Golden and Silver Age legends at the SDCC

Hello to all visitors! I'm still tied up with some important business, and it'll take until next for me to resume blogging, but for now, here's a story from the San Diego ComicCon featuring some great folks from the Golden & Silver Age, Allan Bellman, George Gladir, Lily Renee Phillips and also Mel Keefer, who were together with Mark Evanier on one of the panels. They were met with warm applause.

May be busy for several days

I'm going to be doing extra work within the next two weeks that may keep me away from the keyboard, so I have no idea if I'll be able to update as often as I'd like to. Stay tuned until then, and I hope I'll be able to make time to do some more write-ups within that time!

The Marvel stamp designer

The San Diego Union Tribune has an interview with Carl Herrman, one of the art directors for the US Postal Service who's worked on the designing of the new Marvel stamp commemorative series and who'd also worked on the designing for DC's own stamp commemorations earlier.

Japanese comics and vocabulary

From this article in the SGV Tribune, it sounds like Japanese manga may be ahead of American comics in some respects: they provide interesting vocabulary in their pages:

Kaplan, the test-prep company, and publisher TOKYOPOP partnered on three Manga novels, released in early July, that included vocabulary words such as "exculpate," "sanctimonious," and "unfetter." The words are underlined and are defined in a box on the same page.

Exactly what comic books, both for the young and old alike, can use.

The things that are enabling comics to be hindered today

This is a little list of things that, IMHO, are responsible for leading to poor quality in comics today:

• Editors who force mandates/edicts and crossovers upon almost an entire line, which leads to a lot of "developments" that are in poor taste, and/or don't suit the characters, and are just plain implausible, adding nothing positive whatsoever.
• Editors who choose the writers - and artists - according to their popularity in a specific genre and with specific audiences, but not according to if they understand what makes the book work. (And if it's artists we're talking about, regardless of whether their artwork is dreadful a la Liefeld.)
• Writers who knee-jerkity go along with the plans of the above, which puts their devotion and dedication in doubt.
• Marvel zombies, and also DC zombies, who buy what they're told to by those doing the promotion, regardless of quality, and regardless of whether the assigned writers are doing a bad job, implying that they don't think for themselves.
• Speculators, aka collectors who don't buy for if there's a fun story in store, but rather, in hopes that the comics they buy will be worth plenty of money someday.
• People who buy a comic book because it touts the death of a protagonist, and are willing to tolerate the marketing of death as something great to check out, among other bad things.
  
• Mainstream press companies and reporters who serve as cheerleaders for those doing all these things no matter how bad they are, and without even asking if there's something wrong with the whole approach.
  

There's probably plenty more examples that I could think of here, but for now, these are but a few of the problems I see as driving the quality of comics into the mud swamp today, and also giving a bad impression to people outside of comic books of what their audience are like. In reference to say, "zombies" I see them as being a source that'll inevitably have to be criticized for destroying the Marvel universe and all chances of good developments. And market speculators will also have to be frowned upon, since they're making a joke out of themselves.

Stark differences between Marvel/DC sales again

Once again, there's an amazing difference on display in sales, about how Marvel continues, no matter the low-ranking quality of any of their books now, to maintain [relatively] big sales, World War Hulk being the main example of the moment, whereas DC is falling way behind with a lot of their stuff just now. As Amazons Attack has shown, crossovers, at least at DC, may be starting to backfire (via Newsarama blog).

A reasonable explanation for this difference, why Marvel is selling relatively well, even if it's far behind what comic sales were like up to the early 1990s, is because, simply put, they long ago succeeded in garnering a zombie base that DC never managed to maintain, whom some people tend to describe as "Marvel zombies". It may have once been a kindly phrase, but now, I've got a feeling that it could all change to something way different.

This is something that's going to have to be taken issue with, about why Marvel - but also DC - zombies are undermining story quality as much as the editors and writers themselves are. In fact, I thought of trying to write up a bulleted list of things that could be causing the problems comics now face. I'll see in time if I can do that.

Just what the world needs

Scripps-Howard News Service gushes over NBM Publishing's "Treasury of Victorian Murder" and its latest entry, "The Saga of the Bloody Benders", which is set in Kansas during the 1870s. And the article really caps itself with a manhole cover when it says:

One thing's for sure: If you think the serial killer is a modern phenomenon, think again. Only in the 19th century, as rendered by Geary, murder was a lot better looking.

