn't heartily recommend it to you.  Simply stated, it's an absolutely thrilling read that I could barely put down (read it in two sittings), and if you haven't already made the acquaintance of this titanic tale, then run straight round to your nearest comics shop (or bookstore) and plonk your pounds on the counter in exchange for a copy.

CHRIS WESTON's art is how comics should be drawn, and MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI's story is compelling and entertaining in equal measure.  Honestly - this is the best collected edition of relatively recent material that I've read in ages. You must - you need to - add this superb contemporary comics classic to your collection immediately.  Should you currently be bereft of funds, sell your wife, your children (keep the dog though), or even hawk your mutton for the dosh to buy this book.

Believe me, are you in for a treat!

The 'JOYS' Of BLOGGING...

"There is only one thing in life that is worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about" said Oscar Wilde, so perhaps I should be flattered to find myself the subject of someone's obsessive attention and to discover the extremes that they're prepared to go to in order to vent their bitter, malicious spite against me.

This saddo, who clearly has too much time on his hands, has created a Twitter account in my name, with my avatar, filled with lies, distortions and various absurdities, in the hope of convincing others that I'm not a very nice person.  I'm disappointed, as I thought I was doing fine on my own in that regard, and it's a bit of a blow to my pride to learn that I seemingly require some assistance in the matter.

Take a look at his tweets so far:  (Click to enlarge.)  To read them in sequential order, start at the bottom one and work your way up.

And look - he's even got two followers.

He talks about irony, but seems unaware of what the word means.  I post my opinions on my own blog, so how does that qualify me as a troll?  And whenever I comment on another blog, I always do so in a civil manner.  Yet here we have someone who's disturbed to such an extent that he's created an account in my name, using my avatar, not for satirical purposes as he claims, but for no other reason than to malign me.  Isn't that the epitome of 'trolling'?  And that's the only time I ever use the word - to point out the irony of someone doing that which they (falsely) accuse me of.

Further, as any fair minded person can see, I welcome debate, discussion and disagreement on this blog, and have never 'banned' anyone for it.  I recently told someone calling themselves 'The Source' not to bother responding further after he insulted everyone with a different view to him by describing them as stupid, which I wasn't prepared to allow.  Disagree with me all you want to, but don't resort to rudeness just because others don't see things your way.

Every one of his assertions is a distortion of the truth.  I've never once said that I chose lettering because it 'paid more' than art (per page obviously); what I actually said was that I stuck with lettering because I was able to do more pages of lettering in a day than I'd have been capable of producing as an artist (and thus earn more). When I lettered a regular, one-page strip for LOADED mag back in the mid-'90s, it paid £30 (update: actually it was £50) for what amounted to no more than around half an hour's work.  So you see, I didn't quite say what he claims I did.  (Truth is obviously just not his thing.)

It's interesting that the lies in these ridiculous tweets are the same as ones expressed on another blog by one of a very small group (you could squeeze them all into a 'phone box) who seem determined to bad-mouth me.  Twitter inform me that the account no longer exists or has been suspended, so perhaps it won't be very long before the source (see what I did there?) is identified and publicly exposed as the lying, twisted, odious little scumbag that he is.  Incidentally, if my doppelganger can provide one instance where I've ever blamed others for not working in comics, I'd like to see it.

At least now you can see for yourselves that when it comes to lies, distortions, and obsessional, petty, small-minded behaviour, if anyone deserves to be called a 'troll', it's pretty obvious that it isn't me.  No doubt this sad individual will have another go at this kind of thing, so if any of you become aware of it before I do, I'd appreciate you letting me know.  Some people, eh?

And in case you were wondering, yes, I do have a pretty good idea of who's behind it all, but I'll wait until I have conclusive proof before saying anything.  Perhaps his internet pals should be asking themselves if they want to be associated with this sort of behaviour, or, indeed, such an unpleasant, unbalanced individual.  Nice to know that I'm the cause of such vexation to him though - I almost feel a sense of achievement.  After all, some @rses deserve to be roundly kicked.

FOURTH & FINAL PART OF WHIZZER & CHIPS #7...

Images copyright relevant owner

With these pages, you now have the complete issue of WHIZZER & CHIPS comic #7 - or do you?  What you have are scans of the contents of the comic, not the comic itself.  "Wait a minute," you say.  "I can see it and read it, so in all practical ways, I have the comic, do I not?"   No, you have scans of the comic, which is not quite the same thing.

It's a difficult one, I confess.  In this case, the comic is the carton and the content at one and the same time, but if you only have access to the content, then you don't have the carton.  One could argue that though you don't have the original carton, you have a different form of carton, which surely qualifies as a comic given the content.  Although, does comic strip content automatically define an alternate carton as a comic?  It doesn't qualify books or newspapers as comics (which remain what they are) if they contain comic strips, so why should it with anything else?

And even if there were some validity to the above argument, I'd still maintain that a distinction should be made between an actual published periodical (as defined and accepted for decades) and a digital presentation of the same material.  One you can touch, smell, pick up whenever you want and experience in a different, far more satisfying way than reading it on a computer screen.  But the real difference is this:

If you ever run out of loo roll, you can't take your laptop, tablet, iPad or smartphone into the toilet with you and wipe your @rse with it then flush it away.  That must surely count for something?!  (Yes, yes, I know;  to wipe your bum with a REG PARLETT or TERRY BAVE page would be tantamount to sacrilege.)