FRANK THORNE'S ONLY MARVEL UK WORK?

Copyright relevant owner

I'm now too old to reliably recall whether I ever had Planet Of The Apes & Dracula Lives #100 back in the day or not, but having recently seen the cover of it over on McScotty's blog That Was Then (should actually be called Now And Then 'cos he doesn't post very often, the lazy loafer), I decided I must have the issue for myself so promptly bought one via eBay.  Why?  Well, as far as is known (by me anyway), it's the only cover Frank Thorne ever drew for a UK Marvel mag, perhaps even any UK mag in fact, and that makes it worth having in my collection.

Frank was an excellent artist and he drew the female figure in such a way as to induce feelings of lust and desire in young teenage boys who slobbered and drooled over babes like Red Sonja - She-Devil With A Sword.  He could draw bosoms as if they were ripe fruit just waiting to be plucked (I said plucked, Melvin) and it's difficult for me to tear my eyes away from the lovely lass on the cover of POTA's Centennial issue, despite all the action going on.  Anyway, thought I'd share it with you here to save you having to jump over to McS's blog.  I'm thoughtful that way.

LOOK And LEARN's FINAL BOW...

Copyright relevant owner

It was 43 years ago that something came to an end, though I didn't know about it at the time and didn't learn of the sad event until many years (perhaps even decades) after the fact.  Look And Learn first hit newsagents' shelves in January 1962 and finally breathed its last in April 1982, not even granted the courtesy of being merged with another weekly magazine as was usually the case with IPC Magazines.

I've been looking to acquire the last issue for a good while now and it finally landed on my hall carpet this afternoon.  The periodical lasted for three months past 20 years, though seemed to have been around for much longer as 20 years doesn't seem a very long time in retrospect from this old man's perspective.  (I suppose if I were still only in my early 20s, the same span would seem like  practically forever.)

Anyway, thought I'd show you the cover of the final issue (and the 'special message' from the editor), as well as the cover of the one that started it all, which I acquired a fair number of years ago.  Not long after buying a facsimile of the debut issue, an original came into my possession, so it's nice to have both.  Were any of you ever Look And Learn readers, Crivs?  Then feel free to share your memories with your fellow members.

Note that in the response to one of the above letters, the editor says to look out for The Trigan Empire Annual 1983.  Was it ever published?  I have The Look And Learn Book Of The Trigan Empire for 1973/'74 and the Hamlyn book from 1978, but I've never seen another that would fit the description of an 'Annual'.  Any info would be appreciated.  While you're thinking about it, below is the cover of the ish that started it all.

THROUGH THE... BEDROOM WINDOW...

Back in 1983, when my family moved from this house, the tenancy still had almost 3 weeks to run.  We moved out early because the house we were moving to was new-built, so it was lying empty waiting for us.  We left the odd piece of furniture at our old address, to be collected at our leisure before our tenancy officially ended.  During that period, although we were living in our new home, I'd now and then pop into our old one and sit on a wicker chair and gaze out of my old bedroom window at the sun going down on the horizon.

I knew I'd miss my old view, and never quite felt that I'd ever get used to the 'new' one.  Well, as regular readers know, just over four years later, we returned to our former domicile and I was reunited with that view, and for the next 20 years, I seldom thought about the house we'd vacated, or the view from its bedroom window.  Now, however, another 10 years down the line, I find myself recalling it with almost the same kind of fondness I had for the one I returned to.  I find it strange that I immediately fell into the familiarity of my old view and never gave the 'new' one much thought - until relatively recently that is.

I just accepted being back in my old home to the extent that it almost felt as if I'd never been away.  However, I looked out of my window tonight, and I think it was the first time since being back that I realised I'd taken it pretty much for granted.  Tonight was the first time it'd struck me that the view I'm again so familiar with was once part of my past life, and not (for just over 4 years) my then-present one.  I sometimes feel as if I only dreamt about living in another house, but now and again I'm reminded that, no - it was for real.