We have enough cruelty, sadism and murder galore going on in comics already as it is, and I think that enough is enough already. But the real problem here is how blatantly they sensationalize the talk of murder. Murder is NEVER a good looking act, it is one of the sickest, ugliest acts humankind can commit. That line there above is pure bottom-of-the-barrel sleaze. And that's probably the main reason why I wouldn't dare run the gauntlet of buying books like those.

Nothing is good about murder. Not in fiction, nor in real life. Bleah.

Trackposted to: Blue Star Chronicles, bRight and Early, Church and State, Jo's Cafe, Leaning Straight Up, Mark My Words, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Yankee Sailor.

Article featuring Joe Sinnott

The Red Deer Express of Alberta, Canada, has an article about a new book by Tim Lasiuta called Brush Strokes With Greatness that does a special tribute to artist Joe Sinnott, who'd been one of Marvel's most notable artists/inkers in the past few decades, having joined in the 1950s to work with Stan Lee on the thriller comics he wrote and edited at the time, and then becoming an assistant to Jack Kirby on Fantastic Four in the Silver Age.

Important elements for a successful GI Joe movie

With the success of the Transformers movie, that's doubtless what's led to a possible GI Joe movie being in the works.* And if there is to be one, then here's what's needed for it to work:

• It should be set in modern times.
• The main adversary should be Cobra. They're the most recognizable and formidable nemeses of GI Joe for many years now.
• Cobra should be portrayed as the terrorist gang of conquestors they are.
• Cobra Commander should be wearing his hooded mask with a snake on it, which makes him look appropriately evil.
  
• The filmmakers should not stray from the subject of terrorism under any circumstances, and should deal with it as meat-and-potatoes as a semi-sci-fi concept like this can.
• They should make sure to include Cobra's self-named battle call, because for them, it reflects their own terrorist unification perfectly.
• They should likewise make sure to include GI Joe's own battle call, "YO JOE!"
• There should be plenty of advanced weaponry on hand to see, for both sides.
• If Scarlett's in the movie, she should be portrayed as a convincing butt-kicker. I've noticed how a few movies based on comics and other surrealistic items (the Daredevil movie, for example?) seem to have contempt for karate chicks and the filmmakers tend to water down their talents considerably. That should not be the case here.

If the filmmakers working on this fulfill all these important details, then we may get a perfect GI Joe movie that doesn't stray from effective storytelling. And if we do, then all Joe fans can say...

YO JOE!!!

* And GI Joe has even more roots in comics than it seems, since the earliest template for the Joes was in a comic strip by David Breger for Stars and Stripes first published in 1942.

Trackposted to: The Bullwinkle Blog, Outside the Beltway, Stuck on Stupid, The Virtuous Republic.

Red Sonja now subject of a court battle

The female counterpart of Robert E. Howard's Conan the Barbarian, both of whom were stars in comics from Marvel for many years, is now the subject of a court battle in Delaware over who gets the rights to ownership of the merchandise and revenue. The article also gives a little history over how the She-Devil with a Sword came to be:

The lawsuit was filed in April 2006 by Red Sonja LLC, shortly after Paradox Entertainment issued a news release announcing it had completed a deal with Howard's estate to acquire the rights to all of Howard's work, including Red Sonya with a "y."

That Red Sonya appeared in the single 1930s short story "Shadow of the Vulture," in which she is described as "a tall, Russian warrior woman who carries a saber, a dagger and two pistols," and who lived in Vienna in the 16th century and fought invading Turks.

[...]

According to court papers, the birth of Red Sonja with a "j" came around 1973, when one of the authors of Conan the Barbarian comic books was looking for "a roughly equivalent female hero" and stumbled on the 1930s story.

Roy Thomas changed the "y" to a "j," took away her pistols and transported the tall, red-headed warrior back in time to be a contemporary of Conan, according to the lawsuit. The rights to that character were sold by Howard's estate in 1982.

There's considered to be two different Reds here? That puzzles me a bit. Roy may have reworked her into a protagonist of the world in which Conan dwells, but surely she's still the same character as the original one who lived in the 16th century?

Another mainstream goof-off

This article from the Post Star of Saratoga Springs about two brothers hosting the city's first comics convention might've had something going for it, until towards the end, as I realized, it took a turn into the superficial, and blows like a flat tire:

Carrara, of Greenfield Center, said he thinks people like comics because they are "fast-paced, have identifiable characters and they can be filled with timely, relevant information or they can be the exact opposite and provide an escape."

With all of these powers combined, Carrara said, comics are becoming increasingly mainstream.

