Quote from: irishmoxie on February 18, 2017, 10:27:30 PM
I've been reading some romance comics. I especially like Career Girl Romances. The slang is hilarious. It's amazing to think how different the world was back then.

I like the romance reprints in IDW/YoeBooks' WEIRD LOVE. I also have a couple of trade paperback collections of romance stories where they've whited out all the dialogue balloons and captions, and completely rewritten the stories, to hilarious effect. Dan Parent's hard-to-find TP collection LOVE-O-RAMA 2000 is a modern comedic take on romance comics. The WEIRD LOVE stories are 100% genuine, unaltered, and re-presented exactly as they first appeared, but almost as bizarre. In a few instances, even more so.

Quote from: irishmoxie on February 17, 2017, 10:29:34 PM
Would I like Dead@17?

... I'm going to say probably not. It's not girlie at all, even though most of the main characters are girls. This is more like a fantasy action-movie (though looking more like a Cartoon Network action cartoon) based loosely on the biblical Book of Revelations. There's a lot of violence, but that tends to be blunted somewhat by the simple cartoon style of drawing, so I wouldn't quite call it gore. I wouldn't exactly call it horror, but if it were a live action movie it might seem that way.

Quote from: irishmoxie on February 17, 2017, 10:29:34 PM
I found some random Scooter Girl B&W issues in the 25cent bin once. Liked the art, not the story. Maybe I would like it better in color. Like Blue Monday.

That's where I first found it too, as random issues in the cheap boxes. I like Blue Monday better as well. The main thing I didn't like about it is that contrary to what you'd expect, the title character, Margaret Sheldon, isn't really the main character of the story, and we never really get to know that much about her, apart from one scene in the final chapter. That, and one other thing too complicated to get into.

Quote from: irishmoxie on February 17, 2017, 10:29:34 PMYou're back to reading Jonesy? I thought you gave up on the series.

It's borrowed. I probably wouldn't bother if there were more current comics coming out that I liked. The later issues definitely aren't as good as the earlier ones.

Quote from: irishmoxie on February 17, 2017, 10:29:34 PM
Let me know if Patsy Walker ever goes back to the girlie story it was for the first few issues of the comic. 

I don't know that it's changed all that much. The nature of this being published at Marvel means that there are always going to be a lot of appearances by other Marvel characters like She-Hulk, Jubilee, and Howard the Duck. That, and they need to get her into the costume at least once in most issues. Otherwise, it probably wouldn't continue to be published. I do kind of wish it would concentrate a little bit more on the Patsy Walker side, and less on the Hellcat side of the character, and maybe get her out of New York. I liked the earlier stuff where she was being recognized as the star of the old comic books, but they seem to have dropped that angle.

Quote from: irishmoxie on February 17, 2017, 10:29:34 PMI might try some of those Ito comics. I'm slowly getting into horror. But I like more ghost than gore.

Ito's stuff isn't ghost stories, they are "strange" stories. There's some gore, violence, and a lot of grotesque imagery, but it has this Twilight Zone/surreal weirdness quality to it. Ito rarely gives any rationale for how the paranormal elements come to exist, they're just there. There always seems to be some odd angle to the story, something that most people wouldn't imagine, yet the stories seem grounded in a fairly realistic style - but there is still some room for blackly comedic moments on occasion. He's good at drawing faces and conveying subtle expressions. He gets a lot of mileage out of the contrast between that convincing realism/normality and the more grotesque moments.

Quote from: irishmoxie on February 17, 2017, 10:29:34 PMDid you check out the Jem Annual? It has Gisele art in it.

I didn't know she was in there. There was nothing in the solicitation copy about it, and this seemed like a one-off alternate universe/fanfic take on the characters. I will check it out, though.

Quote from: steveinthecity on February 18, 2017, 03:36:46 AM
The IDW "Best Of" Lucey, Shwartz, and/or DeCarlo volumes. Also any of the Bob Montana Collections of dailies are great fun imo.

