New Venom being set up using old character, who's now being called "amazing" in another pointless Spidey spinoff

IGN says Marvel, already having done Mary Jane Watson enough damage in recent Spider-Man storylines, is now putting Eddie Brock back together with the symbiote, and putting a member of Spidey's rogues gallery in another symbiote, in preparation for a miniseries spinoff called - surprise, surprise - "the Amazing Venom":

Marvel is in the midst of the Queen in Black crossover, which sees the world caught in the middle of a destructive conflict between Asgardian death goddess Hela and the symbiote god Knull. It's a watershed moment for Venom, Carnage, and every other character connected to the symbiote family. And it goes without saying that the landscape of the Spider-Man franchise will look much different when all is said and done.

Part of that involves the launch of a new monthly Venom series that sees Eddie Brock reunite with his beloved symbiote at long last. But there's also a new spinoff miniseries in the works called The Amazing Venom. Who or what is the Amazing Venom? To answer that question, we turned to writer Jordan Morris. In an email interview with IGN, Morris explains how this series takes a cult-favorite Spider-Man villain and elevates him to new, ridiculous heights. [...]

When all they can think of is recycle certain adjectives, it's another example of how creatively bankrupt they are, right down to how there's still no sign they'll ever restore the Spider-marriage, even if MJ is no longer being depicted as a female Venom host. But, who indeed is this "amazing" Venom?

So who is the Amazing Venom? None other than Fred Myers, formerly the costumed supervillain known as Boomerang, and a character who makes a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo in Spider-Man: Brand New Day. Fred has really come up in the world in 2026, as he's now bonded to a symbiote named Passenger and sporting a costume inspired by Spider-Man himself. As Morris explains, this new series serves as an exciting opportunity to fundamentally revamp a character who's suddenly been thrust into the forefront of the Marvel Universe.

"I love that Fred is a villain with simple ambitions," Morris tells IGN. "He doesn’t want to rule the world, he just wants to throw boomerangs at people and steal a bunch of money. I’d like to think that if I had access to exploding boomerangs and jet boots I’d be a hero, but if I ended up going villain, I’d probably go the Fred Myers route. It’s so funny that this two-bit scumbag keeps getting caught up in world-ending sci-fi madness. I mean, he got killed by a vampire and came back from the dead! That’s stuff that should be happening to Avengers or X-Men, not guys with boomerangs on their head."

Why not "civilian" co-stars? I sometimes wonder if the police captain Jean deWolff's death in the mid-80s was really called for, and civilians who aren't superheroes shouldn't be prohibited from the privilege of being able to be resurrected, a concept that's part and parcel of science-fantasy. What this Morris tells is insulting to the intellect.

It also sounds like the writer, most unfortunately, is opportunistically putting more tired and grating emphasis on villainy, which has become far overemphasized in modern times. That they even resorted to economy casting also speaks volumes. Looks like Marvel's done little more than bore the senses with yet more promotion of villainy over heroism. And that, again, is a leading problem with modern storytelling. We decidedly could do without Brock's new solo too.

Video game about boy trapped in comic book unfortunately also trapped in horror genre

InvenGlobal tells about a video gaame titled Yurei, which is about the following:

Yūrei is a psychological horror game set within the haunted pages of a comic book, developed by Team Yūrei. The game was created over five months by ten second-year master's students from Cnam-Enjmin, the National School for Video Games and Digital Interactive Media in Angoulême, France.

Players must follow the comic's progression, reading the story to reach its end. The comic book, which is stuck to the protagonist Jun's hand, constantly speaks to the player, sometimes offering hints and at other times presenting challenges to solve. It acts like a narrator, yet it may also force you to make sacrifices.

The premise of being inside a comic itself may be clever, but making it part of an overused genre is not. It's regrettable the horror genre continues to be what's used as a theme for these kind of computer games, when here, if they'd wanted to, they could've turned it into a fanciful adventure with a brighter setting, yet they stick to potentially violent themes instead. That's the biggest problem with modern entertainment, and no telling how to convince anyone why it needs to change.

And I hesitate to think what they mean by "sacrifices".

Digital comics are allegedly still a big deal

Publisher's Weekly wrote about the market of digital comics, and says it's ostensibly improving after a slump:

Less than three years ago, the lights on digital comics seemed to be getting dim. In November of 2023, Amazon announced the impending shutdown of the Comixology app—the platform that had accounted for the large majority of digital comics sales from every major U.S. publisher for the past 10 years.

But a new digital landscape was quietly developing, as both longstanding comics publishers and upstart digital retailers carved out new approaches to producing, selling, and reaching an audience for online comics. Could 2026 be the year that the comics industry fully comes into its digital era? We talked with publishers and retailers to find out.

The problem is that no sales figures, even digitally based, seem to turn up in this item, and that's the common modern weakness in such puff pieces. Though it does say here that:

Meanwhile, at Sweet Shop, another new retail platform that launched in beta in late 2025, Kenny Meyers has a different approach. In contrast to Neon Ichiban’s suite of features, Meyers believes that the key to digital success is to keep the app and market as simple as possible.

“There’s a lot more to [digital comics] than gimmicks,” Meyers says. “People just want, in my opinion, very simple, elegant ways to discover comic books.”

If the digital market avoids gimmicks like multiple variant covers, that's a good thing, but do people want entertainment value? That's what seems to be missing here. And then, once again, they sugarcoat DC/Marvel sales:

DC Comics has hardly been a late bloomer when it comes to digital comics. The company sold its first single-issue digital comic more than 15 years ago, and was among the first publishers to embrace day-and-date digital sales. In 2007, they even (briefly) attempted to launch a digital-first slate of all-original titles—the short-lived Zuda imprint.

Today, DC is coming off a heady year of growth, fueled by sales of its new Absolute Universe imprint and the surprising success of its digest-sized DC Compact Comics. By the end of 2025, the publisher even overtook Marvel in comics shop market share for the first time in years.

And as new readers came to DC, new digital sales followed. “We're finding an almost equal number of new readers coming in through physical and digital at the same time,” general manager Anne DePies says. “And once the digital readers come in, we've had meaningful success in seeing that they are purchasing across our ecosystem.”