Even Captain America's funeral was prominently featured in mainstream media outlets such as USA Today, he said.

Oops, once again, it sounds to me like a case of publicity at any cost. Another letdown is that it doesn't ask if current offerings are as good as what was put out years before. And thanks to that, the article falls flat on its face and has no impact by me.

Besides, isn't USA Today's own news coverage awfully superficial compared to most other newspapers?

Superheroes as society's mirror

The New York Times (registration may be required) would like us to think that the way a new exhibition on the evolution of superheroes at Montclair Art Museum is being displayed does reflect society, I'm sure, but, the following parts really cast a shadow of a doubt over just how honest this exhibition is:

The show is about as up-to-the-minute as a comics fan could hope. It begins with the birth of Superman in June 1938 and ends with the death of Captain America in March 2007.

Boy, putting that on display has got to be reason enough not to go visit! Because if that's what they're going to consider "art" then something's got to be wrong here.

More recent developments continue to underline how superheroes reflect political realities, whether it’s the Justice League’s questioning President Lex Luthor’s decision to invade the fictional nation of Qurac in 2003 or the continuing schism among Marvel’s heroes after being ordered to register their identities and abilities with the government. That debate began last year and will affect the group for some time to come.

The future of heroism is what Ms. Stavitsky hopes visitors will weigh at the conclusion of the exhibition; specifically, she said, “What kind of role should superheroes play now?”

A better question might be, "what roles are they being made to play now?" And the answer to that is overly politicized roles replete with anti-war rhetoric that have also largely deprived them of any real development in their own worlds. Alas, the NYT is not going to discuss subjects like those, if the superheroes are being forced to act in too many politicized storylines, and thus, nothing is accomplished by this propaganda article.

Mark Waid may have set the path for Flash ruin?

In the replies to this preview for All-Flash #1, I made a discovery via one of the replies that tells that Mark Waid may have led to the Rogues' tarnishing:

Back during Waid's run, he killed the Rogues off once, restored them when Rogue Fandom begged the point, then inactivated them all with the Replicant storyline. In interviews he was always vocal about not feeling the Rogue's Gallery was a worthwhile enemy for Wally.

Waid's use of the Rogues Gallery during his run was certainly minimal, and this could explain why. But while it's not like William Messner-Loebs used them much either, he didn't disrespect them, and his stories like the one in issue #18, where the Rogues had a reunion party and invited Wally and a ladyfriend at the time to join, was very engaging. The Porcupine story, which had Capt. Cold and Golden Glider working as bounty hunters, was well done too. Here's an example of an early form of writer's disdain for what made a book like this entertaining when it first began.

Waid may not have tarnished the Rogues, but he certainly may have set the path to its happening.

Is Rogue Fandom going to beg the point again? Come to think of it, is Impulse fandom going to do something similar?

Rob Liefeld is just like Kenny on South Park

He just keeps on coming back, this latest time for a revival of Youngblood, one of the first things Image Comics published when he co-founded them. But then, part of the reason for that is because, strangely enough, he seems to have some kind of an eerie following that's willing to shell out their money for his awful penciling. Fortunately, I'm not fool enough to be one of that gullible bunch.

Update: almost forgot, but, surely for Image, this isn't doubling back on some of the pointless tripe they were trying to move away from after a couple years? Apparently, they figured that, with the inexplicable following Liefeld seems to have, it now makes little difference.

DC's new Zuda website

This has been spoken about for a few days now about how DC is launching a website called Zudacomics whose purpose is to look for new talent, here being in webcomics.

It's certainly an interesting idea, but, why not search for talent in scriptwriting for their own mainline of books, done by people who can understand what it takes to make the characters work, and who've got more respect for them than today's own writers? Oh, right, because of how they're deliberately limiting themselves to all but a few select writers, that's why.

Don't forget the villifications, bud

Interesting to see that the comics columnist of the Colorado Springs Gazette actually agrees with those who find repetitive deaths horrid:

I agree with those fans who say, enough is enough. Sure, death doesn’t stick a lot of times in comics. Even so, I’m getting tired of DC bumping off characters. Every character, after all, is someone’s favorite. And the drama seeps away when death becomes routine. Live and let live, I say.

Maybe his saying so is better late than never, but that won't excuse him of his dishonesty and sugarcoating the whole affair in Identity Crisis three years ago. In fact, is he sorry for how dishonest he was when he pulled that dumb stunt? Otherwise, what's his justification for saying he's in agreement over pointless deaths?