IDW also published a single hardcover volume of The Best of Stan Goldberg (all older stories). While these are all beautifully produced by IDW, oversized, with good coloring and printed on quality, glossy paper stock, mostly shot from the original art, and the selection of stories is superb, I only hesitated to mention these because at $25 per volume for 152 pages, IDW's "Best of" the Archie artists series is really aimed at collectors as opposed to general readers, and not the most economical in terms of price per page, bearing in mind that Fred99999 mentioned he was looking for "bang per buck". Many of the stories in the IDW artists series do also appear in other, cheaper trade collections published by ACP.

As an aside, I feel the need to caution Fred99999 NOT to purchase any issues of the ARCHIE 75th ANNIVERSARY JUMBO COMIC DIGEST, as this 12-issue limited digest series merely recycles the exact same stories which had previously appeared in the BEST OF ARCHIE COMICS and ARCHIE'S FAVORITE STORIES trade collections, with the addition of absolutely NO newly-reprinted stories whatsoever. Let the buyer beware.

Regarding the IDW Archie by Bob Montana newspaper strip collections, while they are in black and white (except for the single volume of ARCHIE'S SUNDAY FINEST), they are also all 300+ pages collections for about $40 (less from many online booksellers), and the material therein has not seen print (except for a few very brief excerpts in THE BEST OF ARCHIE COMICS) in any other publication. I was hesitant at first to purchase the newspaper strip collections, as I am, to be completely honest, not much of a fan of the 1940s Archie comic book stories. I've studied a lot of Golden Age comic books and strips, and I find the comical style in ACP's 1940s comics to be crude, to be absolutely blunt, even considering the lower standards of art generally acceptable in comic books of that time. I'm not really sure what happened to Bob Montana between his service in WWII and the start of the newspaper strip in 1946, but somehow in a few short years he had developed into a highly competent cartoonist and writer, and the work on those 1946 and later newspaper strips is a quantum leap in quality over his comic book work for ACP 3-5 years earlier. Maybe because of the higher standards the newspaper strip held itself to, after the strip was launched the quality of the comic book cartooning also began to improve, but I don't think it really caught up to Montana's work on the strip until about a decade later, when the years of journeyman work really began to pay off for artists like Harry Lucey and Bill Vigoda and they came into their own as cartoonists -- Lucey perhaps 5 years earlier than that (he had always been an above-average talent as an adventure-style comic book artist, even going back to the early '40s). Lucey seemed to experience a growth spurt as an artist around 1950-51, when he worked on both SAM HILL and GINGER. DeCarlo doesn't really begin to hit his stride an an Archie artist until around 1958 (prior to that he concentrated the bulk of his time on work at Marvel/Atlas). The first couple of those IDW newspaper strip collections made me a believer, and I was happy to discover the genius of Bob Montana.

Quote from: SAGG on February 18, 2017, 01:02:23 AMKnow what's REALLY scary? "Versus", not "and", or "teams up with". They're gonna FIGHT one another?  What's missing? Bugs Bunny vs. Superman?

Oh, no -- Bugs and Supes are both the good guys. Marvin, Yosemite Sam, Lobo & Wile E. Coyote, and Elmer Fudd are all bad guys.

Meanwhile, eighteen years ago (and now seeming like a timely candidate for a TP reprint collection) ...

Toons will live. Toons will die. (Or at least, have anvils dropped on their heads.) Elmer Fudd gains the powers of Superman. Daffy becomes the Duck Knight Detective. And due the mischievous machinations of those extradimensional imps, Mxyzptlk and the Do-Do, there looms a Cwisis on Infinite Eawths...

Written by Mark Evanier (who has plenty of experience with animated characters), penciled by Joe Staton, and inked by Tom Palmer & Mike "No Relation" DeCarlo.

From Bleeding Cool, dated 2-16-17...

QuoteWe've been wondering what Archie Comics may be replacing Sonic The Hedgehog with...

In a press release, and probably being talked about at ComicsPRO right now, Marvel and Archie have announced a publishing collaboration. No, not Punisher Meets Archie 2, but Marvel Comics Digest, a collection of Marvel's all-ages titles packaged in a digest format and sold on the newsstand, in "big box" stores as well as comic retailers. Six to be published each year, with four in 2017 starting with MARVEL COMICS DIGEST: Starring The Amazing Spider-Man.

