You are currently browsing the publishing category
So the response to the Final ’90s Countdown survey is going fairly well, people are mostly avoiding the excess conversation there and leaving their choices. I have noticed that quite a few titles are being suggested that I (gulp) don’t really have anything to say about, so I’m gonna have to muster all my blogging powers to discuss them. I’ll say more about this when I actually start going over everything.
Anyhoo, get in there and cast your vote (after reading the instructions of course)!
• • •
Last week we got ourselves a new facsimile edition of a Swamp Thing comic book, this time being
Swamp Thing #37 from 1985, the (supposed) first appearance of everyone’s favorite magical Englishman, John Constantine.
And since we are living in the Modern Age of Comical Books, there are variants a’plenty. Did your pal Mike get one of each? Oh yes he did.
There’s the standard issue regular cover:
The “Mondo” variant, with the image redrawn:
…and an ad on the back where you can buy a poster of same:
Then of course there’s the “action figure” variant:
…the back cover of which is detailed with figures I wish they’d actually make in this supposed Super Powers line:
No cigarettes in sight, but he does have his Flame Hex:
Cover D is the foil covered version, which doesn’t scan very well, but I assure you it’s plenty shiny:
And rounding out this batch of funnybooks is the blank cover, where you can get your favorite artist to draw a picture of Swampy on a motorcycle, Easy Rider style:
Now I mentioned above that this was the “supposed” first appearance of Constantine. That would be because there are some who think…well, here, I wrote about this back in 2004, but rather than send you to that heavily link-rotted entry, I’ll just reprint the pertinent info, sans dead links:
“And then there’s pal Mark, he of Dorothy of Oz fame, who makes the (I believe) very correct claim that in issue 25 of Saga of The Swamp Thing, it’s a caricature of Sting, not John Constantine, who makes an appearance. However, due to the physical similarities, some people have claimed that issue 25 marks a ‘cameo’ appearance of Constantine, predating his actual first appearance by over a year. In fact, look at this exchange in the letters column of Swamp Thing #54 (Nov 1986):
“‘Close scrutiny has brought forth one fascinating observation I’d like to share with you concerning Mr. Constantine. Everyone knows he made his debut in ST #37. But has anyone taken a close look at issue #25? … In panel 2 [of page 21] a sobbing Abigail Cable is standing next to – yeah, that’s right – John Constantine! I always wondered how Constantine could have known so much about Abby and Swampy. The bloke must’ve been following them around for months, maybe years.’
“And the official editorial reply, from Karen Berger her own self:
“‘Aren’t you the observant one…. Great spotting on Constantine’s first appearance.’
“I’m sure this is just Karen keeping a fan happy, but I’m sure you see where the confusion comes in.
“Anyway, the very reason Constantine was created was because the Swamp Thing artists at the time (Steve Bissette and John Totleben) wanted to have Sting as a character in the series….”
Okay, back to 2025 Mike now, the one with the tricky back and the eye problems. Here’s the specific panel from #25 we’re all talkin’ about here:
Mmmmm…yeah, unless that was John during his time performing in the punk band Mucous Membrane, I don’t think the character we know and love would be caught dead dressed like that. Or maybe he would, that John fella is hard to pin down.
Anyway, this “is it or isn’t it?” has been a bone of contention for years, where even the Hot Comics Apps (as of three years ago) couldn’t keep their story straight. (Warning: I do link back to that 2004 post there…honestly, don’t click on the links if you go read it.)
Now what Swamp Thing comic should get a facsimile next? Frankly, I’m pushing for them to publish a proper, finished and colored comic book version of the 1970s unpublished Swamp Thing #25. Or, for an actual published comic, Brave and the Bold #176 from 1981, the Batman/Swampy team-up by the writer of the then-forthcoming Saga of the Swamp Thing series, and drawn by Jim Aparo. That’s a good’un.
Which one would you pick?
