And now, a special message from Disturbingly Off-Model Superman, Robin, and Batman.

§ September 22nd, 2011 § Filed under advertising § 18 Comments


from ad in Stanley and His Monster #112 (Oct-Nov 1968)

18 Responses to “And now, a special message from Disturbingly Off-Model Superman, Robin, and Batman.”

  • Plastic Soul says:

    Kryptonian Meth?

  • Darius Smith says:

    Sterling/Spurgeon 2011

  • pedro de pacas says:

    Also note the folds in Batman’s ears.

  • Tim O'Neil says:

    Whomever drew that was doing a pretty good time-traveling Daniel Clowes homage.

  • Patrick Joseph says:

    Wait, you have an issue of Stanley and His Monster!?!


  • Jim Kosmicki says:

    Stanley and his Monster is one of MY dream reprints. I can understand why DC didn’t reprint it in the past, what with Kevin Smith’s complete destruction of the characters in Green Arrow, but they certainly could now. And they could add the Phil Foglio mini (wasn’t there a Secret Origins story too?) for a nice sized volume.

    I understand that Fox and the Crow were licensed, so that getting reprinted is a huge longshot, but they own Stanley and his Monster. Stanley and Thpot would still work for today’s audience – it’s timeless in that Dennis the Menace/Calvin and Hobbes manner. In fact, if I could ask Bill Watterson one question, it would be how much (not if) he was influenced by Stanley and his Monster.

    oh, and I wonder about the whole Fox and the Crow licensing thing too. The characters appeared, named as themselves, in the last Zoo Crew miniseries as newscasters. The indicia to the collection made no mention of the characters belonging to someone else. I have this vision of Mark Evanier working his magic and talking Garfield’s Jim Davis into writing an introduction to the first collection of Fox and the Crow reprints (which were primarily done by the animator Jim Davis).

    as to the actual content of this post: those ads in comics were important back in the day. They were about the only way a kid knew what the new saturday morning schedule was going to be. My friends and I would plan our Saturday mornings around the information in those ads.

  • J.W.Rollins says:

    10:30-11:30? Supervillain party at noon!

  • Chris G says:

    Ehn, I’ve seen worse. At least they weren’t redesigned by Jim Lee.

  • Darius Smith says:

    Sterling/Spurgeon 2012

  • philip says:

    Kryptonian meth might also explain that incredible run-on sentence.

  • JRC says:

    “You can always count out us to count out crime”

    So in this iteration, instead of stopping criminals, they just count the number of crimes being committed.
    Sort of a Sesame St.-like invocation of “The Count’s” specialty.

    They’ll finally get Luthor for those 40 cakes!

  • Casey says:

    Still Better than Liefeld.

    Anybody else notice how good it feels to knock Rob Liefeld again? I haven’t been talking about him this much in over a decade.

  • Steely Dan says:

    Not sure where else to write this on this page, so I’ll just comment on the latest post.

    I’m a lapsed DC reader who gave up on the company back in the early 1990s (except for Batwoman and anything Darwyn Cooked released through the company). I was cynical about the relaunch. I would have preferred a clean reboot across the line, but ce la vie. I decided to give a few of the books a try (using their iPad app).

    I have to say that I am pleasantly surprised. DC has gotten knocked for their lack of diversity, but the ones that I’ve liked best so far (and the ones I’ll be back for in issue number two) are:

    Batwoman (loved it),

    Wonder Woman (my favorite of the relaunch),

    Supergirl (very pleasantly surprised by how good the artwork was and by how much I got into the story),

    Birds of Prey (had zero expectations for it, but other than the Batgirl reference (can we get through at least the first story arc on all of these series before we start crossing over with characters from other titles?) but really liked it in a pulpy sort of way–not at all what I was expecting),

    Batwing (expected to hate it but read a few good reviews and decided to take a chance on it and liked it quite a bit), and

    Action Comics (finally, a Superman who is interesting).

    Other than Action, all the comics I’m digging are titles with women and/or minorities in the lead. So I give DC a lot of credit. They may not have a huge number of titles that emphasize diversity, but the ones they do have are (so far) the best of the bunch.

    What’s been the reaction in your store? Are those titles selling well for you? Are they generating buzz amongst your customers.

    Also, can’t remember if you’ve ever answered this, but have you tried reading comix on the iPad? What are your thoughts? I quite like the experience.

  • Shinwell Johnson says:

    The Fox and the Crow originated in a series of cartoons produced by Screen Gems for Columbia. DC does not own them. Their appearance in the Captain Carrot comic must have been a case of sneaking them in and hoping the rights owners would not notice.

    My guess would be that, if DC really wanted to bring the characters back, it could re-license them at no great expense or difficulty–I doubt that anyone else is making offers to Columbia. However, I would also guess that DC just does not care.

  • Tom Mason says:

    If any of the new DC titles were called Off-Model Superman, I’d be at my LCS in a heartbeat.

  • Googam son of Goom says:

    Maybe, just maybe, these are what they really look like when the elder gods return!!

  • Jim Kosmicki says:

    I know that Fox and Crow were licensed – I mentioned that in my first post. However, there’s no guarantee that Sony/Columbia has maintained the copyrights properly. They were actually in very few cartoons (their real popularity was in the DC comics). As far as I know, there was only ever ONE of the cartoons released on a very low print-run VHS compilation and then only because it had been nominated for an Academy Award (it was a collection of award nominated animated shorts, mainly UPA stuff that Columbia distributed – they were NOT known for their animation studio!).

    So basically, I’m wondering if they are orphan works. The people who did the Captain Carrot book are all professionals who work in the licensed field – they would know whether they could “sneak” something in or not.

    and none of that goes against my main point: Stanley and his Monster would be a killer reprint book. Herbie got three volumes. Sugar & Spike have now had their first. I’m beginning to think that I’m not totally out there for dreaming of Stanley & his Monster.