FABULOUS FLASHBACKS - MWOM #3...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Tomorrow, October 14th, it'll be exactly forty years ago that the above ish went on sale in Britain. Featuring a fantastic JIM STARLIN (I think) and JOE SINNOTT cover, this weekly was the third issue of The MIGHTY WORLD Of MARVEL which had been launched only a fortnight earlier.  Let's look at the contents, which reprinted classic tales from Marvel's history - at that time merely eleven years old.

First up (above) is The INCREDIBLE HULK, featuring some great KIRBY and DITKO art, and ol' Greenskin looking as much like BORIS KARLOFF's FRANKENSTEIN monster as was possible without being sued by UNIVERSAL.  (Trust me - it's far more apparent in later panels.)  I recall writing to editor PIPPA M. MELLING to tell her that the art had been wrongly attributed to Jolly JACK KIRBY as it was patently the work of Sturdy STEVE DITKO.  She replied, apologizing for the mistake, which demonstrates that she knew as much about Marvel artists as I did (at that time).  Nowadays, in my more enlightened state, it's obvious that Kirby pencilled it and Ditko inked it, but back then, SD's style was so prominent that it confused my still developing spider-sense.

   

And above is yet another Kirby-Ditko collaboration - the art to the cover of the first issue of SPIDER-MAN - transformed into a pin-up for all frantic followers to put on their bedroom walls.  I never did at the time; it wasn't until years later when I had extra issues to spare that I mutilated these collectable items by depriving them of their interior mini-posters.  I know - it's akin to pulling the legs off spiders or the wings off flies (not something I ever did, I hasten to add). I hang my head in shame at my unthinking vandalism.  (Saved a fortune on wallpaper though.)

Here's something you thought you'd never see - the THING - with ears.  Except it isn't really Benjy of course, but rather one of those nasty, shape-changing alien SKRULLS impersonating him.  Some nicely drawn waves from Kirby here, but I'm not convinced about the perspective or the horizon.  Never mind, I'll learn to live with it.  I'd read this story a few years before, in MARVEL COLLECTOR'S ITEM CLASSICS #1, but it was good to see it again and refresh my memory.

The middle spread (below) utilized a Kirby Hulk drawing with amended arms by another hand (so to speak).  Both appendages are too long, even allowing for the margin between the pages, making him look like a bit of a monkey-boy.  Who's gonna tell him?  

And here's ol' MOLEY (below), not quite as sweet and lovable as his namesake in The WIND In The WILLOWS, but I'm sure his mother thinks the world of him.  This page isn't a former cover, but an 'actual' pin-up from FF Annual #1.  I've often/sometimes/seldom (take yer pick) wondered just how cheap these U.K. Marvel weeklies were to produce (given that they were mainly reprint), compared to the other British comics (consisting of mostly new material) available at the time.  Anyone care to hazard a guess? 

And here's PETER PARKER again (below), demonstrating just how negligent the U.S. government could be by allowing rubber-neckers to get close to a fuel-laden rocket about to blast off.  No wonder folks in Marvel-land were frequently having accidents that transformed them into power-charged beings (or char-grilled pedestrians) - health and safety obviously hadn't been invented yet.  (Nor common-sense, it seems.) 

We Brits had to put up with getting our stories in a combination of black and white, spot-hues - and an occasional page in full-colour, of which the one below is an example.  On reflection, I wouldn't have had it any other way.  There was just something about these bombastic British Marvel weeklies that was truly magical, but difficult to explain to those brought up on a steady diet of four-colour monthlies.  (I'm talking about Americans, Melvin.)  I wonder if these relics of yesteryear are as sought-after by U.S. Marvel collectors as they are by U.K. readers of a certain age.

I noticed a Stateside dealer asking for nearly £450 for a copy of the 1974 Marvel Annual on eBay recently, so he clearly thinks it's highly collectable.  I doubt he'll get his asking price, but if he does, I have a big tower in Paris which I'll gladly sell to any interested Americans for an absolute steal (and it definitely would be).  