Okay, I ultimately decided not to continue the search for the most ’90s comic for the moment, as picking up from where I left off there was…well, weird. But I do have more 1990s comics content in the works, so check back next week for that.
But, speaking of the 1990s…here’s DC Comics with a big ol’ announcement regarding the forthcoming variant-laden first issue of Jeph Loeb and Jim Lee’s “Hush 2” storyline:
So here’s what Batman #158 entails.
Cover A – the main cover.
Covers B, C, D, E, F, G – cardstock cover artist variants
Cover H – the blank sketch cover
Cover I – foil cover by Jim Lee and Scott Williams
Cover J – a connecting fold-out cover by Jim Lee
Cover K – wraparound foil cover by Sean Gordon Murphy
Cover L – the 1 in 25 ratio variant
Cover M – the 1 in 50 ratio variant
Cover N – the 1 in 100 ratio variant
Cover O – the 1 in 250 Jim Lee pencils “virgin” cover
Cover P – the 1 in 608 (get it?) black and white variant signed by Jim Lee
Cover Q – the 1 in 608 black and white variant signed by Jeph Loeb
Cover R – the 1 in 1000 signed by Lee and Loeb
Then there are the Giant Size (probably Treasury Size) editions, with a regular cover edition and a foil one, as well as the Glow-in-the-Dark foil “Launch Party” variant. And this doesn’t count stuff like a special bundle of ashcans for sale/giveaway, or whatever retailer-specific variants there may be for this comic.
Obviously that 400,000+ copies are divided up amongst all these variants, and I wonder what the print run per comic would be…probably 125,000 or so for the main cover, and the balance spread out over the rest of the covers.
Now, it seems unlikely that Batman is suddenly going to quintuple in sales for this comic, and dumping 400,000+ into the current state of the direct market does seem like quite a lot. Retailer orders does not always equal sales (no matter how much the Rob may brag about the order numbers on X-Force #1 back in the 1990s, a solid chunk of those went directly into stores’ back rooms), but I suspect this particuilar Batman comic will do reasonably well. It really depends on how many different covers any one customer may end up buying.
In its favor, there have been a couple of decades’ worth of sales of the original “Hush” story in trade paperback building up an audience for it. (Never read it myself, beyond flipping through an issue or two, but people seem to really like it.) Can DC get people who read this as a trade initially to come back to pick up a comic book series for six consecutive months, or will that specific audience just wait for the eventual hardcover/paperback release?
Will customers already buying single issues in the direct market suddenly flock to “Hush 2” pushing the already (relatively-speaking for today’s market) high numbers on Batman even higher? Maybe for a while, and orders may be up there for the first couple of issues, but I imagine we’ll see a huge correction in orders by part 3.
Another point in its favor is the artist, Jim Lee. He’s been a popular artist for decades, but the extra push of “THE PRESIDENT AND PUBLISHER OF DC COMICS IS DOING A RARE ART JOB” will probably grab eyes. “Hush” has always been a Jim Lee art showcase, the story being relatively superfluous beyond “Batman fights all his villains,” and the prospect of new Lee art is a big sales pitch. Whether it’s 400,000+ copies big, we’ll find out soon enough.
So I done dood it…I got myself a copy of the nigh-legendary Time Beavers graphic novel by Tim Truman, published by First Comics in 1985. Now I haven’t had the time to read it yet, but read it I shall, oh yes. I’m just a tiny bit miffed with myself in that copies of this were just all over the place at my previous place of employment. I mean, I could have bought one of these from there on the day of release, but alas, I thumbed my nose at Time Beavers and headed straight to the rack to grab Green Lantern #188 with its Alan Moore/Dave Gibbons back-up instead. Thus, I have to resort to the eBays and other nefarious means instead.