Others starring Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Black Widow, Spider-Man, Wolverine, and the X-Men are to follow.

Could have something to do with Marvel's sales being the worst they've had in years right now. And just to clarify, I believe they're saying "six" issues "to be published each year", not six ongoing digest titles.

And this just in...

In their quest to leave no traditional property unrebooted, DC will follow up the DC/Hanna-Barbera crossovers with a series of DC/Looney Tunes crossover/reboots:

Jonah Hex Vs Yosemite Sam
Martian Manhunter Vs Marvin the Martian
Lobo Vs The Road Runner.
Batman Vs Elmer Fudd

I know this sounds like an April Fool's Day prank (too early, alas), but I assure you we have confirmation... BATMAN vs. Elmer Fudd??

Haven't posted on this thread in a couple of weeks, but I've been busy reading.

Last week:
MICKEY MOUSE #326
DEADMAN DARK MANSION OF FORBIDDEN LOVE #3 (of 3)
DETECTIVE COMICS #950
WONDER WOMAN #16
DOLLFACE #2
GREEN HORNET: REIGN OF THE DEMON #3 (of 4)
JOHN CARTER: THE END #1
WILL EISNER'S THE SPIRIT: THE CORPSE MAKERS #1 (of 5)
JONESY #10
MOONSHINE #5
SAVAGE DRAGON #220
EMPOWERED & THE SOLDIER OF LOVE #1 (of 3)

DEAD@17: BLOOD OF SAINTS TP
DEAD@17: REVOLUTION TP
DEAD@17: THE 13TH BROTHER TP
DEAD@17: AFTERBIRTH TP
DEAD@17: THE WITCH QUEEN TP
DEAD@17: THE BLASPHEMY THRONE TP

This week:
PATSY WALKER AKA HELLCAT #15
BATMAN TMNT ADVENTURES #4 (of 6)
BATWOMAN: REBIRTH #1
CAVE CARSON HAS A CYBERNETIC EYE #5
THE WILD STORM #1
KILL OR BE KILLED #6
ROM ANNUAL #1 (2017)
THE FOREVER WAR #1 (adapted from the 1974 Joe Haldeman Nebula & Hugo-winning novel)
SLAM #1-3 (Girlie comic about roller girls. It was okay, but I don't think it interested me enough to continue.)

Junji Ito's DISSOLVING CLASSROOM TP - Great collection of short weird horror tales linked by 2 reoccurring characters, a brother and sister.

Junji Ito's FRAGMENTS OF HORROR HC - Another collection of short horror stories, no connections between these.

Junji Ito's TOMIE HC  - 700 pages, but a real page-turner. I read it in 2 days. Weird, surreal, grotesque, disturbing, fascinating. Ito's horror manga is different than any kind of horror I've ever read.

SCOOTER GIRL TP - Love the style and the setting, but I have mixed feelings about it because I hate the core idea of the story.

BETTY AND VERONICA DOUBLE DIGEST #251  - Never thought I'd see Bridgett again in a new story. It was funny, though.

WORLD OF ARCHIE WINTER ANNUAL #66  - Dan Parent's new 5-pager is a funny Reggie & Betty story.

Quote from: Upsiditus on February 16, 2017, 03:48:16 PM
  I had in mind a quote John Lennon made about the Beatles sessions for the Let It Be LP (originally the LP  was supposed to be called "Get Back").  He said they made the worst music possible (paraphrase) so the band could break up.  I was reminded of that quote after seeing the Riverdale TV show.  Also, Archie Comics is clearly in financial trouble. 

You can hardly compare Archie Comic Publications to the Beatles, in terms of success, wealth, or creativity. When Lennon made that statement, the members of the band were the most successful musicians in the world, and already rich enough to spend the rest of their lives in comfort without ever having to work another day of their lives. And the four were not getting along creatively, so they no longer enjoyed their work together. Lennon had come to the reasonable conclusion that it was just time to "let it be". Who needs the pressure of constantly having to top yourself until you fade from popularity with the public? The Beatles did not so much self-destruct as just lose interest and walk away. Not unlike say, Bill Watterson, when he quit Calvin and Hobbes at the top of his game.