Like other comic companies, DC doesn’t provide public figures for its total volume or revenue on digital sales, but DePies says that digital’s relative share of DC sales has remained remarkably stable over the past decade. That’s true of most other major publishers as well: at Dark Horse, VP of publishing sales Mark Bernardi says that digital readership leveled out to around 5% of sales many years ago, and has stayed in place ever since. At IDW, the share is a stable 10%. Image is a bit of an outlier; publisher and chief creative officer Eric Stephenson says digital sales have never recovered from a slide that started when Amazon bought Comixology.

I'm sorry, but failure to provide any public sales figures, which has been the norm for several years now, does nothing to convince. The ICV2 page they point at doesn't give sales figures either, and 5-10 percent is nothing to marvel at. Mainly because again, no sales figures are offered, yet they clearly hope everybody will take their word at face value. Any sales figures provided for the Absolute line were also laughable, as I recall. None of which matters to a puff publisher like Publisher's Weekly, unfortunately.

I'm sure the digital market has potential for the independent market, however. Perhaps provided, of course, that it's not a company like IDW turning out the products, seeing how far they've fallen in quality over the past decade. Yet there's suggestions the digital market, in the end, is doing no better than the print market, certainly if there's no genuine quality to accompany it.

Houston's Third Planet specialty store

The Houston Chronicle took a look at Third Planet Comics, a local specialty store that's been in business for about 5 decades:

There aren't many places left where you can walk in and be immediately met with old-school nerd culture. But at Houston's comic book stores, there are the latest offerings from Marvel, DC, and countless smaller independent companies; bins filled with older discounted comics to sift through; and rare comics worth lots of coin displayed like trophies on the wall. Even as they vary, comic book stores carry those familiar markers, creating a refuge for fans.

I'm sure there's worthwhile stuff to find, but when they say Marvel and DC's latest is what to find, that's where they hugely disappoint, even if it's not surprising they'd take such a superficial view of the Big Two in their modern incarnations. Although there is something interesting told in what follows:

Third Planet Comics, which has become a Houston landmark over its 50 years of operating, is huge; calling it a comic superstore is almost an understatement. The store seems to house everything nerd culture encompasses—comic books, manga, video games, Gundam build kits. You name it, Third Planet probably has it, or can get it for you. In the middle of a weekday, regulars and first-time customers ventured in and out, clearing out their boxes of comic subscriptions, browsing, bringing in old comics to see what they are worth, and parents passing on their own curiosities to their children. [...]

"We have something for everybody here," Johnson said. "I have people coming in saying they've been to other stores and they can't get things because that store doesn't like the product."

Now that's interesting what they tell. You could reasonably wonder if it alludes to independent comics and other creator-owned products that might be turned out by perceived right-wingers, and if the store in question despises them for that. That's not a good example for business, and this is what some possibly left-wing owned stores are relying heavily on modern Marvel/DC output for? So they don't have to rely too much on creator-owned products that might come from folks they don't agree with?

I sincerely hope Third Planet avoids any politically motivated decisions, because in the past decade, it certainly damaged business and its image. That's something that now needs to be mended. If the Houston store remains neutral, if anything, that'll be a good, responsible position.

Marvel crosses its universe with Star Wars, in a special written by filmmaker Kevin Smith

Entertainment Weekly says Marvel's continuing with their pointless distractions, producing a crossover of franchises:

Titled Star Wars/Marvel: Hope Assembles, the five-part limited comic book series will launch in January 2027, Entertainment Weekly can exclusively reveal.

Figures like Chewbacca, Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, and Princess Leia will join Earth-616 — the primary continuity in which most stories of Marvel Comics take place —and mingle with the likes of Captain America, Black Widow, Spider-Man, and the Hulk. Meanwhile, Doctor Doom and the Marvel rogue’s gallery will join the likes of Darth Vader and the Galactic Empire.

But here's the bad part:

Kevin Smith, the actor/director who wrote major runs of Daredevil, Batman, and Green Arrow, writes the new story. David Marquez of Uncanny X-Men and Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man is the artist behind the comic, as seen in EW’s exclusive first look at the cover design.

Wow, what do we need such an overrated filmmaker writing this for? Even if this time, he doesn't suddenly, out of nowhere, take time off from completing the miniseries as he did with the horrible Black Cat miniseries he wrote in the early 2000s, Smith's resume is still just too insufferable to care about 2 ruined franchises crossing over. Another problem is that this perpetuates a serious mistake of the past 3 decades: hiring "celebrity" writers like filmmakers and novelists to script a comic book, yet not basing the employment on merit any more than talent and comprehension of the creations the writers are assigned to script.

Let's also not forget Smith once turned out a woke continuation of the Masters of the Universe cartoon, broadcast on Netflix, no less. That's all you need to know he could always render the Marvel/Star Wars crossover in similar ways. So again, what's the use of even advertising what's bound to be a time-waster?

More about Frank Miller's now tiresome viewpoints

Here's a few more recent items involving an artist/writer who's got to be one of the most overrated in comicdom. First, in this recent UK Observer interview, he tells who his mentor was:

What prompted you to write this book? It’s not a straight-up memoir.

No, it’s a combination – a guidebook for storytelling and a portrait of the amazing little world I inhabit. I think it has something to do with my most important mentor, the artist Neal Adams, who helped me start my career and played the tough sensei in my life. After I met with some success, I asked him what I could do to pay him back for what he’d done for me. Without missing a beat he said: “Do it for the next [generation].” This book is the product of me trying to meet that pledge.

Wasn't Will Eisner an important mentor of his? Or is Miller deliberately trying to obscure Eisner, because the latter didn't live up to the former's exact expectations? Somehow, Miller seems to have disappointed again, all for the sake of political correctness. Besides, what's he actually doing for the next generation that could have lasting value?

You started out writing for Marvel and DC superhero franchises before branching off to create your own worlds, but was working within those confines a useful first step?

Oh, yes. I was being thrown problems to solve that I’d never been thrown before. I was working under specific instructions with this mythology of characters, many of whom I hadn’t even heard of, and learning to work in a much more disciplined situation.

I've got a feeling that even today, there's quite a few older creations he hasn't heard of, and at this point, not only doesn't care about them, he wouldn't be suited to work on them anyway.

You were still in your 20s when you were tasked with reimagining one of the world’s most cherished superheroes, Batman. It must have been a lot of pressure.

