collapse

* Random Image

TheBeginningoftheEnd1
TheBeginningoftheEnd1
Posted by: SAGG
Posted in album: SAGG

* Search


* Recent Topics

Library Books That You All Read by BettyReggie
[Today at 08:54:20 AM]


What comics have you been reading? by DeCarlo Rules
[Today at 01:14:33 AM]


Days we look foward to as Archie Fans. by BettyReggie
[June 20, 2018, 05:26:49 PM]


What have you done today? by Archiecomicxfan215
[June 20, 2018, 12:55:56 AM]


ARCHIE COMICS FOR NOVEMBER 2017 by Tough guy21
[June 19, 2018, 01:52:27 PM]


What is to become of me and my collection? by JanaRonnie
[June 18, 2018, 05:16:32 AM]


Archie and Jughead in Winter Christmas Double Date by JanaRonnie
[June 18, 2018, 05:16:24 AM]


Archie & Me: Prank Attack by PTF
[June 17, 2018, 01:42:19 PM]


Super Suckers: That Lady is a Real Witch by PTF
[June 17, 2018, 12:52:44 PM]


Betty and Veronica Vixens coming to an end with issue 10 by DeCarlo Rules
[June 16, 2018, 02:26:26 PM]

* Shoutbox

Refresh History
  • BettyReggie: 112 Days until Wednesday 10th 2018 ,  Riverdale Season #3 on The CW at 8pm.
    June 20, 2018, 05:28:15 PM
  • Tuxedo Mark: And another one: [link]
    June 14, 2018, 08:42:07 PM
  • Tuxedo Mark: Riverdale spoof: [link]
    June 14, 2018, 08:35:22 PM
  • Tuxedo Mark: My review of "Roughing It!" from B&V Friends #262: [link]
    June 14, 2018, 08:12:53 PM
  • DeCarlo Rules: @irishmoxie -- It's definitely complete. All six of the 1958-59 Sy Reit/Bob White original issues, plus the feature-length "Good Guys of the Galaxy" by Tom DeFalco & Fernando Ruiz from ARCHIE #655, and three 5-page digest shorts that guest-starred Cosmo -- and the complete first issue of the Ian Flynn/Tracy Yarley COSMO (2017) thrown in for good measure. It follows the same layout/format as the previous JUGHEAD'S TIME POLICE, even though that didn't carry the "Archie Comics Presents..." trade dress. Not a bad buy for $11.
    June 14, 2018, 01:08:59 AM
  • irishmoxie: Anyone get the Cosmo book that came out today? Any good?
    June 13, 2018, 08:04:49 PM
  • Cosmo: Ah man....and I was worried I was the last enthusiast for ERB's stuff. I'm currently rereading my Dell Tarzan books. Really good fun! It took a while to complete that run.
    June 12, 2018, 06:51:53 PM
  • DeCarlo Rules: ...Marvel's earlier JOHN CARTER, WARLORD OF MARS in there, so the DE Tarzan comics need to go in a different box, and SHEENA (also a recent DE title) and DC's RIMA THE JUNGLE GIRL will help fill up that box.
    June 11, 2018, 07:40:48 PM
  • DeCarlo Rules: Recently. DE's unauthorized LORD OF THE JUNGLE Tarzan adaptations (and its authorized THE GREATEST ADVENTURE) won't fit into my existing box of previous Tarzan comics from Gold Key, DC, and Dark Horse, so I have to start a new box. Logically these get filed with DE's unauthorized WARLORD OF MARS comics (including DEJAH THORIS) and their authorized JOHN CARTER, WARLORD OF MARS. But I also want to squeeze Marve;
    June 11, 2018, 07:38:48 PM
  • DeCarlo Rules: Interesting. I tend not to group titles by publisher at all, if the characters were not created as work-for-hire (meaning the publisher is legally considered the 'author' of the character). Do they belong to that publisher's "universe" (assuming it has one)? There are some publishers like Dynamite Entertainment where the vast majority of the titles they publish are licensed, and thus were "inherited" from other publishers. Therefore it makes more sense to me to group them together in boxes with similar characters. Flash Gordon, The Phantom, and Mandrake comics (regardless of who the actual publisher was) go together in the same box because they're all classic adventure heroes licensed from Hearst Entertainment (formerly King Features Syndicate). Pulp fiction heroes like The Shadow, Doc Savage, and The Spider (regardless of the fact that the latter did not originate with the same publisher as the first two) also get grouped together. Space considerations allowing, Tarzan (and other Edgar Rice Burroughs adaptations) might share the same box with Sheena and Rima, but NOT with Ka-Zar, because he's a Marvel Universe character.
    June 11, 2018, 07:16:22 PM
  • rusty: I do keep all Star Trek series together in their own section and all Star Wars books together.  I also keep all 2000AD titles together and manga books get their own section.  For titles that have switched publishers, I usually keep them all with the publisher that I identify them with the most.  Tarzan has been published by a variety of publishers, but I keep them with Dell/Gold Key.  Conan is starting to get a bit close with all the success Dark Horse has had, but I still identify Conan more with Marvel.