Anyhoo, there were plenty of comics I had easy access to back then, but didn’t think about acquiring until, oh, say, ten-something years after I stopped working there and three years after that shop closed. Ah, well, What Can You Do™? I’ve got my Time Beavers now, so my decades-old oversight has been corrected. I’ll get it read soon and let you Dingbats of ProgRuin Street know what I think.
• • •
Some interesting news from DC Comics over at the 2025 Comicspro event, such as:
- Krypto: The Last Dog of Krypton by Ryan North and artist Mike Norton, which sounds amazing. No thought balloons here, North promises, but if you’ve ever seen Norton’s artwork, I suspect there’ll be expression enough from the Dog of Steel.
- Supergirl written and drawn by Sophie Campbell…good, there should always be a solid and accessible Supergirl title on the stands.
- Action Comics, which isn’t a new ongoing, obviously, but the new regular team of Mark Waid and Skylar Patridge will be effectively making it into a new Superboy series with a young Clark Kent. After years and years of DC either not having “Superboy” in Clark’s history after the Byrne reboot, and then kinda sorta waffling about it over the last decade of in-flux continuity, it’ll be interesting to see a modern take on the “Adventures of Superman When He Was a Boy.”
- Batman by Matt Fraction and Jorge Jiménez – YAY! Restarting the main Batman series with a new #1 – BOO! I saw a news site state that “this is only the fourth time the Batman series has been renumbered,” and c’mon, that’s like five times too many. Batman will sell just fine without renumbering. Yes, we’ll get a boost in sales for the first few issues, which is the reason they do this, but then it’ll be back to its normal sales level soon enough. …I mean, the comic sounds good, I’ll definitely be reading it, I’ll just sigh heavily every time I look at the issue number.
I didn’t see any new Swamp Thing comic news, so all this Super/Bat stuff will have to do.
So I came across this flyer sent out to retailers in 1995: DC Comics describing the new paper stocks and formats for their books:
(You can click that to make it larger, if you so desire.)
I remember a time when I was really into the whole “paper stock”/price levels thing, particularly back when I was fan prior to ascending into Comics Retail Heaven. “Sure, the standard DC Comics are now 75 cents, but look at this nice white Mando paper on these Atari Forces!” And of course there was Baxter paper for DC’s $1.50 (or occasionally more) books, but that extra expense was well worth it for the thicker paper and better, clearer printing and bright coloring (which took ’em a bit to figure out so that it wasn’t too bright.) (And let us not speak about Flexographic printing.)
Now by the time we got to the mid-1990s, I wasn’t paying that much attention to paper stock names and such, aside from missing the good ol’ days of just plain ol’ Baxter and Mando paper. A couple of these paper/format types I either forgot or just didn’t know in the first place. But “Miraweb” is a name I already knew:
…though I associated that with Frank Miller’s Ronin from a decade earlier, but I might be remembering that incorrectly. But I do recall these comics, particularly the Superman books, suddenly getting printed on really shiny paper (and priced at $1.95). It was an attractive package, with clear and colorful printing and felt like it was worth the price.
Okay, I didn’t remember the name “Fracote” gettin’ thrown around:
…but I honestly can’t recall any significant difference to the texture or printing of these titles. Granted, I wasn’t reading a lot of these specific books at he time (I did have those Babylon 5 books), but I don’t recall ever thinking “wow, look at this paper stock!” or anything.
“Rebax” feels new to me too:
…and I don’t believe I thought anything about the paper stock here either. I mean, aside it was nice and presented the art well, but at some time between being a fan in the mid-1980s and working behind the counter in the mid-1990s my concern with what these things were being printed on dissipated beyond “is this readable and colored well?”
Right now, I couldn’t tell you the paper stock of any comic book being currently published, unless something is just obviously printed on newsprint. I do wonder occasionally, like that recent G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero omnibus is massively thick but incredibly light. That paper has no weight to it, and yet seems sturdy and presents the artwork quite well.