I don’t have any memory of having any fear. I was so full of ideas of where I wanted to take it. It was mostly enthusiasm and a sense of overwhelming joy. The amazing thing about Batman is that it’s so versatile. You can find different ways to make it work. Every once in a while I get a chuckle out of how much of The Dark Knight Returns is still surfacing in [Batman] movies after all these years.

Oh, but of course it was a joyous occasion, wasn't it? After all, he got to do swipes at Ronald Reagan, for ambiguous reasons. As for allusions to DKR in movies, the odd thing is that Miller hasn't found most of said movies appealing, and in another article coming later on the list here, they mention that subject.

Like so many East Coast writers before you, you were lured to Hollywood in the late 1980s.

That was wild. It was a whole lot of fun. I was playing in a much bigger ballpark to obviously a much bigger audience. But it was a very different experience: there were a whole lot more bosses.

You refer to “the fiery fallout of fame” and hitting rock bottom after moving to LA. What happened?

I lost my way. I’m afraid I got more involved with ego than with my mission as an auteur, and I lost track of things. But it’s through telling stories that I’ve been able to come back around to find myself and my purpose.

He sure did. His work on the Robocop sequels, if anything, was such a failure. But even his later adaptation of Sin City to film didn't pan out beyond 2 entries, IIRC, with the 2nd, A Dame to Kill For, thudding badly. It reminds me of a description of some two-season TV shows I once noticed on another blog a decade ago: "first season wonders, second season blunders". A similar description could be thought of for some recent live action comic adaptations.

Something that crops up again and again in your work, not least in Sin City, is the flawed but single-minded crime fighter who will clean up the mean streets against all the odds. What’s at the root of that fascination for you?

I’ve always liked my heroes, from Superman to Batman to Zorro. And I’ve always loved crime stories. The more I discovered film noir, the more I realised that stuff spoke to me like nobody’s business.

What's left out is that he developed a dim view of the Man of Steel, all because Supes in his narrow vision is ostensibly "too powerful". As for crime stories, based on the dark vision he alludes to, that's basically the problem: he seems more interested in honing skills for storytelling that's anything but science fiction, and maybe that's one of Miller's biggest weaknesses.

Somebody once asked you if you’re a conservative and you said “No, I’m a libertarian”. Is that still the case?

Let’s just say I’m an independent thinker. You know, being conservative right now means something very different than it did a generation ago. So I find my own way.

Unfortunately, it's been sadly apparent for years now he just can't bring himself to quit ragging on figures like Donald Trump, again, for ambiguous reasons. I just don't know what exactly Miller wants or expects.

As AI encroaches, do you regard it with excitement or something else?

Something else. At first I thought it was a magic mystery box. Then I thought it was the end of creativity. Now I think that it’s going to be something that everybody will eventually calm down about. Its uses are limited. It’s not a panacea, it’s not a god. It will be much like the personal computer, in that it will change things, but we need not all bow down before it.

I wonder how he'd feel if AI were used to imitate his art style, which has been mediocre for years? More to the point, if any would-be artists try cutting corners by resorting to AI to complete their assignment, isn't that dishonest and a poor approach? It's bad enough much of mainstream artwork's become so mediocre, but that doesn't mean we should approve of AI either, if anybody winds up using it as a way to save on employing actual artists.

Next, when the latest Spider-Man movie came out, how fascinating that Miller saw fit to praise this particular film, according to the Hollywood Reporter:

The comics icon took to Instagram to share his feelings about Sony’s latest Tom Holland adventure, calling the film, “The most Ditko movie yet and with my Hand in it for all to celebrate. This fan’s dream come true. Tom Holland is my forever Spider-Man as romantic as he is heroic. Congratulations to Destin and the whole team.”

Miller, who famously wrote The Dark Knight Returns and Batman Year One for DC, has sometimes been a tough critic of comic book movies over the years. In 2014, Playboy asked Miller about the “lousy” movie adaptations of Daredevil and Elektra. “When people come out with movies about characters I’ve worked on, I always hate them,” Miller said. “I have my own ideas about what the characters are like. I mean, I can’t watch a Batman movie. I’ve seen pieces of them, but I generally think, No, that’s not him. And I walk out of the theater before it’s over.”

When asked if that includes Christopher Nolan’s acclaimed Batman trilogy, Miller replied, “It includes all of them. I’m not condemning what he does. I don’t even understand it, except that he seems to think he owns the title Dark Knight. He’s about 20 years too late for that.”

Oh yes, that's interesting history too. I can't recall now if Nolan ever made use of any noticeable allusions to Miller's writings in his screenplays, but years later, when Nolan produced a woke adaptation of Homer's The Odyssey, which unfortunately grossed quite a bit at the box office, one could wonder if Miller would change his mind. There's another writer, more Hollywood-connected, however, who also had what to say about this:

Longtime Spider-Man comic book writer, J. Michael Straczynski, also had some praise for Brand New Day, writing on X: “To be clear I’ve enjoyed all the Spider-Man movies. But for my money, this latest iteration feels most authentically Peter, and Spider-Man. So many comic movies have fallen into MacGuffin plots, looking for the code, the stone, the box, the sword…this one is all about what William Faulkner called ‘the human heart in conflict with itself.’ It’s a very human story, emotional without being slow or dull or self-indulgent. It feels like stepping into a really good Spidey comic. Well done to all concerned (and even those unconcerned).”

As Toy People News notes, both Miller and J. Michael Straczynski are credited in the film's special thanks listings, "suggesting their comic work may have served as inspiration for the movie." But as the latter's presence makes clear to me, anybody as overrated and contemptuous of Spidey's world as JMS turned out to be is reason enough to skip this film for a long time. He played a part in the dissolving of the Spider-marriage 2 decades ago, and no matter what defense he employed at the time, it was just inexcusable. Also, Miller seems to think he owns the Dark Knight as well, so why complain about Nolan, regardless of where he's been going lately?

