|
Post by Icctrombone on Feb 16, 2023 5:35:23 GMT -5
Another one: Angel and the Ape. Yes, there’s been numerous appearances, but are they truly big? Feels like they, much like my other choices, should have soared higher. I read a bunch of their stories and enjoyed them. The Bob Oskner art was great but it was a humor book and those don’t exist these days.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Feb 16, 2023 11:24:37 GMT -5
If we're talking Angel and Ape vintage, what about.... I think if it had been ten years earlier it might have lasted. Or if it had come in 5-7 years later, about the time that Jonah Hex hit it might have lasted longer. It probably also would have helped if Americans were more discerning consumers.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Feb 16, 2023 11:26:58 GMT -5
They weren't new characters, but I expected these two licensed comics were off to a long, long run when they hit the stands in the early 70's: After a couple of issues, I realized Doc wasn't going to take off like I had hoped, with Marvel botching the start by updating it to the 70's before a quiet reversion, but I held out hope for The Shadow. Within a couple of years, I learned not to get too attached to any new comics, and I don't think I ever again felt any confidence that a new feature I liked would be sustainable. I was always disappointed when a favorite would disappear in less than a year or two, but never shocked. I just think that the cross-over between the series paperback market and comics wasn't big enough. You would definitely have thought that Doc Savage might have lasted because those Bantam paperbacks definitely had legs. But, alas, no.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Feb 16, 2023 11:36:40 GMT -5
Maybe I'm a pessimist. Or maybe I'm a realist. But I'm super hard pressed to come up with any book or character that I thought would be BIG. I pretty much expect most books to fail and most characters to sink in to semi-obscurity. Because, by and large, superhero comic book readers are a superstitious and cowardly lot who fear change and anything new. And anything outside superhero books has very little chance of really catching on...and that seems to get worse every year.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Feb 16, 2023 12:03:40 GMT -5
What Slam_Bradley says was unfortunately true in 1968 when we saw DC trying a little bit of everything to compete with Marvel. I had only been reading comics for six years then, I had become an avid fan of almost every genre and was happy to give everything a shot. In fact, I’d have to say that I was bored by a lot of the superhero comics, which were more homogeneous in nature than they had been when I started reading. The formula was starting to win out. And too, the fact that comics only cost $.12 certainly had a great deal to do with it. But that was a good thing, because as a reader, you didn’t feel as if you were losing money if the comic weren’t that great, and you were more willing to give a series a shot and stay with it for a few issues. For all kinds of reasons, Infantino and the powers that were did not give a fair shot to all those well drawn/ well written titles. No, not all of them would have lasted four or five years, perhaps, but it would have been nice to see them have a chance to flourish and give DC a broader base of comics and fans. As it was, both Marvel and DC soon became heavy duty producers of horror comics, some of which were good, but most of which were repetitive in their stories and less than stellar in their art.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2023 12:59:17 GMT -5
Fearing change is a topic in its own right - and not just with comics.
There’s a magazine in the UK called Snooker Scene. It’s long been described as an analogue relic in the digital age. With all due respect to the editor, he started editing it in…1972. In recent years, there have been complaints that the magazine is filled with too many match reports and statistics rather than analysis, features, opinions, etc. Well, the editor ceased to be editor and a new editor took over late last year. He had plans to reduce the match reports and statistics and be a more modern publication of analysis, opinions, etc.
Well, he lasted a mere two issues. He’s gone. The old editor is back in a caretaker role. Despite much criticism by readers, they’ve reverted to the old format of match reports, stats, etc. The old editor even “berated” his successor for doing away with some of the antiquated stuff. It seems that the publisher didn’t like change.
A friend of mine didn’t like the movie Licence to Kill. Personally, while I would not have wanted every 007 film to be like that, it was a refreshing change to the formula.
