BEANO VERSUS DANDY (EXPANDED EDITION)...

Images copyright D.C. THOMSON & Co., Ltd

Browsing through the comics section of my local WHS this afternoon, my eyes spied the latest issue of The BEANO.  Something about it looked different, so picking it up, I perused its contents.  Looks good, I thought, so I decided to buy it, along with its companion paper, the desperately doomed DANDY.  (Which didn't look so good, it has to be honestly said.)  I was surprised to see that The Beano's 'new look' also came with a new price - £2.

Let's explore that for a mo.  The Beano has 36 pages;  forgetting for a sec that around 14 of them are a mixture of ads, games & puzzle pages, that works out at a little over 5 pence per page, which is pretty good value.  It's still good value at just over 9 pence for each of the 22 pages of actual strip cartoons, but obviously the first option is the better of the two.  That's to say it's good value 'relatively speaking' - whether the public perceives it as such is open to question.

The Beano raising its price by a quarter is worrying though.  (I presume the comic was still £1.50 last week, but it's been a while since I bought it.)  50 pence is quite a steep rise, especially in one go.  Comics normally only do this when circulation is falling - it's a way of compensating for the loss of revenue from declining sales.  We'll have to wait and see whether the increase will scare off even more buyers.  You'd think D.C. THOMSON would seek to entice The Dandy's 7,000 readers by combining it with The Beano when the former expires in a few weeks, but it seems not, apparently.

Also, after coming under fire not that long ago for describing cover-mounted toys as 'gifts' when the regular price was increased to pay for them, you'd think that Thomson's would take greater care to avoid misleading advertising.  '2 Huge Posters' shouts the cover blurb, but it's actually only one double-sided poster.  Is there a difference?  Yes, there is.  Two posters would be two separate posters which could be displayed simultaneously.  As only one side can be seen at a time, it should have been described as what it was - a double-sided poster.  A subtle distinction admittedly, but an important one.  Any siblings hoping for a poster each were doomed to bitter disappointment.

So, let's look at a couple of Beano pages.  First one up (above) is CALAMITY JAMES, as drawn by TOM PATERSON.  Well drawn, well composed, and not only funny to read, but also to look at.  It may be a reprint for all I know, but regardless, quality is quality.

Next up is MINNIE The MINX, drawn by KEN H. HARRISON, the only artist since the legendary DUDLEY D. WATKINS to do justice to Oor WULLIE & The BROONS.  Nice simple layouts, clear storytelling, immaculately illustrated - what more can I say?  Now, however, let's look at the other side of the coin.

I have to admit that The DANDY logo has been improved by the addition of the white border on the inside of the letters, but the overall shape is still somewhat lacking.  Some apologists for the comic's failure have blamed its imminent demise on kids being unable to find it in shops, but in every WHS I've been in, it's always placed right next to The Beano.  We'll just have to put that lame excuse down to bitterness on the part of those who promoted themselves as the comic's saviours, but instead hastened it to its doom on a grease-wheeled skateboard.

And here's one of the reasons why.  Artwork which is stiff and flat, minimalist layout (look at the 'classroom' - then recall the work that LEO BAXENDALE put into The BASH STREET KIDS and The SWOTS & The BLOTS), too many panels consisting of talking heads, and poor perspective.  (In the first picture, teacher looks as if he's floating above the pupils.)  This is the standard of art I'd expect to see in a fanzine produced by a 14 year old.  (Which probably explains why someone who lurks around my site is such a huge fan of this 'style' that he attempts to emulate it.)  But it gets worse.  Look below.

Sigh!  Horse poo mountain indeed.  That covers it.  Sadly, nothing more need be said.

******

However, I'll say something anyway.  I've said it before, but it bears repeating.  Look at the awful lettering font used in the above two pages.  The Dandy editor justified its use by saying that kids found it easier to read than upper case.  I'm not convinced, but even if it were true, it would surely only apply to neatly rendered upper and lower case, not a spidery scrawl.  Also, u&l case is a style that's traditionally associated with nursery comics in Britain.  (TWINKLE, LITTLE STAR, etc.)  Perhaps this is one of the reasons why comics have long been seen in this country as being fit only for children.  Upper case is not only easier to read (in my opinion), it also makes a page seem less juvenile.  Something to consider perhaps?

The RUNAWAY SUPERBOY - PART FIFTEEN Of FAVOURITE COMICS Of The PAST...