You know what?  I reckon that if for some reason, I had to live in that house again, then I'd probably feel as if my 30 years back here were a dream, not the other way around.  No real point to this by the way, I just thought I'd share with you the strange thoughts that can occur to a fella from glancing out his bedroom window.

(Originally published Tuesday July 4th 2017.) 

FOR FACS' SAKE - FACSIMILE RIP-OFF ON EBAY...

Copyright D.C. THOMSON & Co., Ltd

An eBay seller currently has the above slabbed issue of a facsimile of The Beano #1, given away with The Sunday Post in 1998, at an asking price of £500.  It's printed on 'glossy' paper, has only 24 pages out of the original 28, and part of the top of masthead mascot Peanut's hair has been cut off.

First of all, I can't believe that anyone would be so optimistic (or opportunistic) as to ask for such a ludicrous price, never mind anyone actually being stupid enough to pay it.  I recently showed you a far superior facsimile of this comic going for a mere £13.20, which has the complete 28 pages, unlike this one.

How anyone can ask for £500 and not be aware of the damage to their credibility as a seller is beyond me.  It also speaks volumes as to what he thinks of potential buyers if he really thinks anyone would ever pay it, given the fact that it's hardly rare.  In fact, I've got around a dozen of them, still in the poly bags they came in inside The Sunday Post.

And he's such an unpleasant seller.  The way he answers his neutral and negative feedback is a disgrace, and eBay should ban him at once.  We can only live in hope.  (And no, as far as I recall, I've never bought anything from him.)

WHEN IS A FACSIMILE NOT QUITE A FACSIMILE?

Copyright DC COMICS

DC Comics have been producing facsimiles of some of their Limited Collectors' Editions for quite a while now, and for anyone who missed the originals back in the '70s, it's a less expensive way of obtaining replicas of classic comics they'd like to have owned back then, but for some reason didn't or couldn't.  Or perhaps they did, but lost, misplaced, or gave them away down through the years.  So now these 'new' presentations help them roll back the years and let them re-experience aspects of their youth that were once so dear to them.  (It's a strange concept - to reprint a reprint, as most [though not all] of those giant-size card-covered mags were.)

However (as is often the case), there's a catch.  When the original reprint editions were produced, amendments were often made to their larger-than-life presentations in what was then a new format.  Splash pages were usually extended, height-wise, to compensate for missing indicias present in the initial standard-sized printings of the tales.  Credits were sometimes added and captions and footnotes altered to bring them up-to-date, or for some other editorial reason entirely.  So having clued you in, I'll shortly demonstrate exactly what I'm talking about, using the relatively recent facsimile of LCE CR-48 (Superman Vs The Flash) to provide examples.

But why's it so?  Well, the original (altered) proofs for CR-48 probably no longer exist, so when the decision was made to reprint it, DC went with whatever sources were available of the two tales from later (restored) presentations, like hardback collected editions for example, which sought to preserve the archival aspects of the strips' first printings.  That's why the facsimile has corner page numbers and different colours, while the '70s incarnation had the numbers removed, new colouring, added credits (on the first strip), an amended end-caption, and an extended splash page.  With the facsimile, they used whatever more archival proofs for reprints that were to hand.

So these new facsimiles aren't always exact  - they're as close as they can be without going overboard in the 're-creation' stakes.  I daresay most readers wouldn't even notice the difference unless they have an original to compare to, but if they don't, then it hardly matters much, does it?  Unless you're as pernickety as me, that is.  What do you think, Crivs?  Would you rather have exact facsimiles (prices and indicias aside), or as long as they use the same covers and contain the same strips and features, do the occasional slight departures from the originals not bother you?  Comments extremely welcome, so start exercising your typing fingers now and have your say!

