Friday, March 21, 2014

Cover Redux!

Time again to compare and contrast the original Marvel comic and the book it was reprinted in (or in some cases, replaced entirely)!
135
The covers this time around either have completely different artwork for the reprint, or there's no change! Here's my first comparison, Sgt. Fury #3 and Special Marvel Edition #5. Obviously, we're looking at entirely new artwork for the reprint! I never quite got why Marvel would do this, with my best guess being that they were trying to make the book look like it's new stuff, rather than a reprint. I prefer the original myself, although the new cover art isn't bad, either -- it's like seeing two different artists, being given the same description, coming up with their interpretation!0

215
I can't spot any real differences between Avengers #49 and the reprint in Marvel Triple Action #41, aside from the art being reduced a little bit.

063
Next, it's Amazing Spider-Man #39 and the reprint in Marvel Tales #29... and again, it's an all-new cover, although I think the original far outstrips the new cover, don't you?

193
Sub-Mariner #5 and Tales to Astonish #5 don't have any real differences, other than the reprint featuring a reduced cover (unusual for this reprint book).

150
And finally, we have Avengers #16 and the reprint in Marvel Triple Action #10, and it's an all-new cover, featuring a very different scene, doesn't it? I prefer the Kirby original to the Kane version, but that may be because (1) the original is such an iconic cover, and (2) Someone miscolored Giant-Man's costume on the new one, making him have bare arms. The first time I ever saw it, I wasn't sure who he was supposed to be!

2 comments:

  1. "I never quite got why Marvel would do this (new art), with my best guess being that they were trying to make the book look like it's new stuff, rather than a reprint."

    In a number of cases, it's because they no longer had original art, film negatives, or photostats of the covers.
    In the 1960s they sometimes sent first-generation material to overseas licensees, expecting to get it back.
    Sometimes it got lost, sometimes it simply wasn't sent back.
    It's the same reason a number of covers and interior pages in Essentials are greyscale scans of printed pages.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I can't spot any real differences between Avengers #49 and the reprint in Marvel Triple Action #41, aside from the art being reduced a little bit."

    Look at Magneto's face.
    It's been redrawn, probably because the photostat has grey (black dots) in it.

    "And finally, we have Avengers #16 and the reprint in Marvel Triple Action #10, and it's an all-new cover, featuring a very different scene, doesn't it? I prefer the Kirby original to the Kane version, but that may be because (1) the original is such an iconic cover, and (2) Someone miscolored Giant-Man's costume on the new one, making him have bare arms. The first time I ever saw it, I wasn't sure who he was supposed to be!"

    Again, look at all the grey "black dot" screen on the original cover.
    At that point it was too much trouble to re-ink, but it's been redone since for Masterworks and other reprints.

    ReplyDelete

Please keep your comments relevant, I delete all spam! Thanks.