Images copyright DC COMICS

SUPERBOY #146 is another comic I had as a boy which I never got to read the conclusion of in the next-but-one issue.  (Again, just like WORLD'S FINEST COMICS #178, the succeeding publication was an 80 Page Giant which featured reprints of earlier stories.)  The wrap-up of the Superboy adventure came in number 148, but I've never read it in the forty-odd years since I first obtained the original comic featuring the first part of the story.  (Or if I have, I've long since forgotten it.  I don't think I have though.)

If my flashback faculty is faithfully fulfilling its function, I got this ish the same day as X-MEN #45, both bought for me by my bruv on or around the time of his birthday in December 1968.  I recall comparing the full-colour X-Men story with its black and white reprinting in the pages of bombastic British publication, FANTASTIC, shortly before it finished its 89 issue run.  I think I also flicked through FANTASTIC FOUR ANNUAL #6 in the same shop on the same day of purchase of the other two.

The shop still exists*, although it's changed hands quite a few times over the years - and it's been decades since it sold any U.S. comicbooks.  However, one glance at Superboy #146, X-Men #45, or FF Annual #6 (even though I didn't buy it) and I'm once again back in that shop as it was in 1968, when I was a mere ten year old boy.  Many years later, as an adult, I finally obtained that FF mag, but it cost a lot more than it would have back in the '60s.  Couldn't tell you where I got it from 'cos I can no longer remember.  Not that it matters, I suppose, because it's too firmly associated with that shop from my childhood days.

And perhaps that's how it should be.

(*Update:  Well, it did at the time of writing, but around three and a half years later, it closed its doors for the final time.  It's now a fast food outlet.)

   

Update: I've now got the conclusion to the above tale, which you can read about here.  Before you jump over to have a look, below is the cover (replica edition) of #147, the Giant reprint issue, so that you've got all three issues in sequence.

TV CENTURY 21 - MUSIC FROM 2065...

For those of you not fortunate or discerning enough to have held on to your copies of TV CENTURY 21, it may interest you to learn (if you didn't already know) that the comic had a vinyl disc tie-in back in the '60s that serves as a nice little keepsake of the famous publication.  It's fairly easy to acquire on eBay (I've just bought two of them) for a relatively inexpensive price, which surprised me as - a good many years back - I saw a few of these CENTURY 21 EPs at a comic mart for about £15 to £20 each.  Perhaps the fact that most (if not all) of them have since become available on CD has lowered the price of the original records.

I have the first year's worth of TV21s in my collection (including #1), plus a good number of others up to the last issue, but it's nice to see the logo gracing the cover of a record and it's a great little collector's item to own.  Once I've luxuriated in its presence for a while, I'll place it alongside my FIREBALL XL5 - JOURNEY To The MOON EP, which I bought a good many years ago.  The TV21 record arrived today and is in very good condition, but an even better version is winging its way to me as I type.  Interestingly, DOCTOR WHO was never featured in the comic, so I assume that the inclusion of the theme tune was intended to represent The DALEKS, who appeared in the first 104 issues.

Collectors of TV21 may be interested in a facsimile of the free gift (Fireball XL5) from #3, available from NORTHERNLAD on eBay.  Priced at £5, it's printed on card (without his name-stamp) and is a nice way of reliving part of your childhood if you owned an original back in the day.  Item #130794388939. 

WANTED: DEAD Or ALIVE - BATMAN! FAVOURITE COMICS Of The PAST - PART FOURTEEN...

Copyright DC COMICS

As I've said many times before, comics are the next best thing to diaries and photographs (in fact, sometimes they're better), because they somehow manage to evoke specific moments in our pasts in an almost tangible way.  Very often, I've been so buried in a back issue that I'm surprised when I look up from its pages to find I'm not still in the house (or the time) I lived in when I first read it.

Take BATMAN #201 for example.  This was yet another comic purchased from CORSON'S (which, at the time of typing, still exists*) back in the latter half of '72, not long after we'd moved into our new house.  I remember buying it early evening, and arriving home to discover that friends of my parents were visiting.  I sat at the dining table in the living-room, and set about re-creating the splash page on a piece of blank paper.  That table was given away some years later, but it still exists in the fabled land of memory whenever I recall that golden evening of so very long ago.  (*Update: Not any more, alas, 7 or 8 years later.)