Quote from: steveinthecity on February 16, 2017, 12:36:25 AM

Quote from: Alexandra Cabot... (snip)...      Frankly, I don't see the point of Archie Comics without Montana/DeCarlo/etc. art style.

This in a nutshell.  No one wanted or needed New Coke, either. I understand sales were slugggish, but from my outsiders perspective the fault lies more with ACP management than the creative staff.

The style and type of humor is everything. Just as no one wants to see Dick Tracy or Calvin and Hobbes or Peanuts continued after the original creator retired in a totally different style. With Dick Tracy and some other comic strips (Popeye, Alley Oop, etc.) the strip continued on after the original creator retired but drawn by another artist, in a style imitating that of the original artist, just as Archie continued after (and even before) Bob Montana died, drawn by different artists but in a similar style.

With Calvin and Hobbes or Peanuts, I think most people would consider a continuation tantamount to sacrilege, probably even if it were done in a similar style. I remember when the Dick Tracy movie came out and Disney produced a comic book drawn in a completely different, modernist style by Kyle Baker. With all respect to Kyle Baker's talent, I just didn't see the point, and I can't see the point in New Riverdale comics. The characters, such as they are, are completely subordinate to the style. That's what made these things successful originally and what is largely responsible for them lasting for decades.

While it's true that you can point to other comics like Superman, Batman or Spider-Man that continued successfully for decades while radically changing the style of art over the years, these are characters in which the concept is more important than the style, and they retain a certain continuity with the original versions via iconic visuals like costumes, and the accumulated details of their past adventures. They can change the costumes temporarily, but when they change them so radically that they aren't recognizable as the characters they originally started out as, they lose a big segment of their audience. The all-black Spider-Man costume shook up the status quo for that character for a little while, but after a short time reverted to the classic costume, because that's what the audience identifies as the 'real' Spider-Man. Changing the costumes, identities, and gender or ethnicity of their original characters, and/or and rebooting them to change details of their past history, may temporarily shake up the 'ho-hum' of the status quo for a lot of Marvel and DC characters, but leads to an alienation of the traditional audience over the long run. Reboots are even worse than other types of changes, as they immediately draw a line of demarcation in the sand. They immediately signal to the traditional audience the end of any continuity with the previous version of a character, like the period at the end of a sentence.

Quote from: Upsiditus on February 15, 2017, 08:49:07 PM
I believe the change in the 1980s came about because there was concern among many people that Jughead was gay, and homosexuality was not widely accepted in the USA at that time. 

I think you're absolutely correct on that point.

Quote from: JonInIowaCity on February 15, 2017, 01:47:48 PM

Quote from: carrotz on February 15, 2017, 04:39:58 AM
I don't think they can do new shows about anything except Sabrina. The other characters aren't familiar to people and they are not very good except for Josie, but I don't think a Riverdale Josie spinoff will happen.

There might be some power to taking lesser known or unknown Archie/MLJ properties that lack emotional connections with today's audiences and recreate them with modern upgrades. Stuff like Sam Hill, That Wilkins Boy, Katie Keene, Ginger, Hangman... Whether updated MLJ characters appeal to modern audiences or whether they're updated well is another matter.

Doubt it. The whole point in licensing comic book characters is getting a pre-sold audience that wants to see the movie or TV show because it's an adaptation of something familiar that they've heard of. And THEN they go and change everything about it. It's not that the comic books have these oh-so-brilliant, so-original ideas that nobody in the movie or TV business could come up with. At least in most cases. There are exceptions, but those tend to be smaller projects that are quirky and generally don't make much of an impact in monetary success. You get things like The Rocketeer or Mystery Men, that might be good movies, but relative flops by the standards of the industry. Why not just make an original film like Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, rather than licensing some of the original stuff that inspired it like Captain Midnight, if not enough people would recognize the latter? ACP's characters are so obscure that it's easier for Warner/DC or Disney/Marvel to dredge up something relatively obscure from their libraries of thousands of characters, that will still be more unique and high-concept than anything you can find at ACP. Yeah, even though Marvel is huge now with movie & TV adaptations, the odds of seeing a Millie the Model or Patsy & Hedy movie or TV show are pretty low, or a WB production based on Debbi's Dates or Swing With Scooter.