Note the 'pattern' in the grey of the facsimile (right).  This is usually the result of not

being scanned at the appropriate resolution 

As you can see, the original reprint (left) has been amended and extended

End caption has been slightly amended in the original reprint (left)

Original reprint page (left) has been extended downwards.  For some odd reason, in

the facsimile (right), this page was printed smaller than others (and the original)

Horizontal gutter in middle of page has been reduced in facsimile (right)

Both covers side-by-side for you to compare - click to enlarge

Not even one comment so far?  Hell's teeth, you lot are hard to please, that's a fact.  I'm off to sulk under my bed - and I may not come out for, oh - ages.  (Better hoover the carpet under it first.)

DOGGIE Of The DAY...

Aw, just melts your heart, doesn't it?

HAVING A WEE HOLIDAY...

Due to circumstances beyond my control, I won't be able to do any new posts or answer comments for a few days.  See all you Crivvies on my return.  In the meantime, have a Bear Of The Day.  (I know you much prefer Yogi to women.)

THREE FANTASTIC FACSIMILES...

Copyright D.C. THOMSON & Co., Ltd

I was thinking of having some fun with you all by not mentioning that the above Beano #1 is a new facsimile edition and just leaving you to wonder whether I'd lucked out in locating an excellent condition original, but I resisted temptation.  It's stapled, instead of glued at the spine, but trust me - this is likely to be the best re-presentation of this iconic comic that will ever see the light of day.  It's so good, you won't ever need an original (which is not necessarily to be taken as an admission that I don't have one) and it's at a beano of a price, too.  (£16 inclusive of p&p - and it contains all 28 pages.)  Get over to eBay and type Beano #1 facsimile into its search box.

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Next up (above) is The Fantastic Four #3 Facsimile Edition and it does exactly what it says on the tin.  Indicia in the wrong place again and barcode still on the front cover, but it's still a nice little item to add to your collection, regardless of however many reprints you might already have of this tale.  Apparently, it's Marvel's intention to reissue the first dozen FF's, as well as #s 49-50 (the Galactus Trilogy), so start saving your shekels now, effendis.

Copyright DC COMICS

This one's a game-changer for DC, and I only hope that future facsimiles from them will maintain the same high standard.  Barcode discreetly placed on the back cover, high-quality newsprint-type paper, and - most important of all - every ad brand-spanking new-looking, not faded scans from published comics as in many previous DC facsimiles.  I wish Marvel would print their replicas on the same paper and put the barcodes on the back cover - then they really would be cooking with gas!  Well, watcha waiting for?  Buy 'em now!

SO WHO SCRIPTED FANTASTIC FOUR #1...?

In all three captions, past tense words have been amended
to present tense.  E.g., 'raised' to 'raises', 'flew' to 'fly' and
'flies', 'tried' to 'tries', etc.  Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Something has always niggled the back of my mind about Fantastic Four #1.  The writing, or to be more precise, the scripting.  It doesn't quite seem like Stan Lee's usual style and I wonder if Jack Kirby (or someone else) initially scripted it, only for Stan to redo some segments to imbue his 'voice' into it.  Sheer speculation on my part of course, but I've got to provide something for all you panting Crivvies to read, so I thought I'd indulge myself with this subject.

'Raced' to 'race', 'seized' to 'seizes', 'came' to 'come', 'blazed'
to 'blazes', 'melted' to 'melts'.  Note also the last 4 lines of the
end caption appear to have been altered, suggesting that the
story was perhaps originally intended for  a different mag

Stan normally scripted in the present tense, yet there are quite a few obvious examples of lettering amendments to transform past tense words into present tense ones.  Some past tense words remain in an earlier segment of the tale, but that's a flashback so it's entirely appropriate to have done so.  Take a look at the following examples and see what you think.  The amendments are pretty obvious so I won't spell them all out (except in the 'footnotes') as there's no point in overkill, but I can't help but wonder exactly what happened in this instance.

