SPOT The DIFFERENCE: The FANTASTIC FOUR #11...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Well, in this one the differences are obvious, aren't they?  In the production stat above (I'll call them 'cover proofs' from this point on), SUSAN is far too tall and BEN is far too small in relation to her.  Solution?  Redraw Susie smaller (and give her a haircut as well), and lengthen Ben's leg to make him appear taller.  (Still not tall enough in my estimation.)  The original version saw print, in colour, in 1973 as an ad for MWOM #23 in sister publication SMCW #4.  (And turn in your F.O.O.M. card and hang your head in shame if you don't know what those esteemed initials stand for, not-so-frantic one.)

The published version

SPOT The DIFFERENCE: The AVENGERS #4...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Above is a production stat of the cover to AVENGERS #4 as originally drawn and lettered, below as it was published.  As you can see, CAPTAIN AMERICA's right head winglet has been altered to match the left one, and the jagged outline around the larger caption has been removed, along with the words 'THE REAL'.

This was in reference to a Cap impostor having recently appeared in a HUMAN TORCH story in STRANGE TALES #114.  MARVEL obviously wanted us to know the original was back, but then must've realised that we were smart enough to figure that out for ourselves.  The SUB-MARINER caption has also been slightly repositioned.

Marvel amended the production stat for their first printing of The Avengers MARVEL MASTERWORKS in 1988, but overlooked the head winglet.  Below is how it appeared in that valiant volume.

BABE Of The DAY - DANA GILLESPIE...

What's that, DANA?  You want me to come

to bed and make mad, passionate love to you?

Why don't you start without me and I'll join you

 when I've read my comic.  I'm at a good bit.

SPOT The DIFFERENCE: The AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #11...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Yet another cover variation for you, Criv-ite chums, this time 'round The AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #11.  Up above is how STEVE DITKO originally drew it, but fearless leader STAN LEE wasn't happy with the way Sturdy Steve had drawn the web-spinner's legs, so got Jolly JACK KIRBY to 'fix' them before publication (as you can see below).  And, as I'm sure you'll already have noticed, DOC OCK's face looks like it's also been slightly revised.

But wait, that's not all!  When the ish was reprinted in MARVEL TALES #148 in 1982, the cover was flipped, Spider-Man's legs were again redrawn, Doc Ock's face was 'slimmed down' even more - and he was given a new pair of glasses that didn't quite sit right.  Three versions of the same cover is going a bit overboard, even for Marvel!

So whaddya make of that, frantic ones?  Personally, I don't think the right leg Jack drew is an improvement.  Feel free to leave a comment in the you-know-where.

And just so you don't feel like you're missing out on anything, below is the Marvel Tales version.  (How to ruin a Steve Ditko cover without even trying.)

FEEL LIKE COMMENTING?

I've had enough!  I'm fed up leaving comments on other blogs to demonstrate I'm showing an interest and that their efforts haven't gone unnoticed, only to find when I revisit that my comment hasn't been acknowledged.  I just find this terribly rude, so the next time I leave a comment somewhere that gets ignored, I won't be leaving any more comments.  In fact, I may even stop reading their blogs altogether.  They've only got themselves to blame.

Does such rudeness annoy you, Criv-ite chums?  All comments will be responded to - honest.

KLASSIC KIRBY KOMIC KOVERS: AVENGERS #2...

Image copyright MARVEL COMICS

I first read this tale in SMASH! in the 1960s, and again in MARVEL SUPER-HEROES in the '70s and there's just something about it that really grabs me.  (Despite STAN LEE having RICK JONES say that The HULK's secret identity is Dr. DON BLAKE, but hey - nobody's perfect, eh?)  Hulkie looks a bit small to me, which was a fault JACK KIRBY had, but it's not the real Hulk anyway so we'll overlook it this time.  Not exactly an action-packed cover, but nice enough.

BABE Of The DAY - LYNDSEY MARSHALL...

The lovely LYNDSEY MARSHALL blows

loving kisses in my direction because, like most

women, she adores macho manly-men like me.

 And who can blame her?  I'm quite a catch.