Oh, but look below - a free gift as well as a comic!  Weren't we spoiled?  Nowadays, buyers have to wade through newsagents' shelves overflowing with bagged issues full of cheap plastic tat in an effort to find our favourite periodical.  (Those of us who still have one in this increasingly cynical and commercial age.)  Back then, however, comics normally only carried gifts for the first three issues - and usually ones which slipped discreetly within the pages.  (With an occasional exception, obviously.)  Surely I can't be the only person who wishes things were still like that? 

Well, that's yer lot for now - hope you've enjoyed this look back to forty years ago.  Be sure to tune in again soon for something that will hopefully tickle your thistle and put a smile on your sporran.

PART SIX Of COMIC COVERS 'SNAP'!

 

Copyright DC COMICS

 

Fifty-one years after the debut of ACTION COMICS #1, the cover design by JOE SHUSTER was used again by GEORGE PEREZ for issue #643 - when SUPERMAN returned as the star attraction after months of featuring in only a regular double-page strip, drawn by the legendary CURT SWAN.  The main difference, I suppose, is that on the first cover, ol' Supes is only leaping - whereas, in the newer version, he's a fully paid-up member of the superhero flying club.  Curiously, for all the detail that Perez includes, his figure's torso seems far more stiff than Shuster's.  Just goes to show that the old guard had their strengths as well, and that it wasn't just the bold young turks who could teach us a thing or two.

 

COMIC COVERS 'SNAP'! PART FIVE...

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Time now for yet another game of COMIC COVERS 'SNAP', so here are the covers for X-MEN #s 1 and 104.  As you can see, the latter is based on the former, although only one original X-Man remains in the lineup.  When issue 104 was reprinted in CLASSIC X-MEN #12, another version of the layout saw print, but I don't have it to hand at the moment and I'm not tearing the house apart to find it - you'll just have to trust me.  In the meantime, enjoy these two interesting variations on a theme. 

Aha!  I just remembered that the third version of the cover (below) was reprinted in my within-reach-copy of The OFFICIAL MARVEL INDEX To The X-MEN, so here it is.  Phew, handy, that - saves me rummaging through boxes of comics in my attic.  So, which one of the three do you prefer?  Feel free to share in the comments section.

THE LAST ANNUAL OF THE CENTURY...

Copyright relevant owner

You're looking at the cover (above) to the 1968 TV CENTURY 21 Annual (on sale from Aug/Sept '67).  The third in the series, this was actually the last annual to include the word 'Century' in the title, the remaining five being called simply TV21.  (Though the annual for '69 carried the original name on the spine, despite the new, shorter title on the cover.)

  

The next two annuals were the last to carry any GERRY ANDERSON related content (JOE 90 was listed on the cover to the 1971 book, but was nowhere to be seen inside), and the final three publications bore no resemblance to what had gone before, carrying a curious mix of STAR TREK, The SAINT, LAND Of The GIANTS, TARZAN, and - in the '72 annual - SPIDER-MAN, The SILVER SURFER, and The GHOST RIDER (the cowboy version).

So - feast your eyes on what was essentially the last yearly tie-in with TV CENTURY 21 when it was still riding the height of its fame, before it shortened its name and started to fade in the affections of the comics-buying public (not that the two things are necessarily connected).  We shall probably never see its like again.

CONNERY & MOORE - SHARING A BOND...

Much has been made of the 'differences' between SEAN CONNERY's and ROGER MOORE's portrayals of BOND...  JAMES BOND over the years.  In my view, the way they look and talk aside, there really wasn't much difference at all.  Depending on what you read first, some reports said that the producers 'toughened up' Roger's Bond because he didn't look quite so ruthless as Sean's, hence him slapping women and generally being mean to them.  (MAUD ADAMS in The MAN With The GOLDEN GUN for example.)

Other reports claim the writers geared the movies towards Roger's strengths as a 'light comedian' and that there was more humour in them.  Absolute tosh in my opinion.  Bond slapped women on occasion regardless of who was playing him and there have always been fairly large dollops of humour in 007 movies.  These so-called differences tend to be retroactive rationalizations applied after the fact in answer to reporters' enquiries.  If you ask someone what the difference is in something, the mere suggestion that there is one will probably produce an answer that meets the requirements of the question rather than the facts of the case.