The 'eyes' have it!  Have what?  Don't seem to have their heads in panel 3

FF #1 is a peculiar issue as it's filled with contrived introductions of the four characters and inconsistences in the art.  For example, Reed has two left hands in one panel (not shown, but see here), and Ben Grimm's attire switches from peaked cap and windcheater-type jacket in a couple of panels (above) to slouch hat and overcoat in others (below).  Note also that in the third panel of the above tier, there's no room for the monster's three heads behind the eyes - it's almost as though they're disembodied and floating in mid air. 

Note Ben has four fingers and a thumb in panel 1, and it's unclear whether a finger has been
added to his right hand in panel 3.  And his left thigh seems far too thin in the middle panel

Am I perhaps being too pernickety, Crivvies?  Then be sure to tell me so in the comments section.  (Incidentally, the lettering amendments will be more noticeable if you click on the images to enlarge and study them.)

ROLL UP, ROLL UP - FF FREEBIE (AGAIN)...

You may remember me wittering on about POWER RECORDS some years back, and their Comicbook and record set of The FANTASTIC FOUR #126 ("The WAY It BEGAN!")  Well, rather than wear out the record by playing it, in 2014 I transferred the audio on to my computer and thence to CD, clever chappie that I am.  I even copied the record label to provide one for the disc, and I'm well-chuffed with it.

Now, here's the good news (maybe).  I did a few trial and error runs on getting the label just as I wanted it and therefore have excess copies of the disc - four to be precise.  If you'd like a free copy, just leave your name and address in the comments section - don't worry, I won't publish them - and I'll send you a copy at my own expense.  Also, your details won't be passed on to anyone and will be deleted from my files once I've addressed the jiffy bag.

The disc contains two versions of the record - the original one, plus one with the page bleeps edited out (no gaps) so that it sounds like a radio play.  If you've bought the mag, but have long-since lost the record, here's a chance to replace it with a brand-spanking new CD.  It's also been processed to reduce the record crackle, so it probably sounds better than you've ever heard it before.  So, it really is that simple - if you want a copy, just let me know.  Remember  though - it's first come, first served, so better be quick!  (UK Crivs only, I'm afraid.)

******

To reiterate - there really is no catch, hidden or otherwise.  Your name and address won't be used for any other purpose, won't be shared or passed on to any other parties, and won't be stored by me for future use in relation to anything else.  I delete the info right after I address the envelope.  Honest, you have absolutely nothing to lose and a free CD to gain.

(Update: All now gone, alas.  You were too slow!)

The FORGOTTEN BIRTHDAY CARD...

Regular readers may remember me mentioning living down in Southsea in Portsmouth for 3-4 months back in 1981.  I was there in response to the invitation from a friend to visit him for an indefinite stay, but when I got there he stayed well-clear, and apart from me seeing him for around 10 minutes at his naval base (HMS Vernon) the day after my arrival, and again for maybe 15-20 minutes in a canteen at Haslar Hospital in Gosport the week before I returned home, the only other time our paths crossed was when I spotted him by chance on his Moped one day and waved him down for a few minutes of chat.

His birthday was on February 17th so I'd bought him a card, but held on to it assuming I'd see him before his 'big day' and give it to him in person - alas, 'twas not to be.  (I'd arrived in Southsea towards the end of January and purchased the card at the start of February.)  Like I said, things didn't pan out that way, but it's just as well I didn't post it because he wouldn't have received it anyway as he was no longer living in navy married quarters (as I learned when I last saw him), but either on the base in Gosport or HMS Vernon.  I never spoke to him again and only learned in September of 2023 that he died in January of 2013.

As for the birthday card, it came home with me and lay forgotten in a box for 44 years, but I recently thought of a way whereby it could finally fulfil its purpose (sort of) by placing it on my mantlepiece in February of this year.  Sure, its intended recipient never got to see it, but I felt kind of sorry for it and wanted it to have its moment of 'glory' by being the object of attention in my living-room on the date it would've celebrated back in 1981.  This way, things have come full circle (again, sort of) and the forgotten card at long last has done what it was purchased for so many decades ago.  That's a happy ending (sort of), isn't it?