Here's also a review on Quillette of Push the Wall, which while mostly behind a paywall, offers the following visibly:

Even outside of comic book circles, Frank Miller is known as a gifted artist and writer who made comics grown up and gritty. From his damaged version of Bruce Wayne to Marv in Sin City (whom Miller pithily describes as “Conan the Barbarian in a trenchcoat”), Miller has created stories that resemble a strikingly original blend of film noir and dark Wagnerian opera. But the Miller who emerges from this memoir—part autobiography, part primer for aspiring graphic novelists—is as much a romantic as a gung-ho rebel.

It's always sad how earlier scribes like Dennis O'Neil and Steve Englehart are obscured in regards to whomever made comics "grown up". And why do they think a scribe who originally lucked out with the Robocop sequels is truly a "gifted" creator? Let's also not forget his only solo directorial effort to date, the cinematic adaptation of Will Eisner's Spirit, which was dreadful.

More importantly, New York was the home of his first great love: “Sure the city was violent, but it was also the hub of comic books and had been since the beginning. Marvel and DC were there, and all my real-life heroes were either still there bent over their drawing boards or they had spent formative time in the city, honing their skills and learning the lessons that only New York can teach you.” Miller was a childhood fan of the medium, and developed a particular fondness for EC comics, which were geared towards adults and “explored forbidden themes such as environmentalism, nuclear disarmament, and the miseries of war.” From EC comics, Miller “learned to always push the walls that others constructed, to challenge the strictures others put in place to stifle and smother.”

How does he feel about the mainstream moving away to Hollywood, apparently because that's how to truly manage a live action adaptation? One could argue the comics industry won't have as much impact as it used to, when DC/Marvel have been taken away from where they began.

Part of EC’s appeal no doubt rested on the reproaches it earned from the Comics Code Authority, which Miller describes as “a crusty remnant of ‘Red Scare’ censorship and the prim morality of postwar America.” The attempt to drum up a moral panic about comics will be familiar to those who have followed similar media and public campaigns to ban and censor video games and “video nasties” in the name of child protection:

And on this, one can only wonder how he feels about modern censorship, which made a comeback in the past decade, and the industry still hasn't recovered from it? Moral panics as we know them turned up again 15 years ago, with video games some of the primary victims, and Miller, unshockingly, seems oblivious to all that, as does the book reviewer.

Next, more recently, the BBC also interviewed Miller, and they perpetuate the whole notion only he succeeded in convincing everybody Batman was more than just kids stuff:

A deadpan do-gooder who wears underpants over his tights, and always carries a can of shark repellent spray.

For a long time, that was Batman – or, at least, Batman as the general public saw him, thanks to the camp 1960s television show and film. In his DC Comics adventures, he was depicted as a more serious and even sinister character, but the average person still saw him as Adam West in a self-mocking comedy with an infuriatingly catchy theme song.

Then came the graphic novel that changed everything – not just Batman, but superhero comics, and the many Hollywood films those comics would inspire.

I guess they too are just too lazy to do any research about Englehart and O'Neil's work in the 1970s. It's just like such an otherwise awful news network to be such favoratists. What's so special about Miller's work that isn't about most other Batman writers? Wasn't Chuck Dixon's creation, Bane, adapted for either the 2nd or 3rd Nolan film? Miller also told them:

"We do not have a Superman in the real world, but we do have huge military forces which can be used for good or evil. We do not have Batman out there, but we do have people's own desire to resist the use of force against them, and so on. I wanted to use the machinery and iconography of a children's story to tell a story for an older audience."

Back at the time, it was sadly intended to feature negative right-wing metaphors, and Miller doesn't seem troubled by how it all went from bad to worse, or that his very own 1986 miniseries was exploited by the editors by the turn of the century for depicting Batman as a mindless control freak. With the biggest irony being that Miller didn't apply the characterization wholesale from the miniseries to the ongoing flagship series when he scripted those.

As he recalls in his newly published memoir, Push the Wall, Miller was still in his twenties when he was commissioned by DC to "breathe new life" into a character who was at the time "emasculated" and "a second-class citizen in comics".

No kidding! That could easily describe what's gone wrong with a lot of portrayals of heroes in recent times: they're either emasculated and even depicted as cowards. Does it also sit well with them if Superman was transformed into a 2nd class citizen in comicdom, all for the sake of the Masked Manhunter? Such balderdash the BBC wrote up.

The idea was that while Batman was absent, Gotham City had crumbled into an urban hellhole, overrun by murderous gangs. The setting was based in part on Miller's own experiences. He moved to New York in the 1970s after a childhood in idyllic rural Vermont, and while he adored his new metropolitan home, "it was really a city in pretty serious decay".

Luckily for Gotham, the Batman of The Dark Knight Returns is no longer a gentlemanly sleuth, but an intimidating, ultra-violent vigilante who takes a grim satisfaction in breaking criminals' bones. He's so brutal, in fact, that it's almost incredible that DC's editors didn't object.

When you notice how ultra-violent modern entertainment's become, their acceptance of even a stand-alone tale set in a future era could be considered a precursor to modern problems. As for what Miller thought of NYC in the past, does that also sum up what he thinks of it today, when it's easily worse?

Most radical of all, Superman became a government stooge, loyal to a president who happened to resemble Ronald Reagan. And the Joker became a monstrous sadist. When the mini-series was first published, these revisions seemed iconoclastic, but Miller maintains that he was looking back as well as forward.

One can only wonder if the Joker was written as a metaphor for conservatives too, and IIRC, Marvel published a story featuring the Red Skull in the past decade that depicted him as one.

Numerous articles were written about how superhero comics weren't for children anymore. And the influence his work had on the comics industry was "pretty obvious fairly quickly", he admits – as were the shameless imitations. "But that's the nature of the beast. If something succeeds, there's a natural inclination by not just the publishers but the talent as well to imitate it. It's certainly nothing to resent or deplore."

At least they admit there's blatant imitations, not the least being some of Miller's own. I'm sorry, but when one looks at how bad entertainment's become today, it is what to resent and deplore. One more reason I'm not wasting time and money on Sin City.

His influence on the film industry was clear, too. Every single modern Batman film, from Tim Burton's 1989 blockbuster onwards, has taken some of its toughness and noirish style from The Dark Knight Returns.

Christopher Nolan's second and third Batman films took their name from it. And Zack Snyder's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice lifted whole sections directly from its pages. Beyond those, it could be argued that Hollywood's current understanding that superhero stories can appeal to all ages, without being dumbed down, can be traced back to Miller.