    June 11, 2018, 06:27:26 PM
  • DeCarlo Rules: Believe it or not, I even have a box labeled "Pseudo-manga" that contains comics published by American companies and created by American creators like Astro Boy & Racer X (Now Comics), Battle of the Planets (Gold Key & Top Cow/Image), Captain Harlock (Malibu), Godzilla (Dark Horse) and Ultraman. I just want to keep those separate from the boxes of real translated manga in floppy comic format.
    June 11, 2018, 03:34:17 PM
  • DeCarlo Rules: Well. the problem is when you get titles with licensed characters that aren't owned by the publisher. So if you collect Star Trek comics, you'd have different series published by Gold Key, Marvel, DC, and IDW (and I probably missed one in there). It doesn't make sense to me to put them in different boxes by publisher, but to each his own. Disney comics would be another example. There are even some instances where if I like a certain artist enough, I will put all his work regardless of publisher or characters into one box, like Paul Gulacy, Steve Rude, or Mike Allred (and file them chronologically from older to newer, rather than alphabetically). Those are examples where my interest in the creator far exceeds my relative interest in whatever characters are involved.
    June 11, 2018, 03:14:29 PM
  • rusty: That makes sense.  There are many ways that people can file books.  What I do is file by company or category and then alphabetically within each section.  My first category is Richie Rich then Archie, then other Harvey titles, then Disney, then other humor/kids books, then by company (unless it is a company where I don't have very many books from them.  Star Trek and Star Wars each get their own section as well.  I will probably revamp a bit when I do my next major sort/merge.  The biggest section by far for me is DC.
    June 11, 2018, 09:28:59 AM
  • DeCarlo Rules: I don't even file my comics alphabetically. I file them according to how closely they're related to other titles, but it's all dependent on the number of issues I have of any given title, and what will fit into a single box. Fpr ACP comics I just put all the short-run series (whether an actual miniseries or just a not particularly successful title) into one box. Even though some of those short run series star Jughead, and I could as easily file those together with the main JUGHEAD title in another box. For longer running ACP titles, "girl" titles are sorted into different boxes than "boy" titles. Eventually when I have enough issues of BETTY (and BETTY AND ME and BETTY'S DIARY) they'll get their own box, and VERONICA will get her own box.
    June 10, 2018, 09:49:06 AM
  • rusty: I file Jughead under J and Reggie under R in all of their incarnations, though I do file the original Lois Lane and Jimmy Olsen books under S since that keeps them with the Superman books and also because they kept that title throughout their entire run.  If anyone wants to look up Jughead or Reggie in Overstreet, though, they will have to look under A for the early issues.
    June 10, 2018, 07:56:27 AM
  • BettyReggie: I can't wait to get that Reggie book. It's coming out the day after my 39th Birthday.
    June 10, 2018, 06:42:06 AM
  • DeCarlo Rules: Yeah, I never understood why publishers felt the need to point that out on the covers of a comic book, like maybe someone didn't really know who REGGIE was, and might buy it just because they noticed the words "Archie's Rival" above the big letters that spelled REGGIE? Same with "Archie's Pal" or "Superman's Pal" or "Superman's Girl Friend" -- like some potential buyer wouldn't know who Jughead, Jimmy Olsen, or Lois Lane was, but would know who Archie or Superman was? Just assume you're selling the product to idiots, I guess. Is anyone really filing REGGIE under "A" for Archie's Pal in their collections??
    June 10, 2018, 05:42:02 AM
  • rusty: In it's first incarnation, Reggie was titled ARCHIE'S RIVAL, REGGIE.  It wasn't until after the title was resurrected nearly a decade later that it became REGGIE and then REGGIE AND ME.
    June 09, 2018, 10:23:13 PM
  • Tuxedo Mark: I've never understood why those old titles had "and Me" in them, anyway. Why not just name the titles after the starring characters?
    June 09, 2018, 08:17:45 PM


Author Topic: Archie #22  (Read 1853 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Vegan Jughead

Archie #22
« on: July 19, 2017, 09:13:48 AM »
Archie #22 is sweet and heartbreaking at the same time.  I recommend it. 


