Setting aside Archie (if they ever did it right), I'd go for Archer, or better yet, The Herculoids. The CGI alone could be cool. Zok, Igoo, Tundro, and the biggest challenge, Gloop and Gleep, would be awesome. Get a great script, of course. Space Ghost and (not Harvey) Birdman could have potential. Mightor? Possible. Jonny Quest should have been had a movie a while back. Discuss!

Gooooofish?

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 07, 2016, 12:43:26 PM

Quote from: The Downloader on July 07, 2016, 12:01:48 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 07, 2016, 11:53:30 AM
Pretty sure that ACP will be the first traditional company to go all-digital. I'm betting they wished they could have made the change a couple of years ago. Not like they haven't been pushing it hard enough, harder than any other company.

true, but f they continue on low readership, than they might not be able to.

Correction -- if they continue on low readership, digital might be the only affordable method left for them. WAY cheaper than print, and no distributors to deal with. Goes straight to your device, anywhere in the world.

I could put up with this, believe it or not. The only thing would be mostly Classic Archie or reprints of Classic Archie...

Quote from: Archiecomicxfan215 on July 07, 2016, 08:10:45 AM
I know that story!! i've see it in a double digest that I own.. if I find it I can scan it and post it

I have it on my computer. It was in my gallery, but it was wiped out during the recent Great Purge. Ronica was acting like the Lovely Looney during one of her jealousy jaunts against Betty about wearing glasses, and decided to wear Dilton's...

A very shrewd, tongue in cheek swipe at the current Archie Comics situation, right? Well played, PTF!

Whew! For a moment there, I thought you guys were gonna be bosom buddies! Thank God THAT'S not happening!

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on July 02, 2016, 02:15:09 AM

Quote from: SAGG on July 01, 2016, 06:32:31 AM
The more I look at that last panel, the more it looks like the back of a dolphin. It's possible Mr. Lodge wanted to scare the bejeebers out of Jughead by having Jughead THINK it was a shark so Jug would get it through his head NOT to EVER try and pull that stunt off on him of all people...

No, I think the intention was that it's a shark. It's made ambiguous in the picture not intentionally, but accidentally. Because the animal is below the water level, you can't tell whether its tail fins are in aligned in the vertical plane (as a shark's would be) or the horizontal plane (as a dolphin's would be), and the the angle at which the bottom panel line cuts across the animal's body doesn't show the animal's snout, which should be the dead giveaway. That same bottom panel line is bisecting the animal in such a way that what would be the eye of a shark could easily be interpreted as the blowhole of a dolphin. The obfuscation doesn't seem deliberate, though.

Man, I'm telling you, I should be called The Peacemaker on these boards! I'm making DR and daren the best of board-posting buddies! What else can I get them to agree on?

The more I look at that last panel, the more it looks like the back of a dolphin. It's possible Mr. Lodge wanted to scare the bejeebers out of Jughead by having Jughead THINK it was a shark so Jug would get it through his head NOT to EVER try and pull that stunt off on him of all people...

Just as Ronica seemed to have switched bodies with Jughead when she was hungry for pizza, Jughead went on ahead and swiched bodies with Reggie...

Quote from: daren on June 30, 2016, 04:26:12 AM

Quote from: SAGG on June 29, 2016, 04:19:53 AM
Leave it to me to inadvertently get you two to actually agree on something on these boards.  

Are we that bad? 

After seeing all those back and forths between you guys? Oh, yeah...

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on June 29, 2016, 04:41:38 AM

Quote from: SAGG on June 29, 2016, 04:19:53 AM
Leave it to me to inadvertently get you two to actually agree on something on these boards. So every Archie character can basically avoid each other from our comic book POV while still being buds, and the "team title" would be like a Justice League or Avengers-type?

Well, obviously they're not going to function like some kind of formal group. I just meant in terms of having one book where they would all be more or less equal players, with no one being the star of the book, or they're ALL the stars. Not to say that they'd all get an equal amount of panel space in every issue, it could vary from one issue to another.