What I notice more nowadays is the paper being used for covers. The real nadir of this was Gladstone using “self-covered” comics, where the cover was the exact same stock as the story pages inside. Like torn covers? This is for you!
And a number of comics today, particularly from the Big Two, have cover stock that is…not the most durable. I mean, sure, DC will ding you an extra buck for the cardstock variants, but for most comic covers the quality can vary. Sometimes the paper is slick, sometimes it’s barely slicker, sometimes it feels like it should be interior page stock (though still a little thicker, but not much more so, than the pages inside the specific comic)…it’s just all over the map.
This is an interesting artifact of the time, one you don’t see today, of retailers ballyhooing their printing quality. Comics look quite nice now, certainly much improved over what our caveman ancestors had to tolerate. But I kind of like not knowing stuff like the specific manufacturer name of the paper used. Just make it legible and somewhat durable, that’s all I ask.
And by the way;
…no, comic retailers are never satisfied. It’s just our nature.
So, alas, I’ve been going through the collection of a late customer of mine…a longtime customer, in fact, going back to the early days of my toil at the previous place of employment. Probably about 30 years or so…when I opened up my shop, he followed me over, which I always appreciated.
He passed away last year, and his brother brought me most of his collection then, but this week brought me several more boxes. I took a first pass through them and pulled out some items of interest…and he was a huge Lobo fan, so he had lots of Lobo ‘n’ related comics, including one I haven’t seen in decades. I thought I’d present a few of them here today.
From the “Lobo-related” category, here are a couple of parodies, starting with Spoof Comics Presents #9, featuring “Hobo: Patricide.”
The title is a parody of the 1992 DC Comics mini Lobo: Infanticide, a title I still can’t believe actually made it to the stands. Anyway, like many parody comics of the period, part of the joke was gender-flipping the characters, so we get a Lady Lobo here. This Is A Fetish for Someone™, as a very wise and stunningly handsome person once said.
Speaking of which, there was a later one-shot by the same company titled Wolverbroad Vs. Hobo…Wolverbroad being a parody of, oh, I don’t know, the old Legion of Super-Heroes character Timber Wolf I think.
In the non-gender-flipped category of parody was this comic, somewhat surprisingly from Eclipse Comics in 1992. It’s Loco Vs. Pulverine #1:
…Pulverine, of course, being a parody of, oh, I don’t know, Puck from Alpha Flight I think. This comic had an amusing wraparound cover, inspired by the similar cameo-filled cover on the famous Superman Vs. Muhammad Ali treasury.
Here’s the back cover:
…where you can see such luminaries as Hagar the Horrible:
…and here is celebrity power couple Krazy and Ignatz from the classic Krazy Kat strip.
Plus, here’s a special note from creator Gary Yap:
Last but not least is the comic I was shocked to see in this collection…well, okay, not shocked that in was in this collection, given the preponderance of Lobo stuff, just shocked that I’ve finally seen it again after all this time. It’s the infamous The Wisdom of Lobo one-shot from 1992:
I last wrote about this on my site in 2011 in these two posts, in which I noted I hadn’t seen it in forever even back then.
To recap, this came in a slipcased set, with the slipcase featuring an image of Lobo’s face. The books inside were Lobo’s Greatest Hits (a compilation of early Lobo appearances from Omega MenLobo mini-series, and this Wisdom of Lobo thing. We sold a lot of these sets, and demand for Lobo was high enough that we even broke up some of these sets and sold the components individually.
I mentioned in one of my earlier posts that the Grand Comics Database included a note on the Wisdom book that retailers were annoyed by the gimmick (in that the 64 pages inside were blank, you see), but that note seems to be gone now. But as I said then, it didn’t really annoy us, and when pricing out the components of the slipcased set vis-à-vis its retail price, the Wisdom book was essentially free.
I didn’t remember then what we sold the Wisdom comic for on its own, but the copy from this collection still had the old shop’s price tag. For a mere $1.50, you could have had this Lobo-branded sketch book for your very own.