That's the great thing about comics; they're a gateway into an earlier time and place - a means by which we can relive the past for however brief an instant, through the images on the page and even the smell that emanates from the paper - re-creating long-vanished moments from another era which we can experience again and again whenever the fancy takes us.

Somehow I doubt that perusing comics on the Internet or on an iPad is an experience that'll easily lend itself to the same kind (or degree) of nostalgic and sentimental wallowing in which an actual published paper periodical allows readers to indulge.  And to think they call it 'progress'.  I know what I call it, and I very much doubt I'm the only one.

However, let's suppress our sadness, and enjoy these pages from a period when the demise of printed comics was still a very long way off.  Hopefully, that fate isn't as imminent as it now appears to be.

STREWTH! Is He MAN Or LINK? Or... Is He BOTH? (PART EIGHT)

Copyright relevant owner

It was with the eighth instalment in FANTASTIC #8 that The MISSING LINK changed direction and stepped up a gear.  With the 'hulking' Link now transformed into a human, the strip started to evolve into a bona fide superhero series, though it would take several more episodes before this became apparent.  If you weren't around in the '60s to savour this strip the first time out, ahead of you lies the thrill of joyous discovery, as this blog re-presents - in chronological order - all fifty-one episodes of this classic from yesteryear.  And, if you behave yourselves, I might throw in the full-colour tale from FANTASTIC ANNUAL 1969.  No, don't applaud - just put a cheque in the post!

For Part Nine, click here.  For Part Seven, click here.

PART THIRTEEN Of FAVOURITE COMICS Of The PAST - 'HAS-BEEN HERO'...

Images copyright DC COMICS

Before the memory of past events fades beyond my ability to accurately recall, I now cast the spotlight of history upon WORLD'S FINEST COMICS #178, which I had when I was a boy of between 8 and 10 years of age.  My original copy was torn into tiny pieces at some point (I don't remember why) and for a few years the scraps littered the layers of insulation fibre between the floor joists up in my loft.  In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if fragments yet lurked there to this day, over 40 years after my family moved from the house.

The scans you're currently looking at are from a replacement copy I acquired a good many years ago.  It's true to say that I've had it for a far greater period of time than I ever had the original, but in all that span, I've never yet managed to read the story's conclusion in the next-but-one issue, number 180.  (179 was a Giant-Size reprint issue.)  One day I must apply myself to tracking down a copy of the comic and finding out what happened, though it'll be a strange sensation to finally read the resolution of a tale I first started 43 years before.

Looking at this comic now, memories come flooding back; images of CORSON'S, the shop from where I bought it; the bedroom of my old house and the gloom of the loft where it met its final fate.  If you had this comic as a child then you'll have your very own set of recollections to accompany it.  If so, cast now your eyes over the following select pages and enter again that hallowed haven of yesteryear when the world was a much simpler, safer place and the future still lay a very long way off.  (Or at least that's how it seemed.)

And just think - somewhere out there is bound to be someone who read #180 all those years ago, but never saw #178.  Ain't life strange?

******

UPDATE: I've now acquired WFC #180 - click here.

Further Update: I've now also acquired #179, a giant reprint issue unconnected to 178 & 180.

  

Note that the 'photo' of Superman resembles the Aurora model kit.  I wonder if
 it was a deliberate 'homage' or merely a coincidence.  Whaddya think, readers? 

CRIKEY! PART SEVEN Of The MISSING LINK...

Copyright REBELLION

Oh, lookee here - a whole four pages of The MISSING LINK, drawn by the amazing LUIS BERMEJO and published in FANTASTIC #7 way back in 1967.  Obviously I must've read these titanic tales in a previous life, because I surely can't be old enough to have seen them in my present incarnation.  ('Scuse me, it's time for my reality pill.)  Wouldn't it be great to see these classic stories reproduced in full-colour in an inexpensive, hard-covered volume?  Hopefully, by featuring these strips on this blog, I can help create an appetite for such a publication.

Fingers crossed, everybody.  (Update: And as we now know, REBELLION's TREASURY Of BRITISH COMICS arm published just such a book, though in the original black and white.)

FOR FAWKES' SAKE...