Quote from: SAGG on June 29, 2016, 04:19:53 AM
I think it could be a novelty maybe at first

But you know what? Back in 1949-1950, the idea of giving Jughead, Betty & Veronica, and Reggie their own titles was "a novelty" too. Before that they were just supporting characters.

Yes, yes, I agree, but and still the characters interacted with each other, even in their own titles. How about this, something in between: each character could have their own title, but there would be an occasional appearance by another character every several issues...? It's kind of hard not seeing Archie without one of his "main" two girlfriends, though I can see him go through other girls without seeing B & V for several issues...

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on June 28, 2016, 04:06:20 PM

Quote from: SAGG on June 28, 2016, 01:13:33 PM

Quote from: daren on June 28, 2016, 02:13:58 AM
This is a good question, I need to sit on it. I can't write that well and I wouldn't want to do any creative work for Archie anyway but if I was a billionaire who bought the company one thing I would try as an experiment would be rehiring the classic Archie artists to write and draw titles for each of the main five with the rule that none of them could appear in each other's books. Even though they work best as a unit I'd want to see how they each stand up on their own. But I have to think about what they'd each do.

I agree of the part where you make the billionaire point and rehiring the Classic Archie artists and such, but the other Archie characters couldn't appear in each other's books? that would seem to me to be pretty difficult to pull off. For example, how could Jughead not be in Archie's book for a panel or two, at least, the same for Betty and Ronica? I mean, even Daredevil has appeared in a Spider-Man book or spin off, and vice versa...

No, I think I can see what Daren's saying (and I agree, if I'm reading it right). In order for each character to be the STAR of his own title, it would work better if none of the other "star" characters were part of the regular ongoing supporting cast. That gives you a chance to break the existing mold, and not rely on repetition of the same previously-existing character relationships over and over.

Not to say that Archie or Jughead could NEVER ever appear in an issue of Reggie's comic, but that that would amount to a "guest appearance" in the same way Spider-Man appearing in DAREDEVIL would. Spider-Man's relationship to Daredevil isn't something that the book relies on as its main source of character interaction. So Archie, Betty, Veronica, Jughead and Reggie are all more or less forced to develop their OWN ongoing supporting casts (which, of course, can be drawn from the existing pool of secondary characters). Is that about right, Daren?

Given that scenario, there should probably also be a sixth title, what amounts to a "team" title, like a new version of ARCHIE'S PALS 'N' GALS or ARCHIE & FRIENDS, just to satisfy that craving for seeing the Gang of Five interacting, traditional-style. In that title, no one is the main star of the story -- it's an ensemble story, with an equal focus on all of them (plus Moose & Midge, Chuck & Nancy, Cheryl, Dilton, and Ethel).

Actually, the more I think on this notion, the more it seems like not only a good idea, but a GREAT idea. It would really generate some fresh situations, and allow each book to focus on ONE star (except for the 'team' book), in effect becoming more unique and distinct, less like an "Archie spinoff" than an individual title, like JOSIE or SABRINA. There's fresh territory there for exploring these characters outside of their relationships with the other main four. The right, and smart, way to do this in order to make these books the basis of an "Archieverse" is not to ignore the other characters entirely, as if they didn't exist -- you throw in small references and asides in the dialogue (maybe a line of dialogue referencing something that happened/is happening in one of the other titles) or small cameo appearances, like Archie talking to Veronica or Jughead on the phone (or texting them) for a panel or three. You do it in a subtle way so that those appearances don't amount to them being an actual character in the story, just a bit of "universe" subtext.

And if successful, you could go on to add a second tier of titles that does just the opposite, say ARCHIE & REGGIE, JUGHEAD & ARCHIE, BETTY & VERONICA, ARCHIE & BETTY, and ARCHIE & VERONICA. Those books could focus on just the relationship between the two co-stars, leaving out the other three characters again. You could again add another one (maybe TALES FROM RIVERDALE?) that would be like a random "team-up" story, focusing on ANY two co-stars (most likely one major character, and one minor character) -- different co-stars in every issue.