But he stresses that he was only one of several writers and artists who were revolutionising the genre in the 1980s. And he isn't losing any sleep over the many films that owe their existence to him. "It's better for sanity's sake and blood pressure's sake to take it all with a good nature," he says with a cackle.

Unfortunately, much of modern comicdom's been dumbed down, and all the while, Miller doesn't care about anything but his own writing and art. Also, Snyder's Batman v. Superman film wasn't that successful, so what's the big deal there? At least Miller and the BBC admit he's not the only scribe who "revolutionized" the mediums 40 years ago. Even so, they still insult intellects by refusing to give other artists and writers a spotlight for people to judge, and as a result, it all comes down to another mediocre puff piece that doesn't add anything new to what perceptions we could have of comicdom in general.

Bone creator Jeff Smith apparently believes conservatives want to censor his productions

Jeff Smith, the cartoonist who created Bone over 3 decades ago, was interviewed by El Mundo, and says it's one of the most censored comics in the USA. But he also uses the occasion for a political rant:

"Bone has been one of the most censored books in the US. I know, it's ridiculous, right? They see something in it that they don't approve of. Well, they can go to hell," he explodes, who for five years collaborated with the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund precisely to advocate for freedom of expression. "In my comics, I don't promote any political ideas. I only value friendship," he rejects. Although he has no problem taking a stand: "I'm optimistic: Trump will be gone soon and we will return to being Americans. It's a disaster."

He worked with an outfit as bad as the CBDLF? In that case, I'm not sure Bone, which he may have stopped writing as an ongoing series, is worth buying. And what are the odds he's aware it's the left that's censoring far more, but can't bring himself to openly admit it?

And what "friendship" does he value? If he's hostile to conservatives, then his statement's called into question. Also, if he can't avoid heavy handed politics in real life, that claim about promoting any in his comics is meaningless too. Another artist who's only doing a terrible disfavor to the medium's image when he leads such a double-standard.

Spider-Man being exploited for tennis-based collectible covers

US Open's announcing that Marvel's made another deal with the tennis movement for another sports-based story involving one of Marvel's most famous characters, and the special they're producing appears to be another publicity stunt for collectibility's sake, even if it's allegedly for free:

The US Open and Marvel are continuing their groundbreaking collaboration for a third consecutive year with a new and original Spider-Man comic book that champions the theme of the 2026 US Open, “Celebrating Our New York Story.” More than 40,000 print copies of the comic book will be given out to fans for free throughout US Open Fan Week at the USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center, with a limited-edition run of rare, collectible covers featuring one of New York City’s five boroughs given out in a surprise bag to the first 1,000 fans each day August 24-28.

The unique comic follows Spider-Man as he chases and battles supervillain Scorpion across all five boroughs en route to the US Open, visiting iconic landmarks and encountering quintessential New York experiences along the way. All 40,000-plus print copies of the book will be given out on a first-come, first-serve basis for free during US Open Fan Week to those fans who scan their Fan Access Pass at the giveaway tent inside the main entrance.

Rare collectible covers featuring Spider-Man in one of the five boroughs – the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens and Staten Island – are limited to 1,000 copies each and will be given away at random in a blind bag to the first 1,000 fans on-site who pick up their comic book Monday, August 24, through Friday, August 28.

And that's all you need to know this is just another farce that doesn't even seem to have been printed in high numbers, undoubtably as an attempt to get new readers for their output with no emphasis on merit. What are the chances Mary Jane Watson won't figure prominently in this stunt either? Also note that it sounds like they're relying upon the "blind bag" tactic previously employed by Image. Regardless of whether these specials are free, what they're doing still reeks of pandering to the speculator market, and that's one more reason why this is another unappealing example of how Marvel's going about business today.

Postal video game being adapted to a comic

Go Nintendo reports one of the most violent video games ever produced is being adapted, sadly enough, to the comics panels:

Running With Scissors, creators of the (in)famous POSTAL series, in partnership with the renowned artists at Roditeli Productions, release an official digital preview for the first-ever POSTAL comic book series, giving fans a 19-page preview of the diabolical action arriving in late 2026.

With tens of millions of copies sold across the POSTAL game franchise, the greater POSTAL universe has expanded through sequels, spin-off games, a documentary film, and a movie. Now, the POSTAL Dude will make his comics debut in a series produced/co-written by Kevin Roditeli (SWAT Kats, X‑O Manowar, Bad Omens: Concrete Jungle) and co-written by Rob Cannon (Freak Snow, Anime Animay).

The POSTAL Dude makes his way through what appears to be a normal Monday until his fragile peace of mind is shattered once again – this time by an ad for a sinister dating app that sends him into a spiral of conspiracy-fueled madness.

I looked at several pages from the preview, and what a surprise, it does feature bloody acts of violence not all that different from what the game could feature. And the publishers of this tommyrot actually believe this is normal and acceptable?

On top of that, must virtually every video game of this sort be adapted to the comics medium? Of course not. Yet these wastes of trees keep getting made, regardless of how many people even buy them to begin with. I wish more people would wake up and stop plunking their money into even the video game itself, because this is getting very irritating already if and whenever anybody just buys these comics unquestioned, as though it literally must be done. Let's be clear. Nobody has to buy these kind of comic adaptations at all, and a game as jarring as Postal shouldn't have to matter to anybody.

How Tony Isabella turned to LGBT obsessions

Far-left veteran comics writer Isabella, who joined the transsexuality cult the previous year, spoke with the Buckeye Flame about how he took up the position he's sticking with now in his mid-70s, and predictably, they fully comply with his wishes to be regarded as a woman:

Cleveland’s own Jenny Blake Isabella, who previously wrote under the name Tony Isabella, has been a prominent comic book writer for decades. Recently, she has also become a queer icon in the comic community after coming out as transgender in 2025, at age 73.

The catalyst to Isabella’s transition journey came when she attended a queer comic book convention, Flaming River Con, just one year earlier. There, she had an epiphany: “I realized I was so comfortable around queer people because I was one of them… when I realized I was trans, you know, I started feeling better, more adjusted, and more like myself.”