Copyright REBELLION

Remember, remember - er, wait just a second, I've forgotten.  No, hang on - I've remembered again.  Tonight is November 5th, GUY FAWKES' NIGHT - BONFIRE NIGHT - GIVE PENSIONERS AND PETS A HEART ATTACK NIGHT - whatever you want to call it.  For all those participating in the firework festivities, here's a cut-out Guy Fawkes mask from a 1997 issue of BUSTER.  I think this was printed in the insides of the comic just about every year, and may even hark back to my own childhood - it certainly looks familiar.  (Although, back then, it would've been a cardboard free gift - with its own elastic - tucked inside the comic.) 

Anyway, take care if you're having a firework display or attending a local bonfire - fingers and skin are handy things to have, so take appropriate steps to ensure that you or your kids aren't parted from them.  REMEMBER THE FIREWORKS CODE!   

BLIMEY! It's The MISSING LINK - PART SIX...

Copyright REBELLION

BLIMEY!  Ol' LINKY is back - and he seems a little hot under the collar.  (If he had one, that is.)  Here I thought he was a pillar of the community, but it turns out that's just not enough for him - he wants a column all to himself.  Just look at him climb up NELSON's.  (No sniggering, you lot - this isn't the FRANKIE HOWERD show.)  Incidentally, I haven't trimmed off the panel borders on the sides of the pages in the scanning process - that's the way they were printed in FANTASTIC #6, back in 1967.  (In my copy anyway.)

Remember to stay tuned for more Fantastic adventures of The MISSING LINK!  (For Part Seven, click here.  For Part Five, click here.)

 

DANNY DARE 'BLASTS OFF'...

Copyright REBELLION

As promised, faithful Crivs, here's another firework-themed strip from WHAM!.  This time around it's ol' DANNY DARE, legendary space pilot DAN DARE's #1 fan.  One of the things that strikes me about these old strips is how frequently fisticuffs were indulged in.  Years ago, my local newspaper occasionally published the odd strip cartoon by yours truly (for which I was paid), and I remember the editor, MR. BARR, rejecting one for being too violent.  (This was around 1984.)  The panel in question involved a bully receiving one punch to the fizzog by PERCY PROON, YOUR NUMBER ONE LOON (the hero of the strip), and this was regarded as a bit on the rough side for the local paper.  Seems it was all right to print stories about muggings, murder and rape, but a single cartoon punch was considered too much for readers' sensibilities.

One thing's for sure - what some of the kids in comics got up to with fireworks on bonfire night back in the '60s would never be countenanced today.  Also, consider the bad example set by Danny in the above tale, whereby he profits from selling items thrown out by mistake and which don't belong to him.  Nowadays, that second-last panel would be redrawn and relettered to read something like this: "These forks were valuable antiques!  I got a reward for returning them to the owners!"

THE FAB FOUR FEEL FINE...

Copyright relevant owner

I recently saw the above photograph on one of the sites in my blog list.  It was in a pretty damaged condition, with creases all over it (see below).  I find some challenges just far too appealing to ignore, so, with the aid of some computer technology, I set about restoring the picture to something closer to its original state - with the intention of then sending it to the person on whose blog I had seen it.

Trouble is, I can now no longer recall which site that was.  So, if this photo belongs to you, please copy the restored version with my compliments.  Obviously, it could stand some further work, but I only had so much time to devote to it.  Hopefully, you're happy with the results.

And below is an alternate version just for the sake of variety.  If the person to whom the photo belongs sees  this, can he or she let me know please.  Also, if you know which blog the pic comes from, please let me know in the comments section.  Ta.

FIREWORKS FUN With FRANKIE STEIN (And The TIDDLERS)...

Copyright relevant owner

As a little taster for upcoming GUY FAWKES' NIGHT (seeing as how people are already exploding fireworks all over the place), here's a suitably themed story featuring THE TIDDLERS from WHAM!, cover-dated November 5th, 1966.  I'll be posting some more stories pertaining to the occasion over the next couple of days, so stay tuned.

While I'm here, you may as well have the FRANKIE STEIN story from the same issue.  (No point in prolonging your suspense.)Don't you just love that fantastic KEN REID art?

Remember, to enlarge, click on image, then click again for optimum size.  See you soon, chums!  

'THEY DON'T QUITE GET IT' DEPT...

"Do people laugh at your pathetic drawings?"  If the answer to that is "yes", then you already draw The Dandy Way.  With the comic destined to cease publication in little over a month, I think the editors still haven't quite grasped precisely where they went wrong.  They should have remembered the old adage: "You can't give what you don't have".  I picked up a copy of the latest issue today and, with a few honourable exceptions, the standard of artwork in far too many strips is distinctly amateurish.