The truth is, the role of Bond is merely a suit of 'clothes' which the actor slips into and holds up in the shape of himself (more or less) - but the 'suit' (i.e. - the part) is the character rather than any actor playing him.  Had Sean continued as Bond in the movies Roger appeared in, there would've been very little difference in the finished product.  Any evolution in the style or content of the films is more down to the requirements of being bigger and better than the one before than it is in the actor playing the part.

The tone of Roger's first Bond movie in 1973 had been set by its predecessor, DIAMONDS Are FOREVER, which was largely shaped by the participation of the late TOM MANKIEWICZ, who was also involved in LIVE & LET DIE and The MAN With The GOLDEN GUN.  To my mind, Roger's Bond never did anything that I couldn't imagine Sean's Bond also doing, so the only difference between the two actors' portrayals was not in the character of 007, but in the way they looked and sounded.

By the time Connery played Bond in Diamonds Are Forever, he was tired of the role - but the role was also tired of him.  He was 41, but looked at least ten years older.  Sean was definitely the right man for the part in the early to mid-'60s, but it's the lean, mean, hungry-looking Sean we must remember - not the rather puffy, bloated, weary-looking Sean of the later movies.  Moore is actually older than Connery by at least a couple of years, but back in 1973 he looked a lot younger than 45, the age he was when he took over the licence to kill.  Moore was the right Bond for the '70s, just as Sean had been for the decade before.

So, regardless of the actor playing him, Bond is the same man; suave, charming, debonair - and a ruthless killer when required.  So, in this, his 50th cinematic year - here's to Bond... James Bond.  I say again - "Nobody does it better!"

      

GREAT WOMEN Of OUR TIME - (PART THREE)...

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

The above pin-up first appeared in THE FANTASTIC FOUR #10 in 1962, although I first saw it in FANTASTIC #17 five years later.  As a boy I had quite a crush on SUSAN STORM, which is more a testament to JACK KIRBY's ability to draw attractive women than it is to what a strange kid I was.  (At least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.)  Alas, it was not to be, and Susie married some geeky scientist who wasn't good enough for her.  Women, huh?  Who can understand them?  I'd have treated her like a princess.  (Gotta go - it's time for my reality pill.)

MARVEL MEMORIES - 40 YEARS AGO TODAY...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Forty years ago today (1972), October 7th was a Saturday, not a Sunday.  It was also the day that the 2nd weekly ish of The MIGHTY WORLD Of MARVEL went on sale, and I was down at the newsagent's at the crack of dawn (well, shortly after it opened) in order to buy my copy.  Featuring the early tales of The INCREDIBLE HULK, The FANTASTIC FOUR and The AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, as well as fabulous full-colour pin-ups and a Spidey iron-on transfer, it was an absolute bargain at a mere 5p.

   

The above page is from the Hulk's first appearance, continued from the previous (debut) issue of MWOM.  Given the jade giant's skin hue, green was an ideal spot-colour for this story, although it was perhaps not quite so apt for the FF and Spidey.  (Though, speaking for myself, I thought it worked quite well.) 

The above pin-up originally appeared in FF #2.  Personally speaking, I always preferred the THING's original dinosaur-type epidermis, as opposed to his later rocky appearance.  I was over the moon when, years later, JOHN BYRNE transformed ol' Benjy back to his pre-evolved state for several issues.

One of the great things about those early MWOMs was the use of original covers to first issues being utilised as pin-ups for the mag.  The week before, we had seen the cover artwork to FF #1 - now it was the Hulk's turn to be accorded the same treatment.  Spidey was to have a slightly different honour bestowed upon him - as we shall shortly see.

   

Above is the free iron-on transfer given away with the comic.  Worth the price of 5p by itself, thousands of burgeoning Marvelites were doubtless soon running around sporting Spidey on the back of their tee-shirts, Hulkie from the first issue adorning the front.  Thousands more kids (the rich ones from the posh estates) probably awarded these transfers a tee-shirt each, but I wouldn't have been allowed to 'ruin' more than one. 