And I do wonder if he would also agree with anyone who finds cheap and sensationalized villification of veteran characters like Jean Loring, instead of offering them new development as cast members of their respective universes, terrible. Otherwise, again, what's his justification for saying he's in agreement over the pointless deaths that have been strewn out? Especially when he says that Captain America: Fallen Son

should be a heart-wrenching issue.

Thus, I have to question his sincerity here.

Graphic novels may be an opportunity for booksellers, but not if they're marketed this way

24-7 PressRelease publishes an article about how graphic novels could be an "explosive opportunity" for booksellers. Unfortunately, they send their whole arguement here down in flames with the following:

Subject matter of the new genre runs the gamut from adult titles like Fun Home or Mom's Cancer to teen reads like American Born Chinese and Identity Crisis.

Well well well, what a clever attempt at disguise - not! American Born Chinese may be a title suitable for teen/family, but Identity Crisis is only for the most perverted adults with a mind like a teenager. Putting a grisly book alongside one that's for the family and trying to pass it off as a teen book is dishonest and disgraceful.

Another disgraceful mainstream article that does little more than to mislead the public, and families.

Comics for adults

Here's an article from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch about comics aimed at adults, at least one that's published by Fantagraphics.

But what about the fictional ladies?

The Colorado Springs Gazette spoke with Louise Simonson, who'd spent at least two decades as a writer in the field, about DC Comics Covergirls, which she's an editor of, but I can't help but wonder if some of what she says here is being used by the newspaper as a superficial apology for what misogyny exists there today. At the end of the article:

Just as superhero comics appeal largely to male readers, they’re also created largely by men. But Simonson, who now focuses most of her attention on writing children’s books, said she never felt out of place in comics.

“Back when I was working on Superman, we were treated as a team. I don’t think I was treated any different from the guys.”

But what about the women of the DC Universe? And the Marvel Universe? Any woman who'd worked in the comics medium over the years could surely be diplomatic for the sake of good relations with otherwise appalling people, or the writer, whom I'm not forgetting glossed over Identity Crisis, chose to water down the whole article. No wonder I can't help but ask if this column was meant to obscure the contempt for women among comics publishers and editors, and it certainly does avoid the meatier stuff.

Student Operated Press talks about DC's women, but is far from accurate

Here's an article from the Student Operated Press that discusses DC's femmes. It may make a point about how many girls are treated as expendable compared to their male counterparts, but, there's still a lot of shortcomings in here. One example: it talks about how

There have been 5 Green Lanterns of Earth--- none of them female.

That's not entirely true. Jade, daughter of Alan Scott, while her power is more metaphysical unlike her male counterparts, is still in some ways a GL, but she was offed by an uncaring editorial. And while there may not have been more female Lanterns on earth besides her, there have been a few alien members of the GL Corps such as Katma Tui, who was slain by Star Sapphire in 1988, and Arisia, who's luckier to have been brought back. Surely they don't count?

Overall, it's a very iffy article that shows that even some student newspapers don't exactly have a full grasp on all the details about comic books. And why is this page built using a frameset for the article, when frames became passe a couple of years ago?

Under Straczynski, Mighty Thor could become a mighty bore

But of course, it's not like Scripps-Howard News Service, in all their fluff-coatedness, are going to admit that it's possible. J. Michael Straczynski is writing the latest Thor relaunch, but his work on Fantastic Four was so awful that it wouldn't surprise me if his work here were just as underwhelming, if not more so. His "Sins Past" story in Spider-Man was so bad it needs no further mention.

As for Thor, seems they've made a costume alteration here:

Thor's outfit has been altered a bit, thanks to writer J. Michael Straczynski and artist Olivier Coipel. Simons describes the new look as "warrior's garb -- something that a warrior might wear into battle."

Coipel added, "JMS wanted something closer to the 'Lord of the Rings' designs, without getting too far away from the classic costume. So I interpreted it as something not too 'superhero,' but more 'heroic fantasy.'"

Even if it's not too far removed from Thor's classical outfit, that doesn't mean it's good. What if the battle armor he wears looks clunky? And yet, that wouldn't be anything compared to what "adventure" stories JMS writes, which could be full of his own biases, or contempt for the source material, as he showed in the two other Marvel books he wrote. With that in mind, what's the use in bothering about this new volume of Thor? I should hope that by now, JMS's popularity as a writer has waned.

I wonder if we'll be seeing more like this?