Is it possible he's the kind of guy who was once described as "coming out of the closet" in past decades - meaning that he's homosexual, but until recently wasn't up to acknowledging it? Okay, that may not exactly be the problem, but what he strongly suggests is that he's become a self-hating man?!? If so, that's disturbing, and it's similar to self-hating Jews.

“I was thoroughly embraced by the comics community,” she said. “By and large, the comics book industry was so welcoming, and this Comic Con was the first Comic Con I did presenting as my authentic self, and it couldn’t have gone better. Nothing but love and respect and acceptance all across the board.”

Not only has there been more acceptance in the comic world, but there’s also been an expansion of what it means to be a superhero on screen. Queer characters and actors, like DC Comics’ trans superhero Nia Nal, played by transgender actress Nicole Maines, show the industry’s strides towards inclusion. The writers’ rooms, too, are diversifying.

“There’s a bunch of queer and even trans creators in comics,” Isabella said. “I was on a trans and non-binary creator panel at Comic Con, I was on an outed comic panel in Comic Con, and the people on that panel were just a fraction of the queer representation in comics.”

The way the industry went miles out of its way to accept such degrading beliefs and cultures, especially at the expense of heterosexuality - is disturbing, and one of the reasons why, despite their efforts to fluff-coat the whole subject, has plummeted in sales and respect over the past decade. And what "inclusion" are we talking about here anyway? I don't see serious efforts made to emphasize Armenian backgrounds in comicdom, or even Arabs who're Christian/Hindu/Buddhist/Zoroastrian adherents. Also, while it may not be mentioned, something tells me Isabella's unlikely to take issue with hostility to LGBT practitioners in the Muslim world, no matter what he says here. And if he has no concerns over such issues, then what he's telling them here is a sad joke and a blatant lie.

The publication turns to the time when Isabella created Black Lightning, and says:

What motivated Isabella to write Black superheroes came from the influences she received growing up in Cleveland, especially her time attending a comic book club at the Cudell Recreation Center as a high school student.

“My first Black friends were comic book fans who came from the East Side to the West Side for these meetings,” she said. “And I’m 17 years old. Diversity wasn’t in my language. I just thought it was unfair that my Black friends didn’t have more characters they could relate to. So I told myself that if I ever got into the business, I would try to work with and create characters of color.”

Well he sure seems to have largely abandoned that interest now, all for the sake of LGBT ideology, and he seems much more obsessed with that now, along with leftist political ideologies, and hostility to right-wingers like Donald Trump.

Eventually, Isabella saw her creation, Black Lightning, come to life in a different medium: television. Black Lightning, starring Cress Williams, aired on The CW Network from 2018 to 2021, following the retired superhero’s journey as he returned to action to protect his family.

For Isabella, the television adaptation was a delight to both witness and be a part of.

But was that because there's any far-left components to it, like hostility to law enforcement? Well that's why the TV show was nothing to celebrate, and another example of how Hollywood's going down the political drain.

Receiving multiple awards over the course of her career, Isabella recently became a 2026 recipient of the prestigious Bill Finger Award, named after the co-creator of Batman, Milton “Bill” Finger, given to those who have exemplified excellence in comic book writing.

And the saddest part is that they very likely complied with his wish for female pronoun references. On which note, if I notice correctly in one of his recent photos, he's wearing a wig? What are the odds he takes it off when he's at home? That would only make clear he's doing this whole act for show and virtue-signaling. And that's what makes this whole embarrassment additionally sad. I don't know if he ever worked on women's panels at conventions, but based on where he's been going, that's why he's unsuited for it, if he's going to take up a lifestyle/ideology that does more harm than good for women. It's devastating to think of how even the kind of punk subculture that was common in the 1980s has also been validated by today's woke belief systems. Based on some of his recent behavior on social media, that's why Isabella doesn't deserve the award he got. Besides, did he ever do any favors for Finger's memory in past decades? Chances are Isabella never did, which only makes this whole affair that much sadder.

The Comic Hero University store in Los Angeles

Voyage LA interviewed the manager of Comic Hero University, a specialty store, and he tells them that:

We’ve been impressed with Comic Hero University, but for folks who might not be as familiar, what can you share with them about what you do and what sets you apart from others?

Comic Hero University has always strived to be a place that breaks the stereotypes of comic book stores. We want to create a place that is community-first, business second (without sacrificing the business part so we can keep our doors open). We have a large number of products- comics, toys, and collectibles- to entice people to come inside, but the real gem is the people that work here who actively want to create the best experience for anyone new to the industry. One thing we did during the pandemic was create a pay-it-forward program where people could donate money to the business, and we’d use that money to buy comics that we could give away to kids (community first, business second). That program got national press at the time and helped us get through the dark pandemic days. We continue to run our business with the intent to bring new readers and kids who struggle with reading and comprehension, with the hope to build and create lifelong readers and help end the battle against illiteracy.

Here is a link to news report from NBC in regards to our program:

How do you think about happiness?

The moment I see a child pick up a comic for the first time and know that we have created a lifelong reader fills me with joy, as it gives what I do direction and purpose. People’s genuine joy and appreciation fill me with pride, knowing that I did a job well done.

Provided the comic in question is suitable for children, certainly it's something to feel great about. I just hope he doesn't rely heavily on Marvel/DC, based on where they've been going over the past quarter century, and there's plenty of independent creations that could use some notice, whatever age they're aimed for. That could, for all we know, be the way to avoid too many stereotypes about comics stores.

Joe Simon's pro-Israel publication in the 1960s

The Canadian Jewish News wrote about the history of a comics-style project the late artist Joe Simon of Capt. America fame worked on following the 6-Day War in 1967 that was favorable to Israel:

After the 1967 Six Day War, the originator of the comic book hero Captain America produced a spoof on the war and its political aftermath. A Funny Thing Happened to Me on the Way to Tel Aviv was a 66-page satirical magazine created and edited by Joe Simon that sold for 50 cents.

Its pages contain photographs of Egyptian and Jordanian leaders with comic-style word balloons and corny jokes. For example: “The height of Israeli gall: while waiting for negotiations at the UN to begin, one of them opened a kosher restaurant in Damascus.” The magazine reflected the swagger across the Jewish world following Israel’s miraculous military victory.