It seems like #23 will be a weird time to change artists from Pete Woods to Audrey Mok.  They claimed #23 starts a new arc, but it's going to be really a continuation of the current story.  I like Audrey's art much better than Pete's, so I'm fine with it, but I wish this book could stick with an artist. 

DeCarlo Rules

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2017, 10:49:57 AM »
It's probably more a question of what page rate an artist is willing to work for, and for how long. Without some explicit commitment denoted in a written contract, any artist is more likely to gravitate towards available work at a better rate, regardless of who's offering it. That's pretty much the definition of a freelancer.

Then again, there's never been any guarantee at ACP that the artist who drew the story in the previous issue would be the artist who drew the story in the next issue, even on titles where one particular artist might be more likely to draw it than any other. It just goes hand in hand with the philosophy that it's not the artists and writers who are important here, it's the names of the intellectual properties owned by the company that are selling the product.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 11:02:45 AM by DeCarlo Rules »

Mr.Lodge

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2017, 11:18:32 AM »
In other words, it's just ACP operating with their head up the rear. They seen to have no rhyme or reason what they want to do or be. Sounds like bad leadership or lack of. Just ask Fernando Ruiz. The way they treated him, Dan DeCarlo and others is disgraceful. ACP needs Fernando and Gisele, good leadership, real direction.
The selected media item is not currently available.

DeCarlo Rules

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2017, 05:00:10 AM »
The only observation I'll make here is that REGGIE AND ME and JOSIE had the same creative team for the length of their runs, and JUGHEAD had 2 different writers and 2 different artists. ARCHIE has had a single writer and a different artist for each story arc. You can hardly judge Adam Hughes B&V for comparative purposes due to the fact that it only ran 3 issues, the first issue of which was locked into retailers' preorder numbers.

My takeaway from that is that the people who continued to buy ARCHIE after the first story arc either liked Mark Waid's story a lot better than the stories of the other writers on the other New Riverdale titles, or they just want to buy a comic which features Archie and his supporting cast, and they care less about Reggie, Josie, and Jughead as main characters. Possibly a combination of the two factors, but if I had to bet which side sales were leaning more heavily on, I'd go with the fact that it's ARCHIE, rather than that it's written by Mark Waid, since I doubt the main consumers buying ARCHIE are followers of Waid's work on other comic books.

DeCarlo Rules

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2017, 05:38:13 AM »
You can probably expect to see a sales bump on the "Over the Edge" arc issues of ARCHIE due to retailer speculation, following in the same pattern as prior retailer speculation on VERONICA #202 (first appearance of Kevin Keller), and LIFE WITH ARCHIE #16 (The Marriage of Kevin Keller cover variant), #23 (Francavilla
"Afterlife With Archie" cover variant), and #36 & 37 (the "Death of Archie" issues).

DeCarlo Rules

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2017, 07:15:06 AM »
So what do these characters have in common?

Charles (Professor X) Xavier
Dr. Niles (The Chief) Caulder
Barbara (Oracle) Gordon
Anita (once dated Jughead) Chavita
Harper Lodge
Betty Cooper

DeCarlo Rules

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #6 on: August 05, 2017, 12:25:34 PM »
I actually read ARCHIE #20-22 a couple of weeks ago, just to see what all the hubbub was all about. "Over the Edge" seems like a pretty cheesy attempt at some soap-opera theatrics, troweling a copious layer of angst on top of the usual behavior of Archie, Reggie, Veronica, and Betty.

Reggie acts like a jerk as usual. He doesn't care so much about taking Archie's car as just making him look like a dweeb in front of Veronica, and Archie, predictably, is just dumb enough to fall right into his trap. He'd just as soon do something both stupid and dangerous (not that there's one chance in a million of his car beating Reggie's in a street race) if he thinks that there's even the slightest possibility it might save his reputation from looking like a "loser" in Veronica's eyes. If that's all Veronica cares about Archie, she's not worth the bother.

But of course if either of the idiots responsible for creating this dangerous game of chicken were to suffer as a result of it, we'd just say... "Serves him right for being such a total dick" or "What kind of idiot cares so much about his 'image' that he gets suckered into something like that?" and that they got what they deserved. But of course that would be too easy, so Archie not using his brain and acting stupid results in poor Betty panicking and not using her brain and acting stupid to try to save him... and of course, blameless as she is, she's the one who had to wind up suffering for it.