In Teen Titans #47, we're treated to an oh-so colorful scene of Robin bashing Jason Todd in the groin. Of course it's not like this hasn't happened before in comic books, but this, with the accompanying sound effect word ("boof") seems incredibly tacky and superfluous. Jason may be a jerk, but if he's not literally a crook, then what's the justification here? I thought the idea of bringing him back was so that they could improve him as a character. Guess I, and anyone who thought so before, were wrong.

No matter what age group is reading books like this, the above is not something we need to see, and leaves me feeling frankly insulted, since it's like they're trying to bombard me with yet more shock tactics. Ick.

Update: and while we're on the subject of Robin, his ongoing solo book has noticably dropped below 27,000 copies sold recently. With the way they've handled it lately, with almost no plausible or acceptable development, if at all, I can't say I'm surprised that people are starting to lose interest.

Happy 4th of July

Today is the Fourth of July, and I'd like to wish everyone a happy and joyous celebration!

If Supergirl #20-21 are crossover tie-ins, it may be ill-advised to buy them

Almost two months ago, when it was told that Tony Bedard was going to be the writer for Supergirl, that alone did seem like great news, didn't it? But what wasn't clear to me at the time was just how many he'd be writing. I did a search and found that Bedard went onto CBR's board and said it'd be three issues. And to make matters worse, I noticed that issue #20 and issue #21 were connected to two crossovers, Amazons Attack and Countdown. Then I started to frown.

I know that some out there were surely excited by the news, but if this is how it's going to be, then that's why I suspect now that this may be a very cleverly orchestrated trick: buy an acclaimed writer's work but at the price of its being part of a crossover!

Well that's why now I'm starting to feel dismayed, and if I were you, Superfans, I'd suggest holding back from buying those issues due to their crossover status, certainly because one of them is part of an awful x-over like Amazons Attack. I think I can see what DC's trying to do here: if the audience wants Bedard to be regular writer assigned, and assuming they are willing to assign him full time, then the audience has to buy some tie-ins to a worthless crossover to get to that point? I'm sorry, but promoting Bedard's writing this way with strings attached is dishonest, though even he should know better than to take part in something that doesn't provide him with a real opportunity to do some serious character focus (in other words, he's not above criticism, and shouldn't be). But at the same time, if he's got what it takes to make Supergirl a palatable title, then he should be given the full time contract immediately, without any hitches like x-overs.

People shouldn't have to be forced or tricked into buying books tied in to a bad x-over in hopes of hitting paydirt. Now, looking at this more closely, it looks as though something dishonest is afoot. Sure, I'd like to see the Maiden of Might prove herself against the awesome strength of Karate Kid, but not if it's part of a crossover.

Which, now that I mention it, should also send a warning to all Legion of Super-Heroes fans that even that series may be the next victim of crossoverloading.

Message to DC: if you thought you had anyone fooled, it doesn't include me.

We don't need more Eclipso

It would seem as though DC is continuing to depict Jean Loring as an Eclipso-possessed villainess, in Countdown #43. If so, that's another reason why not to get the book. Once again, I'm disgusted.

And the writer who did that one at the Pulse and said that Day of Vengeance is "pretty good" should be ashamed of himself. He is no true fan of DC Comics, IMO.

Update: well! I should've known. Now, they're putting "Jeanclipso" in Blue Beetle #16. Not that I could possibly care for a series that was built off of political correctness though, and this is one more reason not to bother.

Update 2: I AM ABOUT TO VOMIT.

Revivals in name only

A few months ago, I read some news that DC is going to launch a new series of Infinity Inc (there's a bit about it over here) that's got little to nothing to do with the original Justice Society spinoff, but instead stars some minor characters who never really appealed to me to begin with. And that sums up a problem with some recent items they've done: they've got little to nothing to do with the original series.

The first example could be their recent miniseries of the Secret Six. When the strikeforce by that name first appeared in 1968, in a brief series written by E. Nelson Bridwell, they were a bunch of covert spy-like operatives led by a leader whose codename was Mockingbird. And while they may have been set in the DCU, they skirted around a lot of the sci-fi elements you'd find in other series, and were more stand-alone and independent as a concept. The concept was revived in Action Comics Weekly in 1988, with a new team introduced that was initally led by one of the older members, and while I'm on the fence about how Martin Pasko, whose work was either good or bad IMO, killed off some of the older members in the second part of the story there, it still remained true to what the original Bridwell-penned suspense story was about, which was far from involving superheroes.