JOURNEY Into MYSTERY THOR COVER - HOW I WOULD HAVE DONE IT...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

I've already added this image to the 'spot the difference' post on JOURNEY Into MYSTERY #83, but I felt it deserved a post of its own.  As you know, several STONE MEN were removed from the cover before publication to give greater prominence to THOR, but I felt that a few of them could have been left in.  Consequently, I did a little work on a copy of the original production stat to show how I would've done things had I been calling the shots.  (Hey, you gotta think big!)  Below is the original for comparison.

ONE MORE TIME - SPOT The DIFFERENCE: The FANTASTIC FOUR #1...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Yup, you've got the idea of this series by now, Crivvies.  Above is the cover of The FANTASTIC FOUR #1 as originally drawn by JACK KIRBY, below is the published version from 1961 after a few amendments.  Incidentally, none of the original proofs were coloured at the time, that was done for their appearance in the MARVEL MASTERWORKS series of volumes which began in the late 1980s.  Eventually, Marvel started featuring more faithful reproductions of the mags as first printed, but it's fun to see how they started out, don'tcha think?

SPOT The DIFFERENCE: JOURNEY Into MYSTERY #95 (Starring: MIGHTY THOR!)...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Okay, admittedly, the difference is a minor one in this instance, and not a change to the artwork but to the lettering.  However, I think these matters are important as well as interesting, and hey - what else would you all be doing if you weren't reading this here humble blog of mine?  The answer is obviously "nothing" otherwise you'd be away doing it, so let's have no complaints about the trivial nature of this post, or indeed me!  ('Cos you know what a sensitive soul I am.)

SPOT The DIFFERENCE: JOURNEY Into MYSTERY #83... (Updated)

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Well, I'm in repeat territory here, but not everyone will have seen my prior post on this classic cover, so I should get away with it.  (And unlike the BBC, there's no licence fee required to view this blog.)  When JACK KIRBY initially drew the cover, he put in more STONE MEN than appeared on the published mag.  However, I'd say STAN LEE's instincts as art editor were correct, as, dramatic as the original version was, THOR The MIGHTY was visually swamped by his descending foes and the cover was just a tad too 'busy'.

I might have left some of the smaller Stone Men in as it was mainly the one behind Thor that compromised the layout, but maybe they'd have upset the balance of the final composition.  It's difficult to be sure without seeing what I have in mind right in front of my baby-blue eyes.

Below is a b&w production stat I altered of the original cover to show how I might have done things.  Lovely, eh?

SPOT The DIFFERENCE: TALES Of SUSPENSE #44...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

I've shown this cover before, but last time I used an ALAN CLASS reprint to highlight the differences.  The one above is as it was originally drawn and lettered (apart from the spelling of 'Pharaoh', which was corrected for its initial printing in an early MARVEL MASTERWORKS volume, from which the above image comes), and the one below is as it originally appeared to the panting public back in 1963, spelling error and all.  (The image below is taken from a later, more archival printing of the same volume.)  A great KIRBY piece indeed.

RIP-SNORTIN' REPOST: ANOTHER MARVEL 'MYSTERY' SOLVED!

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Well, to be honest, it's not really much of a mystery - except to the team responsible for the reprint editions of The TALES Of SUSPENSE/IRON MAN adventures from the early years of MARVEL.

If you're the proud possessor of the softcover printing of MARVEL MASTERWORKS, the first OMNIBUS volume, or even the ESSENTIALS edition of ol' Shellhead's early adventures, you'll see the b&w production stat of TOS #42, mis-numbered as #41 and toting the previous issue's cover blurb.

The books ponder how this 'boob' occurred and consider possible explanations - including what I regard as the most obvious one, making me wonder why anyone thought it was such a mystery. Let me elaborate.

Back when I freelanced for IPC/FLEETWAY, I regularly visited the offices of KING'S REACH TOWER and often saw pages of artwork with missing logos - sometimes removed cleanly, or simply cut or ripped off the page.  The logos were photo-mechanical-transfers (referred to as PMTs - oh, behave missus) and were sharp, high-quality images which reproduced well in the printed comics.