So it seems some people really don’t want change despite saying that they do.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Feb 16, 2023 13:26:36 GMT -5
Fearing change is a topic in its own right - and not just with comics. There’s a magazine in the UK called Snooker Scene. It’s long been described as an analogue relic in the digital age. With all due respect to the editor, he started editing it in…1972. In recent years, there have been complaints that the magazine is filled with too many match reports and statistics rather than analysis, features, opinions, etc. Well, the editor ceased to be editor and a new editor took over late last year. He had plans to reduce the match reports and statistics and be a more modern publication of analysis, opinions, etc. Well, he lasted a mere two issues. He’s gone. The old editor is back in a caretaker role. Despite much criticism by readers, they’ve reverted to the old format of match reports, stats, etc. The old editor even “berated” his successor for doing away with some of the antiquated stuff. It seems that the publisher didn’t like change. A friend of mine didn’t like the movie Licence to Kill. Personally, while I would not have wanted every 007 film to be like that, it was a refreshing change to the formula. So it seems some people really don’t want change despite saying that they do. Add me to the "Hated License to Kill" list. Weak villain that should have taken Bond 5 minutes to eliminate. Lot of tv-level performances, too. The plot suffers from the committee approach to script writing that plagued the bond films, by that time, and continued into the 90s. Sometimes you got a hit, usually, at best, you got an "okay" film.
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Feb 16, 2023 13:46:24 GMT -5
Maybe I'm a pessimist. Or maybe I'm a realist. But I'm super hard pressed to come up with any book or character that I thought would be BIG. I pretty much expect most books to fail and most characters to sink in to semi-obscurity. Because, by and large, superhero comic book readers are a superstitious and cowardly lot who fear change and anything new. And anything outside superhero books has very little chance of really catching on...and that seems to get worse every year. This is certainly part of it. Remember, the ask is often not "Buy this," but rather "Buy this instead of something you are already familiar with."
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Feb 16, 2023 17:14:49 GMT -5
Maybe I'm a pessimist. Or maybe I'm a realist. But I'm super hard pressed to come up with any book or character that I thought would be BIG. I pretty much expect most books to fail and most characters to sink in to semi-obscurity. Because, by and large, superhero comic book readers are a superstitious and cowardly lot who fear change and anything new. And anything outside superhero books has very little chance of really catching on...and that seems to get worse every year.
I agree in general, but for a few years in the 1970s we were seeing the odd character or series from outside the narrow boundaries of the superhero genre have some success - sword & sorcery (Conan), horror (Tomb of Dracula), spy-thriller (MoKF). So if ever there were a time when pulp characters like Doc Savage or the Shadow might have had a chance to catch on with a larger readership you'd think it would have been then. It still isn't a shock that it didn't happen but perhaps that adds to the disappointment just a little.
|
|
|
Post by MWGallaher on Feb 17, 2023 7:05:40 GMT -5
I was also really bad at recognizing what characters would become big. I felt pretty confident, for example, that G.I. JOE and TRANSFORMERS would quickly vanish from the stands. Not in a million years would I have expected Venom to become one of Marvel's main franchises, or that Deadpool would rack up hundreds of issues.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 8:12:34 GMT -5
I was also really bad at recognizing what characters would become big. I felt pretty confident, for example, that G.I. JOE and TRANSFORMERS would quickly vanish from the stands. Not in a million years would I have expected Venom to become one of Marvel's main franchises, or that Deadpool would rack up hundreds of issues. I pretty much assume any character I like will fizzle and those I don't like will be the next big thing and haunt me for decades... -M
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 8:28:10 GMT -5
I’m sorry to bring a “shopping list” to this thread, but I have another one: The Stranger. I can’t say if he’s been included much in modern tales. I haven’t see him for a while. He certainly didn’t seem to be as ubiquitous as other cosmic heavyweights. I like the look, I like his deviousness, and I wish he’d been more high profile.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Feb 17, 2023 9:20:07 GMT -5
I’m sorry to bring a “shopping list” to this thread, but I have another one: The Stranger. I can’t say if he’s been included much in modern tales. I haven’t see him for a while. He certainly didn’t seem to be as ubiquitous as other cosmic heavyweights. I like the look, I like his deviousness, and I wish he’d been more high profile. FYI, that isn't the real Stranger in that Avengers issue. It's the Toad(!) pretending to be the Stranger.
Cei-U!
Friggin' Englehart, man!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 9:39:18 GMT -5
I’m sorry to bring a “shopping list” to this thread, but I have another one: The Stranger. I can’t say if he’s been included much in modern tales. I haven’t see him for a while. He certainly didn’t seem to be as ubiquitous as other cosmic heavyweights. I like the look, I like his deviousness, and I wish he’d been more high profile. FYI, that isn't the real Stranger in that Avengers issue. It's the Toad(!) pretending to be the Stranger.
Cei-U!
Friggin' Englehart, man! Really? I detest the Toad. I’m sure there’s a better Stranger cover out there.
|
|
|
Post by james on Feb 17, 2023 10:11:23 GMT -5
|
|