 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jim, now that the Under Siege Epic Collection has been out for a little while, have you had a chance to pick it up? If so, I am curious as to your thoughts once you have read it. I got it a couple of days ago, and haven't had a chance to read it yet. Flipping through it, my only criticism is that they stuck a couple of unrelated annuals in the middle of the story. That may reflect publication dates, but I would have placed the annuals either before or after the Under Siege storyline for this collection to maximize readability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 23, 2016 - 11:05 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jim Phelps
(Member)
|
I have it but haven't dipped into any of it yet. However, my most recent expedition into JRJR-era X-Men isn't going well at all so the likes of Buscema-Palmer is looking quite appealing right about now! I'll start it this weekend. 
There's no way around it: I absolutely despise JRJR's sloppy, lumpen artwork on UXM and I have for over thirty years no matter how often I try to get into it. He needs a great inker like Bob Layton, like he had with Iron Man, to add actual anatomical form to his work. I'm also at wit's end with Claremont's humorless writing from that time.
Preach it! When JRJR took over art duties on UXM is where this dude jumped ship. After the uncanny artistic wizardry of Dave Cockrum, the steadfast professionalism of John Byrne, and the quasi-noir style of Paul Smith, JRJR's assignment was akin to a crash landing. A true WTF moment. JRJR was very good over on ASM, though. Funny.
It's really a shame that my all-time favorite comic turned to junk with the arrival of JRJR on UXM. I remember that issue #189 was my final issue. I also grew weary of Claremont's witchcraft-demon mumbo jumbo taking center stage. I grew weary of Rachel's angst--though I have actually softened towards the character now and don't mind her so much--and the over-dependence on the "Days of Future Past" and all the tiresome variations thereof.
Other problems I saw include the bizarre decision to male Nightcrawler team leader, the Storm-without-powers-but-still-with-the-team nonsense, to say nothing of her beating Cyclops in that ridiculous "duel" for team leadership. Kitty went from being a fun-spirited kid learning the ropes to some PMS-suffering dope with some truly horrid coatumes only it wasn't played for laughs like it was previously. Add the unwelcome addition of the X-Factor spinoff book and the sad circle was complete. Oh, and they brought back Jean Grey... 
A shame, really. Thankfully, Batman was about to become tremendously good and retake the #1 position in my comic reading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've been critical of JRJR's artwork on Uncanny X-Men, but one of the more memorable stories from that run was issue #183 (published April 1984). Most of the credit goes to writer Chris Claremont for this issue's power but Romita Jr., acquits himself well.
http://majorspoilers.com/2012/09/30/retro-review-uncanny-x-men-183/
Great story. As the breakup was a result of Colossus' romantic adventures during the Secret Wars mini-series, I am curious as to whether that romance was Claremont's idea, or if it was something Jim Shooter came up with and Claremont was left making the most of it. I suspect the latter, as the characterization of many of the characters, especially the X-Men, in the Secret Wars series was off. Either way, this story was very well done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I did not like Secret Wars, though I may have had I been a few years younger back in 1984 when it was being published. It was one of many things that soured me on Marvel--you know what one of the other things was--so it was not surprising to learn in recent years that comic fans who would have been a few years younger than me in 1984 did like it. Was there a Secret Wars action figures line?
I've seen Secret Wars t-shirts worn by adult comic fans; light blue with a silkscreen of Mike Zeck's admittedly iconic cover for the maxiseries' first issue.
Yeah, Secret Wars wasn't a great series. I respect that Shooter wanted a giant story, and a giant story that "mattered", as the repercussions of the story were felt in several books, but it was a chore to get through. There was a toy line. In fact, I believe the toy line came first, and once licenses were agreed to, Marvel produced the Secret Wars comic to promote it. The figures were terrible, even for its time. Cheap looking with awful sculpts. Kenner did a much better job with the DC Superpowers line, which still weren't great, but far better quality when compared to the Secret Wars line.
There were a few good things to come out of Secret Wars though, most notably a lot of great art, mostly by Mike Zeck. I also love this cover by Bob Layton:
There were a few good moments throughout, and some fun fights, with my favorite being Spider-Man's fight against Titania in Secret Wars #8. A great example of a bully getting her just deserts. It also gave us Spider-Man's black costume, which I think is a great design. Not as great as the classic red and blues, but great when used for an appropriate story like Kraven's Last Hunt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is interesting (perhaps only to me) about that X-Men trade paperback is how the cost has changed between individual issues versus a trade paperback. That Dark Phoenix trade above reprints 8 issues, and I believe one of which is double sized for $9.95. Comic issues at the time that trade was released were selling for $.75, and I think double sized issues were $1.25, so if Marvel opted to reprint the comics instead of releasing the trade, collecting the reprinted comics would cost you $6.50 instead of $9.95. The trade is still worth it though, as it is printed on better paper, and is more durable.
By contrast, modern individual comic issues cost $3.99 with double sized issues costing $5.99. Buying 7 individual comics and 1 double sized comic will cost you roughly $34. On the other hand, Marvel would probably charge only $19.99 or $24.99 to reprint that same eight issue story in a soft cover trade paperback. That isn't even considering the 20% to 30% discount Amazon will give you. The production values for the trade versus comics, which are now printed on much higher quality paper, are the same, and modern comics don't have the collectability that the bronze age and earlier comics did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 4, 2016 - 5:52 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jim Phelps
(Member)
|
What is interesting (perhaps only to me) about that X-Men trade paperback is how the cost has changed between individual issues versus a trade paperback. That Dark Phoenix trade above reprints 8 issues, and I believe one of which is double sized for $9.95. Comic issues at the time that trade was released were selling for $.75, and I think double sized issues were $1.25, so if Marvel opted to reprint the comics instead of releasing the trade, collecting the reprinted comics would cost you $6.50 instead of $9.95. The trade is still worth it though, as it is printed on better paper, and is more durable.
By contrast, modern individual comic issues cost $3.99 with double sized issues costing $5.99. Buying 7 individual comics and 1 double sized comic will cost you roughly $34. On the other hand, Marvel would probably charge only $19.99 or $24.99 to reprint that same eight issue story in a soft cover trade paperback. That isn't even considering the 20% to 30% discount Amazon will give you. The production values for the trade versus comics, which are now printed on much higher quality paper, are the same, and modern comics don't have the collectability that the bronze age and earlier comics did.
Wasn't it DC that was $0.75 in 1984? I thought Marvel held out at $0.60. But yes, I see your point though I suppose we are paying for the superior paper and cover.
Edit: Yes. http://www.comichron.com/vitalstatistics/mediancoverprices.html
I remember thinking how great the coloring process was in that old Phoenix tpb. Looking at it now, it looks all faded and pixelated. I now have these issues--and their classic covers--in "Uncanny X-Men Marvel Masterworks Volume 5." What a glorious book it is, too.
As for recent comics, I haven't bought a new comic since 1998 (and even that was DC).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