To continue repeating myself from those older posts, I’m surprised that I haven’t seen more of these over the decades. I know we sold a ton of those slipcased sets, I figured eventually some would make their way back to me. It took 32 years, and the unfortunate passing one of my favorite customers, but here it is, filling in that little gap in my remembrances of comics retail past.
Thanks, Dale, for the opportunity to see these weird Lobo things again. I’ll find good homes for them.
I want to address a matter that’s been at the back of my mind. One that was spurred on by some unexpected shopping patterns at my store.
Over the last few days I’ve seen an uptick in sales on work by Neil Gaiman, graphic novels and comics and such. And the reason this surprises me is that, well, Mr. Gaiman is in some hot water at the moment. And frankly, it doesn’t look good.
Now, it’s possible folks haven’t heard about what’s been going on. Which is fair, a number of people restrict their interactions with comics to “buying comics” and don’t, say, pursue that interest via online news or whathaveyou.
It’s also possible that they have heard, and are buying the books out of some solidarity with Gaiman, showing him support in his time of need.
Or that they heard and don’t care one way or the other. He’s just a name on a spine or in a credit box, and that’s it. No particular attachment one way or the other.
Whatever the reason, and I am sure there are more nuanced ones that those options, nevertheless I saw more sales on his books than I’ve seen in a bit.
Thinking to a comparable circumstance, Warren Ellis‘ work I haven’t seen any interest in lately. I had a person picking up Transmetropolitan trades about the time news broke about him, but that was pretty much it, despite DC and other publishers keeping his work available for order.
And I get the occasional request for back issues of Joss Whedon‘s Astonishing X-Men. Marvel also has collections of this title either available or soon to be.
Which has me wondering, if/when Gaiman is found to be guilty of any or all accusations, what happens to his published work?
Look, I know all things considered, this is the least important part of the equation. Women getting their stories heard and everyone, including Gaiman, getting their day in court is top priority. “Publishing funnybooks” is the last thing anyone’s worrying about.
But I’m still curious. DC Comics has put a lot…I mean, a lot…into Gaiman’s Sandman. I presume that’s still a solid seller for them, in its multitude of formats. Plus, there’s a high profile TV show based on it, about to launch a second season, in which Gaiman himself was heavily involved. So there’s some real money at stake here.
Is Netflix going to pull Sandman off its service? Unlikely. Will it get a third season? Frankly, given that it’s Netflix, I’m surprised it got a second season, so if it were not renewed, that wouldn’t be a huge shock, and it may only likely be partially related to Gaiman’s conduct.
Just as it seems unlike DC will drop Sandman from its graphic novel backlist or any current or future projects. I expect both in DC’s case and the TV show’s case, if the Gaiman thing goes even more south than it already has, we’ll see a lot less “FROM THE BESTSELLING AUTHOR OF…” blurbs in relation to him. Stuff will stay in print, like Ellis’ and Whedon’s, but without the huge “ANOTHER MASTERPIECE BY THIS GREAT WRITER” in the solicit copy.
I can see them as pushing the Sandman and related characters as being, well, “bigger” than the man who created them. Emphasizing other writers and artists who work on the material, new and old. Yes, Gaiman will likely still get checks, but aside from a tiny “created by” blurb inside you’ll never know he was ever involved. They’ll be “DC Comics Characters” more than “Neil Gaiman’s Characters.” Much like how Astonishing X-Men is an X-Men Story, not a Joss Whedon story.
And then there’s Miracleman.
Miracleman, with all its publishing and ownership travails, finally, finally continuing its story over the last year or so after a 30-something year interim, with Neil Gaiman and Mark Buckingham back at the helm.
It’s been noted before that Miracleman comics coming back haven’t been that big of a deal in today’s market, for varied reasons as “culture has moved on” and “Marvel really futzed it up.” Frankly the only sales pitch the series had for modern audiences was, and no slight meant to Mr. Buckingham, “Here Is A Comic Book Written by Neil Gaiman.”