THE GREATEST RACE OF ALL TIME! (Except for when me and wee Jimmy Jones raced to see who'd reach the bathroom first before wetting ourselves.)

Copyright DC COMICS

I don't know why I do it, but I do!  I've already got the original version of this new Facsimile Edition of Superman Vs. The Flash, but simply had to have this one when I saw it was available.  Enjoy the few images on display here, then run out and buy one for yourself.  You can hug it, and love it, and call it George - or any other name you like, though personally, I'll continue to call it Superman Vs. The Flash, 'cos I'm not a weirdo.  Did you have this issue back in the day?  Feel free to share your thoughts and memories of it in our ever-lovin' comments section.  (Incidentally, it also contains some pages of Neal Adams artwork, but you'll have to buy your very own copy to see them.)  Did you hear what I said, McS?  NEAL ADAMS!

WE ARE ABOUT TO LAUNCH - STINGRAY...

Copyright relevant owner

Those of a certain age (as in decrepit old farts like me) may well remember the above ad (drawn by Ron Embleton) for the Stingray inflatable which appeared in TV Century 21 - and maybe even other comics as well, back in the '60s.  I always assumed it was a buoyancy aid to help keep kids afloat in the swimming pool or the sea, but there's actually no mention of that in the ad, so perhaps it was simply intended as a 'toy' so that kids could play at being Stingray.  Will we ever know?  Do we even care?

Anyway, subconsciously, I guess I fancied this piece of merchandise in my youth, so when the chance to obtain one recently presented itself, I took the plunge (figuratively speaking - no jumping off diving boards for me) and bought it.  I haven't inflated it and may never do, but there it is below laid out on my carpet for your perusal, followed by some of the seller's pics of the item in its inflated state.

Completely useless to me of course as I'd never fit in it, and it'll probably live in a box somewhere for the rest of it days.  However, considering I never owned one way back when, it's strangely still nice to have after all this time.  Anything you ever wanted (or wouldn't have minded) but never had when you were much younger, Crivvies, that you'd love to own today?  The comments section awaits your valued contributions so kindly get typing!

DAREDEVIL #1 FACSIMILE EDITION...

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Another nice new Facsimile Edition that every true Marvel fan should have, so buy yours while they're available and before they shoot up in price on eBay.  Would've been better with the barcode box on the back cover (same as DC) and as you can see below, the indicia is in the wrong place as it would've been under the ad on the inside cover when originally published back in the '60s (hence the space under the ad next to the splash page)*.  That aside, it's still worth having, but I can't help but wish they'd print it on a high quality newsprint paper (again, like DC) as opposed to the slightly glossy paper they use.  At least they've included the 'Continued After Next Page...' lines, which help capture the feel of the period.  Can't wait 'til they do Journey Into Mystery #83.

(*Incidentally, Marvel eventually moved the indicia to under the splash page in their mags, but at this time it was still placed under the interior cover ad.) 

And look below - my original copy of issue #1, and below that, both issues side-by-side.

DRAMA VERSUS COMMON SENSE - IS IT WORTH THE SWAP...?

Copyright MARVEL COMICS

Sometimes common sense has to be ignored for the purpose of drama.  For example, remember when James Bond chases a fleeing bad guy up some kind of crane in Casino Royale when all he really had to do was wait for him to come down at some point and capture him then?  Wouldn't have been as dramatic or exciting though, would it, and it could be argued that Bond was so caught up in the chase that he wasn't thinking clearly when he continued the pursuit and placed his own life in extreme danger by doing so.

Same goes for comics.  Take Fantastic Four #1 as another example, where Reed Richards fires a flare gun into the sky to capture the attention of his teammates.  Why not just use the little walkie-talkies of the kind that the Invisible Girl uses in issue 4, instead of seemingly causing a panic among the populace by a smoke-message?  (And would three English words in the sky really start rumours of an alien invasion - according to one cop - within seconds of the group's name appearing?  Even accepting that aliens might be suspected, it would take time for rumours to spread and the cops to hear about them, surely?)