Simon was no stranger to controversial humour. He edited Sick magazine throughout the 1960s which in its first issue described itself as “a grim collection of revolting humour.” It contained tasteless, politically incorrect humour much like the standup routines of controversial comics such as Lenny Bruce, who apparently purchased 100 copies of each issue that included excerpts from his routines. [...]

Simon used his pen and his sense of humour to stand up for the Jewish people. In his Funny Thing magazine, he includes this legal disclaimer:

“The captions in this publication are entirely fictitious. As for the characters, they should live and be well. Except, maybe, for one or two…”

Now that's amazing. The application of word balloons to live action photography is something the satirists at MAD magazine did too at times. Let's also recall Simon was a conservative in his time, and after September 11, 2001, he'd drawn an illustration similar to the cover of the premiere issue of Captain America Comics where, much like Simon and Kirby drew Steve Rogers punching Hitler, Simon drew Cap punching Osama bin Laden. The question now is whether that illustration was ever made public, or if we'll ever see it on display today? If his estate or anybody else responsible for retaining his artwork is withholding that Simon item, that's wrong.

For now, this is a pretty interesting bit of history of what Cap's co-creator did in the years afterwards, and from what I know, Simon did work in comics and other similar forms of entertainment at least until the mid-70s. His support for Israel, along with supporting the USA, is something important to appreciate.

Paul Newman's last live action movie was based on a GN

Men's Journal spoke about one of the late actor Paul Newman's last movies, Road to Perdition, based on a GN by Max Allan Collins, and also a cartoon he worked on:

Newman’s role as John Rooney marked his final live-action feature film. The Hollywood icon voiced Doc Hudson in Pixar’s animated film Cars in 2006 before passing away in 2008 at the age of 83.

Collider highlighted Newman’s work alongside the rest of the cast as a major reason the film still holds up. [...]

Decades later, Road to Perdition remains a quiet high point in several careers. For Newman, it closed out a lifetime of work with one final, memorable big screen performance.

Good for him. And that's great to know he provided voice acting for a cartoon as well. I'd seen several movies he made decades before, and Newman was a very admirable performer, a lot more talented than some of today's Hollywood actors. If only they'd learn from him.

For every person and generation?

El Pais recently wrote about Spider-Man history, claiming there's one for every person and generation, and predictably, they sugarcoat even the wokest, DEI-pandering products that have only stripped Spidey of any genuine meaning, and have nothing critical or objective to say about the resumes of some of the worst writers to have worked on what has surely become the most editorially mandated franchise, for all the wrong reasons, coming out of Marvel in the modern age:

Spider-Man is always present. The philosopher Grafton Tanner coined the term “foreverism” to refer to phenomena like the Star Wars saga (which never ceases to explore its own intricacies), or those veteran rock bands that never stop reuniting and never quite break up.

These are cultural expressions that have transcended their era. They remain relevant, generation after generation, making nostalgia impossible (and business always possible). Such is the case with Spider-Man: the industry surrounding this character continually offers products for people of all ages and backgrounds. He’s still, quite literally, a kid at heart. And to demonstrate his enduring appeal, the latest installment in the franchise, Spider-Man: Brand New Day (2026), is premiering between July 29 and July 31 around the world.

Yes, and how they remain relevant and enduring, with endless publicity stunts and other alienating tactics that divide the audience, like the time when Joe Quesada forcibly undid the Spider-marriage through contrived circumstances, having Peter Parker make a deal with Mephisto and then in the following years, Mary Jane Watson was repeatedly insulted, and they even tried to "placate" audiences by putting her in solo books that ultimately didn't work out. Unfortunately, Spidey's appeal has not been able to endure increasingly leftist ideologies forced into the books, and they also ignore that Star Wars has succumbed to the same, one of the reasons why it's largely collapsed as a franchise today.

“What’s interesting is that he’s a character who feels timeless,” says Julián M. Clemente, author of the seminal book Untold Tales Of Spider-Man (2015), published in Spanish by Panini Comics. “If you’re a kid from the 1970s or 1980s, if you grew up with the cartoons from the 1960s, you’ll see him as someone who’s always been around. But a kid carrying a Spider-Man backpack today sees him as something very current. He’s managed to metamorphose; he doesn’t seem outdated to the new generations.”

No, but the modern stories are. One More/Brand New Day was insulting to the intellect, and again, the forced erasure of the Spider-marriage, which they don't have the courage to discuss here, has only led to a situation where Spidey has become pretty dated in terms of storytelling, because the stories are increasingly stilted and contrived. What's so current about even a story where Mary Jane becomes a female Venom?

The Spider-Man franchise just kept getting bigger and bigger. The 1980s and 1990s saw numerous milestones, including the black suit, the appearance of Venom, as well as the 1994 animated series. And, in the 21st century, he would be embodied by another character who wasn’t Peter Parker (something previously unthinkable): in 2011, after Peter Parker’s death in a branch of the Marvel Universe, writer Brian Michael Bendis and artist Sara Pichelli created Miles Morales, a young man of color. Half African-American and half Puerto Rican, he resonated with the era’s focus on diversity.

Later, in 2014, writer Dan Slott came up with a wild idea: the Spider-Verse comic book series, which also focused on diversity. Spider-Men of all kinds emerged, from a Spider-Punk to the futuristic Spider-Man 2099. One version was inspired by cowboys of the Wild West, while another was inspired by 1930s film noir. There was even a Spider-Ham (Peter Porker)!

“These [were] fresh ideas that worked out really well; they led to a series of highly-original animated films. [The many versions] demonstrated the character’s resilience, allowing him to reach another generation,” Clemente explains.

When they turn to this kind of stupidity that doesn't even emphasize merit in writing and art, it just explains all the more why the franchise has been as dulled as it's been dated. Why is it such a big deal virtually every "generation" have a Spidey, but not create new characters, and not have the guarantee of story merit? Do they even pay any attention to what sales figures are, or try to find out just how much any particular comic sells in copy units? All that aside, they predictably sugarcoated some of the era's worst writers like Bendis and Slott, right down to how the former mistreated Scarlet Witch horribly in Avengers: Disassembled. And what good was the original Ultimate line, which lasted about a decade, but whose ongoing series were largely cancelled, the Ultimate Spidey version included? They don't get into any of that either.