Occasionally, however, there might be none available when required, with no time to wait while new ones were printed.  So, as I said, a logo from an old page of artwork was re-used on a new page - problem solved.

What obviously happened in this case was something not too dissimilar.  They were fresh out of logos, so stuck a copy from a b&w stat of the previous issue onto the cover art for the next issue.  Duplicate stats of the cover would then be made - one for the files and one to be sent for lettering. (Once that was done, a copy of the finished page would be made for colouring.)  As Marvel has quite a number of cover file stats which differ from the printed versions, I'm surprised as to why anyone was puzzled by the matter.

Too easy - Columbo, eat your heart out!     

TRIPLE 'X' MARKS The SPOT (The DIFFERENCE)...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Okay, I might be over-egging the pudding here, but once I'm on a roll I just can't stop myself.  (Roll & egg pudding anyone?)  This is the 3rd X-MEN cover I've now shown that differs from the published version.  Above is as JACK KIRBY drew it, below is as it saw print after STAN LEE had sanctioned a couple of changes.

Personally, I'm not convinced that the redrawn hand is an improvement as, though it's more realistic, the fingers are smaller than on the other one, making them mismatched.  The altered mouth makes KA-ZAR look less chinless, but I could have lived with the original (which is the one I first saw on U.K. comic FANTASTIC #18 back in 1967).

Got a preference?  Reveal all in the comments section.

  

AGAIN - 'X' MARKS The SPOT (The DIFFERENCE)...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Strike while the iron is hot they say, so having piqued your interest with the previous post, I thought I'd give you more of the same.  Above is X-MEN #1 cover as originally drawn, below as originally published.  I think STAN LEE was right to make the changes as it made the characters stand out more.  What think the rest of you?

If you have an opinion, feel free to leave it in our ever-lovin' but neglected comments section.

'X' MARKS The SPOT (The DIFFERENCE)...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

When the 1st editions of MARVEL MASTERWORKS first hit the scene back in the late 1980s, they weren't always as archival in nature as they could have been.  That's because, back in the '60s, changes were often made between something having been drawn and being published, and very often the only sources available to the Masterworks team were the pre-published proofs before they'd been altered.

One such example is X-MEN #5.  Above is the cover as Jolly JACK KIRBY originally drew it, and below is how the published mag first appeared to the comics-buying public.  As you can see, CYCLOPS and ICE MAN have swapped places, and The ANGEL's face has been redrawn and highlights have been added to his figure.  The corner box has also been altered, but whether it was actually on the original production stat or added by the Masterworks team to complete the cover is uncertain.  (The cover art was sometimes photostatted before all 'copy' and 'dressing' had been added.)

Anyway, a fascinating look at the 'before' and 'after' process I'm sure you'll all agree.  Want to see some more examples?  Then say so in the comments section.

CURIOSITY COMICS: DC/HANNA-BARBERA TEAM UPS...

Images copyright DC COMICS & HANNA-BARBERA

The BATMAN meets TOP CAT?  Seriously?  Yup, it happens in the back-up story of the above issue, and it's played 'straight'.  I've only read the 'bonus features' so far, so can't give you my informed verdict on the main tales, but the BM/TC one was certainly interesting.  If you're looking for something different, these comic mags might be right up your alley.  (Hey, Top Cat allusion - funny.)

Available now from all good comicbooks shops.

RECOMMENDED READING: THE AVENGERS #5.1...

Images copyright MARVEL COMICS

Like comicbooks the way they used to be done?  Then you'd definitely love this 5 part series which concludes with the above issue.  Never mind, there's sure to be a collected edition if you missed what went before.  I really enjoyed this series as it was like returning to the '60s and my youth, which is always a good thing in my estimation.  Nostalgia apart, it's an entertaining tale in its own right, so even if you're a mere youngster, you'll still enjoy it!  Avengers #5.1 - available from all good comicbook shops right now.

   

BABE Of The DAY - IMOGEN HASSALL...

Classy IMOGEN HASSALL

doing what she does best without

even trying - being stunning.  (I'm

 told I've got the same quality.)