Then we cut to Susan Storm, taking tea with a society friend.  Why doesn't she simply say she has to leave instead of turning invisible?  The short answer is to show the readers what her power is, but it's kind of contrived.  Then she makes things difficult for herself by pushing through a crowd while still invisible.  Surely if she could be seen, people would get out of her way and not inadvertently impede her, but this doesn't seem to occur to her.

And why not turn visible when she gets into the stationary cab/taxi?  The driver must've heard the door open and close and known he had a passenger, and it makes no sense that Sue would trust to sheer chance he'd go anywhere near where she wanted to - or decide to 'cruise' for a fare at precisely that moment.  Jack Kirby obviously intended that the driver was aware he had a hire and it was purely the fact that the money seemed suspended in mid-air that surprised him, not that he didn't know someone was in his cab.  Perhaps an example of a 'failure to communicate' between Stan Lee and Jack for which the 'Marvel Method' became famous.

We next turn our attention to Ben Grimm, standing inside a men's clothing store.  Despite his bulky form and him being swathed in a heavy overcoat, hat, and shades, he seems to have been able to enter the shop without difficulty.  When his attention is drawn to the flare, surely it would make more sense to exit as quietly and as (apparently) easily as he entered, instead of disrobing and crashing through the door frame and drawing unwanted attention to himself?  Of course it would, but this is a short-cut way of showing readers what The Thing looks like and what his 'schtick' is.

And what about that Johnny Storm - what an utter plonker!  He's sitting in a car, yet 'flames on' and reduces it to molten slag, with no regard for igniting the petrol/gasoline and possibly blowing his pals to kingdom come.  (He seems to have learned his lesson to some degree by the time issue 4 rolls around.)  Interestingly, in Stan's surviving two-page synopsis of the first issue, none of these details are present so it's likely that Jack was solely responsible for how each individual character was introduced.

These first half-dozen pages of FF #1 are utterly bereft of logic and common sense, but there are other failings throughout the rest of the mag which I'll leave for another time.  Sure, these liberties are taken for the purpose of creating dramatic impact and introducing the characters and their powers as quickly as possible, but does that excuse such 'shoddy' storytelling?  What do you think, readers?  Tell me and your fellow Crivvies and say how you would've handled this issue had you been responsible for producing it.

ADAM ETERNO: VOL. TWO - GRUNN THE GRIM...

Copyright REBELLION

Latest arrival at Castel Crivens, Volume Two of Treasury Of British Comics' Adam Eterno - Grunn The Grim, from the combined Lion & Thunder.  In his introduction, Chris Lowder says the following:

"Ironically, Thunder itself was a massive con from the start, since it was by no means built to last but created solely as a weekly that, after six months or so, would be merged into another paper (In Thunder's case Lion), thus boosting the latter's readership.  This neat trick had been practised by the Amalgamated Press/Fleetway/IPC since the 1900s and, in business terms, was usually highly effective."

Trouble with that is, it flies in the face of common sense.  Sure, no new comic was ever published without the knowledge it would be merged with another title if it failed to live up to expectations, but it is seriously unlikely that a new periodical would ever see the light of day without the hope that it would be a smash hit that would run for years.  Here's why: the sheer expense of launching a new comic was immense and usually took around two to three years to recoup its launch-costs, so going to all that time, trouble, and financial outlay simply isn't practical unless you have long-term aspirations for it.

A comic was usually only merged with another when its circulation was declining, so adding a shrinking readership to another comic may not have increased the circulation of the senior title by enough of a margin to make the financial investment worthwhile.  It would make far more sense to have given Lion a boost by a run of free gift issues and new characters, than go to the expense of launching a new comic for the purpose of boosting the sales of another a few months down the line.  After all, would the bigwigs really risk that approach, knowing that a new comic could be a dud from the start?  Very much doubt it.

Anyway, this looks like a great book and I can't wait until I have a surge in energy so that I can settle down to reading it - I therefore heartily recommend it in advance.