The MOLE MAN makes his first face-on appearance in the above page, with the addition of an added caption in panel five which wasn't present in the original printing of the tale.  Quite a few 'editorial changes' were made in early issues, and not just the usual revisions from U.S. to U.K. spellings.  Story pages were sometimes discreetly edited out due to lack of space.

Above is the artwork from the cover of FF #2, featuring The SKRULLS From OUTER SPACE.  Another great pin-up, the removal of which to hang on a wall surely ruined many an issue of these classic British mags.

I just had to include this ad - ACTION MAN was still selling in the millions when the above page first saw print, and it's a real 'slice of life' from the '70s which many of you will surely appreciate for the memories it brings.  Okay, hands up - who had a 'soldier doll' when they were a kid?  The correct answer is 'nobody' - because, as we all know, boys don't play with 'dolls'.  They're called 'action figures' - got it?

Sharp-eyed readers will have noticed that some of the speech balloons in the above page (in the first two panels) have been re-lettered.  DAVE GIBBONS is reputed to have made certain corrections and revisions in early issues, but I'm unsure whether these ones were made by him or done in the States. 

JACK KIRBY's cover from AMAZING FANTASY #15 was never utilised as a pin-up - that accolade went to STEVE DITKO's unpublished cover, which saw full-colour print in a Marvel mag for the first time on the back page of this issue of MWOM.  (The artwork had been seen previously in black and white in an issue of MARVELMANIA #2, I believe, but that was an 'outside' publication, not a Marvel one.)

And there you have it - a short trip back in time to forty years ago.  Tune in again soon. 

JAMES BOND AT 50 - STILL LOOKING GOOD...

Images copyright relevant owner

How time flies, eh?  I remember, back in 1974, a friend informing me in school one day that the back catalogue of JAMES BOND movies had just been sold to ITV for showing on British television.  It wasn't until 1975 (after I had left school) that the first film - DR NO - made its small screen debut, and I recall watching it and reliving my memories of having first seen it in my local cinema around three years earlier.

So, what has that to do with the price of cheese?  Just this - October 5th was the 50th anniversary of the premiere of Dr No back in 1962.  Apparently, ITV's contract to show Bond movies on U.K. TV also expires this month, with SKY now having the rights in that department.  I find that rather amazing - the fact that an agreement first set up when I was still a mere schoolboy is only just now coming to an end, 38 years later.  In that period of time, five different actors have played Bond... James Bond, and the latest - DANIEL CRAIG - has just signed up for another two movies in the ongoing blockbuster franchise.

On November 25th, another anniversary takes place - the 40th anniversary of the first time I saw agent 007 (in the person of big TAM CONNERY - SEAN to you) go through his paces on the largest cinema screen in Scotland.  He had a licence to kill, chill and thrill - and the world's favourite secret agent is still going strong umpteen years later.

The latest movie, SKYFALL, is due in U.K. cinemas from October 26th, and U.S. cinemas from November 9th.  Don't dare miss it - 'cos NOBODY DOES IT BETTER THAN BOND!

DON'T BE 'THOR' - BUY A MIGHTY MARVEL MASTERWORK TODAY!

Image copyright MARVEL COMICS

I can't stop, I'm on a roll - so here's yet another astounding painting by DEAN WHITE, over JACK KIRBY's and JOE SINNOTT's cover art to JOURNEY Into MYSTERY #83.  The THOR figure appeared on the front of his own volume against a black background to give ol' Goldilocks greater emphasis, but the complete and unobscured version was published in the back of DAREDEVIL MARVEL MASTERWORKS Vol 1 (softcover), from which this image comes.  I can't recommend these books highly enough - they're essential 'must-haves' for all true Marvelites.  (Of which I'm one.) 

AN AMAZING FANTASY MASTERPIECE...

Continuing the theme of the previous post, I thought I'd show you DEAN WHITE's painting of JACK KIRBY's & STEVE DITKO's cover to AMAZING FANTASY #15.  I'm not sure whether Dean traces the original image or uses a projector (or some other method), but the results are fantastic.  I'd love to see special reissues of various MARVEL #1s sporting such covers, with the contents benefiting from the same colouring techniques employed in the TALES Of ASGARD six-part series a couple of years back.  Now wouldn't that be something? 