Because it's always the innocent and blameless who have to suffer for the jerks and dumbasses of the world, who somehow or other always seem to lead a charmed life. Now in the real world that would be a life-changing event for both Archie and Reggie, and either wind up destroying them, or wising them up and straightening them out, making them re-evaluate their whole outlook and behavior. But we can be pretty sure that isn't going to happen here, because their characters are already written to be what they are... Reggie will always act like a jerk, and Archie will always be good-intentioned, but stupid enough to act like a selfish chump anyway.

Mr.Lodge

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #7 on: August 05, 2017, 06:28:22 PM »
It was really cheesy and I knew all along that nobody was going to die. If anybody deserved to die, it's Reggie. He'll piss off the wrong person at the wrong time under the right circumstances and he'll wish the police get to him before they do.
The selected media item is not currently available.

DeCarlo Rules

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #8 on: August 06, 2017, 05:24:56 AM »
If they were giving the reality treatment to a typical plot involving Reggie, it might be Moose Mason being arrested by the police, while Reggie Mantle lay in the ICU after being brutally beaten by Moose, regretting the day he stopped being a cartoon character who could instantly recover from those kinds of injuries by the beginning of the next story.

In the context of cartoon reality, it's funny when Reggie acts like a total jerk or pranks people, or when Moose goes into a blind rage and beats the crap out of Reggie, or when Archie is oblivious to anyone's feelings but his own... not so much in a storytelling mode where you're trying to treat the characters 'seriously'.

Tuxedo Mark

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #9 on: August 06, 2017, 02:52:22 PM »
In the context of cartoon reality, it's funny...when Archie is oblivious to anyone's feelings but his own

Not sure why this would be considered funny. I'm currently re-watching an episode of "Archie's Weird Mysteries" where Archie is obsessed with his car and not really paying attention to the girls. The girls are offended but just kinda take it, and they sigh in frustration. I keep thinking "Quiet DUMP the idiot! He's not gonna notice your lack of presence in his life anyway!"
BV-kiss-small
Riverdale Reviewed
http://riverdalereviewed.wordpress.com
Every episode of "Riverdale", "The New Archies", and "Archie's Weird Mysteries" reviewed.
My digital wish list
https://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/wishlist/14FS742SI1R5I

DeCarlo Rules

Re: Archie #22
« Reply #10 on: August 07, 2017, 12:23:12 AM »
In the context of cartoon reality, it's funny...when Archie is oblivious to anyone's feelings but his own

Not sure why this would be considered funny. I'm currently re-watching an episode of "Archie's Weird Mysteries" where Archie is obsessed with his car and not really paying attention to the girls. The girls are offended but just kinda take it, and they sigh in frustration. I keep thinking "Quiet DUMP the idiot! He's not gonna notice your lack of presence in his life anyway!"

It's something that I think about whenever I see it in a story, and it's something that makes Archie an exasperating character, especially since he's the main protagonist in most of these stories. It's one of the things that makes it hard for me personally to identify with Archie and to root for him. I don't want to see him win, I want to see him lose, because that makes for a funnier story. But as long as the story is existing for the purpose of creating comedic situations, and the characters are drawn in a simple humorous manner, ultimately you can't get too worked up about it, because you know the events of the story have no cumulative effect. By the next story, it will be as though none of the events happening in this story ever happened. That's why Archie never really learns any life lessons, or grows or changes as a character. There can be stories whose resolution seems to result in Archie learning some kind of lesson, but ultimately that has no effect on how his character (or Betty's, or Veronica's, or any of them, really) are written or behave in subsequent stories.

At least that's how the character was conceived originally, and how it worked in classic-style Archie stories for 75 years. Now they're trying to retrofit those characters into a different storytelling mode altogether, one in which stories are routinely ongoing, and there IS supposed to be some kind of cumulative continuity that would allow the characters to change and evolve in the progression of the stories. It's not a situation comedy any more, with familiar tropes repeating themselves over and over in short, self-contained stories -- they want to try treating the characters as more "real". It doesn't work for me.

 


The Archie character names and likenesses are covered by the registered trademarks/copyrights of Archie Comic Publications, Inc. and are used with permission by this site. The Official Archie Comics website can be visited at www.archiecomics.com.
Live Support