Well, there goes that, probably.
There’s still a final chapter/mini-series pending, and I lay pretty good odds that it’s going to be drawn and written by Mark Buckingham. He’s already been listed as “co-writer” so I suspect that “co-” dropping off in short order. Maybe with an “additional material by NG” if necessary.
Given the DC Universe Rebirth-esque reveal at the end of this Timeless one-shot, it’s pretty safe to say Marvel’s anxious to get Marvelman (as distinct from Miracleman) into the Marvel Universe proper. As such, with controversy a-brewin’, Miracleman: The Dark Age may be pushed through a little more quickly than expected, so Marvel can get that behind them and into laying groundwork in their comics for that Marvelman movie someday.
Or they’ll just quash it entirely…”indefinite postponement” and all that. Who knows.
Outside of the unique Miracleman situation, I suspect no matter what happens, DC and other publishers aren’t going to give up their cash cows. They might try to disguise the cows a bit, changing the brands on their sides so it’s less obvious they came from Gaiman’s farm, but they’ll keep milking them as long as they can.
Again, none of this is important, considering the situation. It’s just something that crossed my mind and thought I’d try to work out here. Suffice to say…this situation is so very disappointing and saddening.
So in response to my ponderings about why the I Dream of Jeannie comic only ran two issues and why special attention seemed to be paid to Barbara Eden’s likeness, reader RAR unpacked the following:
“Mark Evanier has addressed this topic a few times. Basically, the publisher would send the comic to the relevant studio for approval, and sometimes the studio would send the comic to the individual actors (or their representatives) for their approval, and sometimes those actors (or, more likely, their representatives) would get very particular about how they were depicted.”
Additionally, RAR mentions a specific example, brought up by Mr. Evanier, that Forrest Tucker was being particular about his likeness in the F-Troop comic, resulting in a photostat of an approved drawing used repeatedly. Which sounds similar to something I’ve heard about the Kyle Baker-illustrated Dick Tracy comics from Disney, tying into the Warren Beatty movie, where Beatty only approved certain drawings of his face to be used in the books. (And by the way, the War Rocket Ajax boys looked at the series recently…it’s a good comic!)
I did some searching on Mr. Evanier’s site, using a variety of search terms (if Mr. Evanier reads this, I apologize for the weird inputs) and couldn’t track down any stories related to this. I even checked through his three paperback collections of columns from the Comic Buyers’ Guide and no dice. I totally admit that I may have missed it, and Mr. Evanier is a very prolific writer and only some of his writing is represented on his website and in his books. It certainly seems like something he would have written about!
EDIT: It’s been pointed out in the comments that Mr. Evanier commented on that F-Troop post with information that backs up RAR above, which I somehow missed. Sigh.
However, in doing an internet search, I did find some discussion of the likeness issues in both F Troop and I Dream of Jeannie, presented on another blog well over a decade ago. This entry here shows how they dealt with the Approved Forrest Tucker likeness in storytelling. And this entry about I Dream of Jeannie focuses on the repeated use of a specific Larry Hagman likeness, which I somehow missed in my brief glances through the copies I had. The writer also mentions some repeated usage of a Barbara Eden likeness, but notes the artist put a little more effort into actually drawing the character.
Sean asks if that was Tony Tallarico on the art chores for I Dream of Jeannie. Apparently the answer is no…the Grand Comics Database entry gives a name with a “?” after it, with an additional note that it’s unlikely this person was the artist (based on information from the previously-linked blogger) so the credit remains unknown.
At any rate, the mystery remains as to why only two issues. Again, I presume sales weren’t great, the usual reason comics don’t continue.