'MUST-HAVE' MARVEL MASTERWORKS...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Criv-ites not buying the new softcover MARVEL MASTERWORKS are missing out on something special.  As well as printing the most accurate versions of classic Marvel stories to date (the reproduction quality of some tales in the FF volume being superior to the OMNIBUS edition), the books also include terrific extras.

Case in point: The above painting by DEAN WHITE (over JACK KIRBY) of FF #1 is simply stunning.  The illo was used on the cover, but with the background blacked out - as is the case with all volumes in the series.  However, the first two releases (SPIDER-MAN and FANTASTIC FOUR) included the full paintings in the back of the books, with subsequent volumes displaying the unedited artwork of the next one to come, inside the back cover.

The books are worth having for these fantastic paintings alone, never mind the cataclysmic classics from Marvel's heyday.  What are you waiting for?  Start buying these titanic tomes today!

IS THERE A FUTURE FOR BRITISH COMICS IN PRINT?

Image copyright D.C. THOMSON & Co, Ltd

I'm afraid we may have to consider the distinct possibility that nothing can be done to save comics in print form in this country and that their eventual demise is inevitable.  Perhaps they really are a dying breed and the digital dimension is the only way in which they can possibly continue.  (Strictly speaking, they wouldn't really be comics then, though they would still be comic strips.)

However, assuming they can be saved, here is perhaps a way to do it.  We all know that newsagents and supermarkets prefer to stock more expensive items as their percentage from sales is bigger, but they'd be foolish to ignore lower-priced items selling in large volumes.  After all, it results in the same thing - profits.

So, what can comic companies do to help their products perform better on the shelves?  Off the top of my head, here are a few suggestions which I think may be worth considering:

1)  Start employing writers who can produce consistently funny strips on a weekly basis. No more editors slumming as writers to supplement their earnings and churning out tired, formulaic, unfunny stories that merely fill space.  Stop aiming strips primarily at an infant audience and start crafting stories which not only children can enjoy, but also teenagers and adults who thumb through a copy in their idle moments.  Remember Dennis the Menace at his finest, when his capers weren't written down to an infant's mentality?  Kids and parents could both find things to laugh over in his exploits.

2)  Give kids stories they can relate to - which are funny - that reflect things they have experience of.  (Conflict with parents, teachers, authority, etc.)  No more ridiculous and repetitive concepts like Gnipper, Rasher, Thrasher, Basher, Crasher, Donner and Blitzen, or however many pets Dennis currently has.  (I might have invented a few there, in order to make a point.)  No more ex-army neighbours with tanks in their back gardens and nonsense of that sort, or flying around in rocket-powered Dennis mobiles.  Keep it real, but make it funny.  (Of course, if the concept of the strip is about a boy with a rocket-powered vehicle or a menagerie of pets, then the above 'restrictions' need not apply.)

3)  Hire artists who can tell a story without merely repeating one panel throughout the length of a strip, or is just a series of talking heads.  Artists who can make funny things funnier by the way they draw them, who have a good grasp of sequential storytelling and whose depiction of events can be understood at a glance - and which don't induce eyestrain and a headache.  Oh, and who don't draw like six-year olds.

4)  Use lettering fonts which are instantly legible and pleasing to the eye, not ones that look as if a chicken has walked through ink and scampered all over the page.  Use a consistent style throughout, to give the comic a sense of unity, rather than just being a hodgepodge collection of random strips.  One cannot seriously defend upper and lower case lettering on the grounds that children (or anyone) find it easier to read, when one is using barely legible amateurish scrawls.  A scrawl is a scrawl, whether rendered in upper case or upper and lower.  You'd think this truth would be obvious to all.

5)  Keep the costs as low as possible by perhaps reducing page count (The Beano and Dandy had phenomenal sales when they had only 16 or 20 pages, remember), using cheaper paper and exploiting traditional, familiar characters that'll prompt parents to buy comics for their children out of a sense of nostalgia.  One of the main factors in The Beano's and Dandy's longevity was the 'nostalgia-factor'.  This alone, of course, won't sustain a comic if it isn't any good - it still needs to be well-written, well-drawn and funny.  Humour comics have fallen into the habit of being faintly amusing - and then only sometimes - over the past couple of decades (with exceptions of course), and this needs to be reversed.