So, do you want to learn how to draw 'The Dandy way'?  Seems the way to do that is to draw as badly as you can, but I'd aim higher if I were you - it should pay off in the long run.

SKYFALL - HAS THE SKY FINALLY FALLEN IN ON BOND?

"The best BOND yet!" claim some reviews of 007's latest blockbuster biggie.  Is it?  Er, to be honest - no, it isn't - not by a long chalk.  It is entertaining however, and well worth seeing, but the plot is rather flimsy and Bond comes across as somewhat inept, failing to prevent the deaths of two people who were relying on him for protection.

The movie revolves around a simple tale of revenge; one man's mission to exact retribution upon the person he believes abandoned him to a fate he somehow miraculously survived.  In that sense, the premise is hardly epic in scale, but Bond plots have never been anything more than a convenient peg on which to hang some spectacular scenes, and in that respect the movie does not completely disappoint.  The views of Shanghai are simply stunning and almost worth the price of admission alone.

The pace does drag in spots though, and the finale on the Scottish moors seems glaringly out of place.  When the source of the movie's title is finally revealed, the viewer's reaction can be nothing more than an incredulous "Is that it?"  Also, Bond's plan to use a certain VIP as bait to lure the villain into his clutches is simply ridiculous.  By isolating the person from adequate security and relying only on himself to deal with the team of killers he'd expected to pursue them, his judgement is seriously open to question.  As such, the conclusion is inevitable, and 007 deserves to be forcibly retired for his sheer inadequacy in the art of strategic planning.

DANIEL CRAIG is fine when it comes to portraying Bond as a nigh-unstoppable juggernaut of destruction - his 007 can certainly handle himself in a fight.  When SEAN CONNERY made his debut in DR NO back in 1962, some critics dismissed him as nothing more than "a thug in a dinner-suit".  Craig fits this description even more than Connery did, but where he is less adept is in capturing the qualities of elegance and sophistication that Bond is also supposed to possess.  In that sense, his Bond comes across as a much more one-dimensional character than any of the previous actors before him.

However, the movie's main defects spring from the 'reboot' in CASINO ROYALE - a totally pointless exercise which resulted in more problems than it could ever hope to resolve.  (Whatever they were supposed to be - does anyone know?)  The biggest mistake with the movie was in not replacing JUDI DENCH at the same time Craig assumed the role of Bond.  Had that been done, the various paradoxes which now abound simply wouldn't exist.  Dench's M was firmly rooted in the previous continuity of PEIRCE BROSNAN's quartet of movies, even referring to her "predecessor" in one of them.  The 'new' direction now means that she couldn't have been M when 007 was a more seasoned assassin than he now is.

Another mistake was placing Bond at the point in time he'd just joined the double-0 section.  If that aspect was absent, it would make no noticeable difference to the movie as a whole.  All the producers had to do was introduce new actors in the roles of Bond, M, Q & Moneypenny at the same time. As it is, Skyfall's nod to previous Bond continuity in regard to the ASTON MARTIN is perplexing.  Clearly Bond is referencing GOLDFINGER, but didn't he just win the DB5 (with Jamaican number plates) in a card game in Casino Royale?  It just makes no sense, and results in the same state of confusion that DC COMICS perpetually inflicts upon their readers whenever they revise the origins of their heroes every few years.

It's interesting to note that, had CUBBY BROCCOLI still been alive, Craig would never have been given the role.  Cubby had a thing about an actor embodying the physical aspects of the hero; Bond had to be over six foot (though in the books he's only six foot) and Craig is around five-ten.  Apparently, LEWIS COLLINS was passed over for the part in the 1980s because he didn't 'measure up' in the height department, so it seems Barbara Broccoli has abandoned her late father's standards in regard to casting.  Cubby even lamented Connery's baldness, saying: "It's a shame Sean lost his hair", but that at least was something the make-up department could remedy.

So - Skyfall - hit or miss?  Well, hit, but far from being the definitive Bond it's touted as.  One can only hope that, with the introductions now out of the way, when 007 returns in his next cinematic outing, it will be the ruthless, witty, elegant and sophisticated Bond we've come to expect from the older movies; not the morose, surly, and - it has to be said - totally incompetent (but lucky) rookie we've seen in the last three.

Agree or disagree?  You have a licence to comment - use it.