So there's a pretty good basic plan for 6 core titles, followed by a second wave of 6 titles. Enough to fill a healthy comic publisher's universe. And of course, from there you could keep expanding with new titles for Cheryl, Kevin, Josie, Sabrina, That Wilkin Boy, etc. Maybe even give one of the secondary characters who's never had a series of his/her own a title.

Leave it to me to inadvertently get you two to actually agree on something on these boards. So every Archie character can basically avoid each other from our comic book POV while still being buds, and the "team title" would be like a Justice League or Avengers-type? I dunno, man. I think it could be a novelty maybe at first, but old habits die hard. There would eventually be pressure from some quarters to get The Gang together more, like, yeah, crossovers. Perhaps some big, all encompassing story that would have all of the titles entangled somehow. I just can't see it...

Quote from: daren on June 28, 2016, 02:13:58 AM
This is a good question, I need to sit on it. I can't write that well and I wouldn't want to do any creative work for Archie anyway but if I was a billionaire who bought the company one thing I would try as an experiment would be rehiring the classic Archie artists to write and draw titles for each of the main five with the rule that none of them could appear in each other's books. Even though they work best as a unit I'd want to see how they each stand up on their own. But I have to think about what they'd each do.

I agree of the part where you make the billionaire point and rehiring the Classic Archie artists and such, but the other Archie characters couldn't appear in each other's books? that would seem to me to be pretty difficult to pull off. For example, how could Jughead not be in Archie's book for a panel or two, at least, the same for Betty and Ronica? I mean, even Daredevil has appeared in a Spider-Man book or spin off, and vice versa...

Quote from: Jabroniville on June 20, 2016, 01:46:28 AM
It's generally been known to happen that the Archie characters have shifted greatly over the years- often becoming much nicer (and perhaps more well-rounded) characters at the expense of conflict and humor. Whether or not this is a good thing is a matter of debate.

So I'm curious as to which version of the following characters do you prefer?



ARCHIE: A) The scheming bastard of the 1940s; B) The befuddled, clumsy loser of most other eras; C) The all-around nice guy.


JUGHEAD: A) The woman-hating, somewhat-vicious schemer of the old days- constantly belittled and insulted women; B) The Jughead seen in the NUMEROUS "Jughead gets a girl" storylines (Joanie & Debbie, Anita Chavita, Sandy Sanchez, etc.); C) The anti-romance character who can still hang out with women (such as his friendship with Betty).


VERONICA: A) Straight-up selfish villainess ('40s & Mark Waid Reboot); B) The Jerk with a Heart of Gold character (mostly seen in and after the '60s); C) The nicer, more down-to-earth one of the '90s-2000s era (where her major conflicts are things like figuring out which charity to pursue).


BETTY COOPER: A) The scheming, somewhat-dim loser ('40s & '50s); B) The All-Around Girl-Next-Door Nice Girl Tomboy (most eras)


REGGIE MANTLE: A) Outright villain whom just about everyone hates; B) Jerk With a Heart of Gold, who still hangs out with the gang.


CHERYL BLOSSOM: A) The super-selfish and obnoxious villain ('80s & her return); B) Veronica-Lite "Actually deep-down really nice" character (from her solo book).

The Archie I think is best to me should be a combination of B and C.

Jughead is C to me.

Ronica? B, but I don't mind a little C....

Betty to me is definitely B, but once in awhile I've seen an A in Today's Betty against Ronica, and that's okay to me...

Reggie is an A, but like Ronica, I can see him having an occasional B...

Quote from: Jabroniville on June 26, 2016, 03:49:30 AM
Ooh, thought of another one:

Big Ethel- Part 1: A) The psychotic, obsessive, "Lena Hyena"-esque stalker out to tackle Jughead and force kisses upon him, or B) Modern-day "sadly mooning over the boy who doesn't like her" Ethel.

Big Ethel- Part 2: A) Old-school, hideous Ethel, or B) Modern-Day, Pretty Ethel.

Don't forget about the "Busybody" Ethel, who either poked her nose into everybody else's bee's wax, or the gossipy Ethel who liked to be a catalyst of trouble between couples...