6)  Cut the price.  Which can be done if production costs are kept to a minimum.  Investigate supplying to 'pound shops' - they're springing up all over the country and are perhaps an avenue which can be exploited.  (Back issues could be sold, three in a bag, for a £1, rather than just being pulped.)  Another thing which should be emphasized is the educational aspect of comics and how they can help children develop an appetite for reading, along with the ability to do so.  Parents need to be encouraged to renew the once-popular custom of buying comics for their kids, and the educational aspect could be a way of doing it.

Well, these are just a few ideas for the purpose of kick-starting reflection and discussion on how printed comics can not only survive, but thrive, in the decades to come.  Thirty years ago they said that Cinema was dead with the advent of the video, but a reversal in its fortunes was achieved which can surely be emulated by comics if we all put our minds to it.

So how about it?  Anyone else got any ideas?

******

(A version of this post was first published on another site.)

CONAN The... 'CONJURER'?

Copyright MARVEL COMICS and CPI

The year was 1979.  A whole 33 years ago and seeming like only a few months back - and, paradoxically, 100 years ago at one and the same time.  I was working in my local central library back then and, one day, several of us were sent out in pairs to chap the doors of people in possession of long-overdue books and to relieve them of their ill-gotten booty.

I was paired up with a fellow worker by the name of Bob Billens, who was also a comicbook geek like myself.  We chapped the requisite number of doors (some in my neighbourhood), then popped into my house so he could marvel at my collection.  (No, that's not a euphemism - behave yourselves.)  Then, by virtue of the fact that he had a car, we sped along to his house (or to be exact, his wife's parents' house, where they were staying at the time) and, while sipping tea in the back garden, I looked through some of his not quite so vast array of four-colour treasures.

He even gave me a handful of his surplus comics, one of them being CONAN The BARBARIAN #6.  Bob tended not to keep his comics in quite so pristine a condition as I aspired to with mine, so a little while later (and not being a particular Conan fan), I cut out the splash page and put it on my wall amongst all the other posters, covers, pages, pin-ups and panels which adorned it.  There was just something about that jewel-bedecked night sky which fascinated me.

That page was on my wall for close to four years until we moved house, where it was again awarded its own space on the wall of my new bedroom.  Then, as regular readers may remember me recounting in a previous post, just over four years later we moved back to our old house, whereupon it resumed the space it had previously occupied and where it still resides to this very day.  (Update: A bright, new, colourful duplicate has now replaced it as it was showing its age.)

Interestingly, when I was in my new abode, I would sometimes look at the page and recall my old house and room and feel quite nostalgic about them.  When I eventually returned to that room four and a bit years later, it was as if I had never moved to begin with and, consequently,  I never spared a thought for the place we had just vacated.

Now, however, 25 years after returning, I look at that Conan page on occasion and recall that other home with fond affection.  Not only that, but I remember that sunny afternoon when me and Bob sat out in his in-laws' garden and spent our dinner hour poring over a selection of various MARVEL and DC comics (mainly DC, it has to be said) before returning to the dismal confines of the library and our dreary and unimaginative, po-faced colleagues.

So, one glance recalls two different houses and rooms, a former workplace, various ex-colleagues, a one-time friend, and a sunny afternoon in a vanished era from long ago.  Funny how one picture can encompass so many memories, don't you think?  If you have a particular comicbook page or panel that conjures up a fondly-remembered time from your youth, feel free to share it in the comments section.

******

(If you're interested in what happened to Bob Billens, click here.)

PART THIRTEEN Of FANTASTIC COVER GALLERY...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

This time around, let's not bother with too many words - why waste 'em when these pictures speak for themselves?  All you need to know, if you don't already, is that these covers and pin-ups are from FANTASTIC, a weekly comic published by ODHAMS PRESS in the late '60s.  Enjoy!