• • •
Hey, you may have heard a little something about Robert Downey Jr. being cast as Doctor Doom for a couple of forthcoming and presumably hastily-rewritten Avengers movies. “What’s up with
that?” you may be asking. I mean, beyond the “look we got RDJ back, please start watching our movies again” flopsweat of it all. Well, my pal Kurt
devoted an episode of his podcast,
Welcome to Geektown, discussing the connection between Iron Man and Doctor Doom, and lays out a reasonable theory as to how they’ll be using Doom in the movies. It’s a short podcast, and worth a listen!
So this week is the release of the Labyrinth #1 facsimile edition from Boom!/Archaia, reprinting the three issue adaptation of the Jim Henson movie originally published by Marvel in 1985.
It does look nice, with the artwork by John Buscema and Romeo Tanghal appearing nice and crisp on the white paper. The paper stock used for the cover feels a little more fragile than I’d like, but that’s kinda par for the course in comics now, so I’ll live.
But one thing that does bug me is this little bit of business right here on the front cover:
Yup, they reproduced the original cover down to the original prices. Before you ask, no, this comic is NOT selling for seventy-five cents, but rather for the $4.99 price indicated on the back cover. Which of course means I’m going to be asked “is this really $0.75?” all day.
Usually, when DC and Marvel do their facsimile editions, they either obscure/remove the original price, or change it “499¢” or whatever. Leaving the original price on the cover for a reprint like this always leads to customer confusion. Especially in recent years, when comics have been released with actual low gimmick prices, or seeing something supposedly selling for 75¢ would not be unheard of. It looks like this comic is getting a little sign under it on the shelf saying “REALLY IT’S $4.99.”
So anyway, publishers, don’t do this. It’s annoying for me as a comics retailer, and it’s frustrating for customers, some of whom will think someone’s pulling a fast one.
I did see some wondering online about why this is being reprinted in the first place, and I think the obvious answer is, like I said above, Boom!/Archaia have been doing Henson comics for a while now. This is just another one, only a reprint instead of new material. Hopefully they’ll get around to reprinting Dark Crystal next.
* I mean, they took the time to edit the Marvel logo out of the corner box, right?
So Thom H. and Chris V brought up the X-Files comics in my movie adaptation post from a week or so ago. Okay, X-Files comics are technically a TV show adaptation, though it would get a couple of movies eventually.
I’ve written about the X-Files comic before, a whole ten years ago (and it’s weird to read about me processing a collection of old comics for the previous place of employment and not my own store). Anyway, way back then I wrote about how when that first issue (picured above) originally came out in the mid-1990s, the crash still affecting the market, we were caught off-guard by how much demand we had for it.
So much demand, in fact, that a second printing was rushed out, with the added bonus of individual serial numbers appended to the covers:
Serial numbers were cropping up a bit on comics around this time, as you can read here. A print run of 120,000 seems mindboggling today, though I suppose Marvel’s new Ultimate books may be approaching those numbers. The intent of the serial number was to boost the “collectability of the reprint in the collectors market, though they needn’t had bothered given the demand from the unconverted who couldn’t care less about printings and whatnot.
The X-Files comics sold relatively well for its short run, ending with the demise of publisher Topps Comics in 1998, more or less. Now at this point in history, I don’t recall if those comics were nearing their natural end sales wise after the initial faddishness had worn off, or if they were cut down in their prime by the publisher going under, but my guess is that they were still doing okay overall.
There were a number of spin-offs and one-shots and repackagings of the material and whathaveyou which either tells me demand was still high, or they were making up for slumping sales with volume, volume, VOLUME. One of those series, X-Files: Season One:
…gets back to the initial discussion point I was having here about comic book adaptations of other media. As the title suggests, they were adapting the first season’s episodes into funnybook form, so this was a somewhat rare case of a direct comic book adaptations of specific television show episodes, versus just doing movies. There was a lot of material doing new stories based on TV shows, but not so much translating broadcast episodes into comics (though, as mentioned, a couple current/forthcoming Star Wars comics are doing just that).