I mean, Sam Hill... what the hell is Sam Hill but an imitation in comic book form of the same kind of hard-boiled detective character seen on dozens of TV shows and movies, and in pulp fiction? There must be a dozen other characters of the same type that would benefit from name recognition among the public, so why wouldn't a movie or TV producer just do an adaptation of them? Or if not, just an original character in the same mold? What's the advantage? Why adapt Ginger when you can do Gidget or Tammy? If no one's heard of the characters being adapted, the 'high concept' idea better be pretty unique for a movie or TV producer to do all that work, and then give up some of the merchandising profits to the IP owner.

Quote from: terrence12 on February 15, 2017, 04:40:33 AM

Quote from: Vegan Jughead on February 12, 2017, 09:25:26 AM
Been hearing about the end of Archie Comics for years now, and they're still here.  Even though RIVERDALE's ratings aren't good it's getting mostly positive reviews and that can't hurt. 


I think Archie will be here as long as they want to.  Maybe it won't be the Archie the old school fans prefer, but Archie Comics will most likely exist for the foreseeable future.

He does  have a point.

You mean they want to get out of the comics business, and just be in the business of licensing out their IP? Well, it's a no-overhead enterprise, I guess, which could be what they're looking for. On the other hand, the characters are nowhere near as iconic as something like Batman or Spider-Man, where you can morph them into different things and they're still somewhat recognizable, if only because of the basic premise and costumes. Archie Comics are mostly tied to the style of cartooning, and as soon as you lost that, they start to get a little blurry as far as recognizing them as the same characters. They aren't as adaptable as the better-known superheroes, because the things that define them as characters are more nebulous than costumes and superpowers.

Quote from: steveinthecity on February 15, 2017, 12:21:39 AM
If memory serves, for a time we used to go to Kmart on Wednesdays to take advantage of their discount dinner they offered.   I was there many a night.   My parents shopped the heck out of the place afterwards, so I presume it all worked out, moneywise.

Wow, a Kmart that's also a restaurant? I've never seen one. Around here they're just department stores (although I've recently been in a larger one that carries groceries, as well). I know of a couple of Walmarts around here that have Subway franchises inside the store, and one Target that has a mini-restaurant that serves fast food (hot dogs, hamburgers, pizza, etc.) but that's about it.

I used to read tons of Marvel and DC comics. Now I'm down to 3 or 4 comics from each of their respective universes. That's part of the reason I got interested in Archie Comics late in 2014 - because I finally had the time, and a void to fill in my comics reading. But just about 8 months later, ACP decided to reboot everything too. DC's Rebirth didn't really help their universe overall, because it's still the same "New 52" universe (only now with the pre-52 DCU Superman in it, which just makes things unnecessarily convoluted). Yeah, they renumbered everything again from #1, but it's not like they really changed anything about how they're writing or drawing the characters, per se. Aside from the numbering, and cancelling some series and replacing them with others, it's pretty much the same deal at DC as it's been since September 2011. They may have shifted some creative teams around, and some titles may be better post-Rebirth, and others worse. Fortunately, DC publishes other lines of comics (DC Kids, Vertigo, and some other titles) that aren't part of their main universe, so that gives me a few more to read than just 3 or 4 titles. I'm not averse to trying a new series they put out either (that goes for Marvel too) if it looks interesting and I like the characters or artwork, but I am rarely finding anything worth sticking with when I sample them.

With ACP's New Riverdale it seems all they did is make less funny, more boring stories with artwork that (overall) I don't much care for, and writing even less so. I guess I just have to be satisfied with the 5-pagers in the digests now.

You're entitled to your opinion, but in my view it seems like you're over-reacting.

Much like in the stories mentioned, where Archie & Reggie and the U.G.A.J. have comically exaggerated responses to small things that are not within the purview of their control (like Jughead's lifestyle choices, which really shouldn't affect them). It doesn't mean they have to like it or agree with it, but instead of just ignoring it and letting it go, they make mountains out of molehills. Refraining from doing so, it occurs to me upon reflection, is a lot like "mind over madder".