Last year, we got a miniseries written by Gail Simone with the same title that had nothing to do with the original Bridwell creations, and the late leader Mockingbird's son, who was suggested as being heir to his father's job, was ignored too (instead, Lex Luthor is Mockingbird here!). Instead, we got a miniseries starring a couple of mercenary supervillains like Deadshot and Cheshire. And just like how there could be a case out there of a book that's too close to things involving superheroics, this, now that I think of it, suffers from a case of being too close to supervillainy.

Similarly, I think that the problem with the new Infinity Inc, which is being written by Peter Milligan, is that it seems to star a couple of characters who aren't just second-rate, but who otherwise have nothing to do with the original team. Just because the JSA is where so many characters who're connected with the classic team from the Golden Age appear now doesn't mean that they couldn't do something similar to when Marvel launched West Coast Avengers in the mid-80s, and feature a team that worked in California, to the regular team's being based in New York. The new series being launched really doesn't interest me, as it's in name only and not a true revival of Roy Thomas' series from the mid-80s.

Then, there's another new item coming up called "Challengers from Beyond", which is supposed to star Donna Troy, Kyle Rayner and Jason Todd, as they explore all these new multi-earths and dimensions introduced in 52 (via Bags and Boards). As you can probably guess, this is obviously meant as a variation on Challengers of the Unknown, but the original astronauts are nowhere in sight. And this is a clearer example of when a series becomes too closely identified with superheroics. Honestly, if it doesn't have anything to do with the original material, and if the original stuff is ignored, then I really don't see what's the use here.

So are any of these revivals of older stuff worth it if they're in name only? Frankly, I can't say that they are.

Marvel's latest marketing trick

They're going to publish Amazing Spider-Man almost weekly, while doing away with two other titles (Sensational and Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man). Augie DeBlieck says that:

Marvel is making THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN into a book that publishes three times a month, while doing away with the other two monthly Spider-Man titles.

You're not overthinking it to believe that this is mostly a cheap publishing stunt. I don't mean "cheap" in a condescending way. I mean it in a very real way: it won't cost Marvel any more to keep the same number of creators around to produce the same number of books each month. In the end, slapping the same title on the cover of each book is a big win for their bottom line.

Marvel will sell more comics, overall. I'm sure they're working on a way to divide the work and the continuity so that the book flows seamlessly from one story to the next. They're going to make a show of NOT just printing three books a month in a seemingly-random order with the same title. (They do have some sense of shame, after all.)

But, in the end, it's a cheap marketing trick. Marvel will make more money. Retailers will likely make more money. And readers will read more Spider-Man comics.

But will they include this humble Spider-fan here? Unless there's really good writing involved, I doubt I'll be among them in such a hurry. That's why the step really isn't something to be impressed with either way.

Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. So said Henry Mencken. The man was clearly a genius. Because if the creators on the new AMAZING SPIDER-MAN had been doing three separate Spider-Man books, only one set of creators -- those on AMAZING -- would benefit from the blind adherence of fandom.

I can't blame Marvel for playing the hand they're dealt here. It's just silly and insulting, as a comics fan, that it'll work so well.

What fools we mortals be.

Alas, yes. That any readers would just continue to buy and buy and buy with complete disregard for story quality is what's really sad about all this.

What's more, I'm of the mind that yes, this is a cheap marketing trick that does nothing to include good writing, what Spidey needs just now, and without the right writers will do nothing to improve the book. No matter how good or bad an idea cancelling the other spinoff titles is, it does not improve the writing quality for our favorite wall-crawler.

The Tenth Comic Book Carnival

Welcome to the July 1, 2007 edition of the comic book carnival, the tenth I'm posting so far. Here's all the results for this month.

Hube presents "Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer" review posted at The Colossus of Rhodey.

K-Squared presents Dead Flash Covers posted at K-Squared Ramblings.

PirateDaycare presents Marvel Trolls Craze Sweeps the Nation posted at Pirate Daycare.

Shark presents Cherokee People: The Downfall of Comics posted at The Shark's Bite.

paris lia presents RULED! - THE COMIC STRIP THAT WHITENS AND BRIGHTENS posted at LOLette, saying, "blog carnivals rule"

MCW presents UNCANNY X-MEN # 487 posted at MarvelComicsWeekly.

Mark25 presents Comic Books - Did you know? posted at HotStrategies.com.

RDoctor presents Gallstones Star Hospital episode 1.1 posted at RDoctor.

That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of
the comic book carnival
using our
carnival submission form.
Past posts and future hosts can be found on our

blog carnival index page.

Technorati tags:

the comic book carnival, blog carnival.