How did it sell? Again, my memories of the period aren’t as sharp as I’d like, but I feel fairly safe in saying the TV-based comics didn’t sell as well the ones with original stories. They were still picked up by the X-Files diehards,
And how were they? Couldn’t tell you. They were likely competent at worst, and likely visually interesting, given the creative teams. But here they were, Topps Comics generating essentially souvenirs of TV episodes for for the fans. (Though as has been pointed out, maybe some fans first encountered these specific stories this way, perhaps not even realizing they were retellings of TV shows.)
Some additional info you might find interesting regarding these: the Wikipedia entry for “Topps Comics” has an excerpt from an interview with Tony Isabella, talking about the apparently grueling approval process they had to go through for each X-Files comic.
A couple more follow-ups on the movie adaptations post:
Cassandra Miller mentions the adaptations for Dark Crystal and Raiders of the Lost Ark, of which I’d only ever read the former. I remember being very impressed by the detailed art in that comic, though I can’t remember who did it at the moment. Hang on a sec.
[TEMPUS FUGIT]
Ah, ’twas Bret Blevins that did the deed, with inking by Vince Colletta, Rick Bryant and Richard Howell. It was an appealingly done adaptation as I recall, fitting the story into about 50 pages over two standard comic books (or in one Marvel Super Special magazine. Alas, those comics departed my collection in a long-ago purge and I can’t present panels from them for you, but I’m sure they’re out there somewhere. But I think I’m assured enough in my memory of them to tell folks to seek ’em out.
Speaking of the Marvel Super Specials…I kind of have a small nostalgic feeling for those, featuring the adaptation in full in one issue, along with supporting articles about the making of the movie or whatever. And then splitting up the adaptation over two or three issues of a regular comic book mini-series. It was a clever ploy, getting their coveted space on magazine stands where comics weren’t necessarily offered, but repurposing that same material for the comic book market.
As for Raiders…I don’t know, I just never bothered with the comic book versions. I came to the movie slightly later, seeing it in a military base theater some time after its regular release, so I may have missed the initial heyday of the comic book adaptations. And I didn’t even do much more than glance at Marvel’s later Further Adventures of Indiana Jones, the first couple of issues featuring some lesser John Byrne work.
But back to Raiders…oh, it’s by Walt Simonson, John Buscema, and Klaus Janson! Look, why didn’t anyone tell me about this, that sounds great. I honestly just didn’t have time for Indy comics for whatever reason. I just wasn’t all that interested in The Adventures of Indiana Jones outside of the films themselves, oh, and video games like Fate of Atlantis, the Atari 2600 cart, and the arcade machine. I’ve poked through a couple or three of them over the years, even picking up a mini-series or two from Dark Horse. Nothin’ stuck. Just not for me I guess. Not even the Young Indiana Jones TV show got much viewing.
But hearing about the creative team on he Raiders adapataion makes me more interested to take a look now. Pretty sure I have a couple of them in the back issue bins at th shop, so I’ll make sure to take a glance.
And Aaron G. notes the Bill Sienkiewicz-illustrated adaptation of Dune, the 1980s film by David Lynch, based on the book by Frank Herbert. I’m a real Dune neophyte, having only seen parts of the movie, and have never even read the book (much to pal Tegan‘s chagrin). All I can tell you from a retailer’s perspective is that the issues command some higher prices nowadays, and are in great demand. I even had a really beat-up copy of the Marvel Super Special version that blew out the door almost as soon as I priced it.
The comics do have striking Sienkiewicz covers:
Maybe I should read these instead of seeing the movie or reading the book. Then I can fake it and join in on all those Dune discussion groups that pop up in coffee shops all across our great country and sound like I know what I’m talking about.
“Yes, of course, I like how Sting was drawn in this one pan–”
[EVERYONE STARES]
“UM I MEAN how his face was framed onscreen. Yeah, that’s what I meant.”
« Older Entries