While there’s a wide variety of Spider-Man stories aimed at younger audiences, there are also options for those in middle age: Dan Slott’s Renew Your Vows series focuses on a 40-something-year-old Peter Parker’s married life with Mary Jane Watson. In that parallel universe, they have two children together, a situation also found in Jonathan Hickman’s recent Ultimate Spider-Man comic book series. “[This scenario] really connects with the audience that came to Spider-Man in the ’80s and ’90s,” Clemente points out. Going even further, Spider-Man: Reign shows an older, gray-haired Peter Parker, who’s around the age of 70. His eternal love, Mary Jane, has already died. He now lives under the rule of an authoritarian regime, in an atmosphere of darkness that seems inspired by Frank Miller’s aged Batman in The Dark Knight Returns.

I think this is equally telling of where this puff piece is going, when they go so far as to sugarcoat DKR's dark influence, and act like alternate dimension versions of Spidey's world are a literal substitute for the 616 universe. And they don't even question whether it was in good taste to write Mary Jane out of the picture and into the grave. Does that connect with the audience? It should be noted that although MJ gets mention here, it's superficial, and doesn't offer any serious focus on her as a character as opposed to Peter, and again, the writer and interviewee don't have anything objective to say about what happened with the Spider-marriage in 2007. So what's their point about Spidey becoming timeless?

The truth is that Spider-Man is, by a long shot, the superhero who has best conquered cinema. While Superman certainly paved the way for major adaptations — and even though Batman influenced several generations — the wall-crawler is the character who has been consistently successful for more than two decades.

Well isn't that because the filmmakers managed to convey some entertainment value? Although if Zendaya's of mixed descent, a case can be made that the Spidey films where she co-stars are a product of the DEI propaganda era. Was that really necessary? And even before that, what about the 2011 reboot? I'd argued before that the problem there was that I already knew the story as it originally began in 1962, so it didn't have the impact it could've.

...we can add the animated saga that began with Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018), considered by many to be one of the best superhero movies ever made, with its revolutionary visual style and a story that turned Miles Morales into yet another icon of the franchise.

The truth is that Spider-Man’s dominance in film goes far beyond the character’s movies. For years now, Sony, which owns the film rights to the character, has tried to build a parallel universe, starring some of the villains and supporting characters (without including the hero himself). The result has been mixed: productions like Morbius (2022), Madame Web (2024) and Kraven the Hunter (2024) have received a lukewarm reception from critics and audiences alike. However, there is one major exception: Venom, the oil-like symbiote that bonds with people and grants them powers similar to Spiderman’s. The version starring Tom Hardy resonated with audiences, thanks to its more irreverent tone. It was so popular that it became a highly-successful trilogy.

Gee, I wonder why we're supposed to care about the villains, if anybody, being pushed to prominence? Sorry, but that was in poor taste, and another example in motion of too much emphasis on villainy and even glamorizing it. IIRC, the sequel, "Let There be Carnage", wasn't as successful, but in any event, it's a shame whenever audiences buy into that kind of embarrassment.

“Spiderman triumphs because the true protagonist isn’t the superhero: [in fact], it’s Peter Parker. There [have been] many superheroes, but people became fans of the person beneath the mask,” Jorge Iván concludes. “He’s a profoundly human character: he’s constantly worried that his Aunt May will discover his identity, he has precarious jobs and he barely makes ends meet. Unlike other heroes, his everyday problems are just as important as the villains [he faces]: if he gets fired, he doesn’t have money for food.”

It sounds like some propagandist doesn't want him to have any. In any case, even the part about lack of food is exaggerated, and this all ignores that the writers are responsible for the storylines turned out, which in recent times have become utterly pointless and dated the series all the more. This kind of stupid lecture is exactly what led to Mary Jane getting kicked to the curb, because some selfish, entitled propagandists want Peter to remain something close to a pauper in the stories till the end of time, who's not allowed, in their mindsets, to find a successful career in photography or university teaching, and his being married to a girl who became a model/actress is somehow implausible and the worst thing that could happen. If they say they respect Stan Lee, they lie.

Ultimately, deep down, he’s not a hero. He is, as the wall-crawler reminds us, just “your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man.”

Well neither are the real life J. Jonah Jamesons who reduce this all to a form of PC propaganda that throughly fails to distinguish between the good and bad stories over the years, and won't ask whether the real descent into tailspin began around the turn of the century, when J. Michael Straczynski became writer. What they don't get into is how Peter and MJ's status has become horrendous over the years, with Marvel's upper echelons subjecting them to some of the worst editorial mandates possible, and despite what they say, when they start sugarcoating the DEI pandering, it's clear that despite any claims to the contrary, we are supposed to care more about the costume than the character. Peter and MJ have been done such injustice, as have even other recurring veteran cast members in Spidey's world, since the turn of the century, and these propagandists don't care a bit. Nor do they admit that all the DEI/SJW pandering they're gushing over is exactly what's made a joke out of Spidey as a creation, because they actually reduce the original's significance without offering anything solid for storytelling.

And if the day comes when Marvel goes out of business as a publisher, they're bound to act like nothing happened, and won't ask whether the degradation that began at the turn of the century had any part in bringing down Spidey. If there's anything that isn't for every person and generation, it's the sad lack of merit, which they unsurprisingly obscured.

How the first Comicon was organized in the 1960s

BBC radio interviewed Bernie Bubnis, who was involved in organizing the first Comicon in New York as far back as 1964:

In 1964, a group of teenage boys organised a convention in New York – it became known as the first official Comic Con.

The idea began after 16-year-old Bernie Bubnis wrote an article in his comic book fanzine. But when no-one else took on the project, he rounded up friends to help.

Together, they booked a venue, arranged a date, sent out letters and posted ads. And for the star attraction, they invited legendary American comic book artist, Steve Ditko, co-creator of Spider-Man and Doctor Strange.

In late July, the doors opened on the first convention, kickstarting what’s become a worldwide cultural phenomenon.

Well that's interesting history alright. Of course, today, legends like Ditko are long gone, and the mainstream sadly long ceased to inspire, so sensible pop culture fans have to hope the organizers of modern conventions are willing to align with the best of indepedents to produce something worthwhile.

San Francisco Cartoon Art Museum closing, and who knows for how long?

The institution where the disgraced ex-curator Andrew Farago worked has announced on their site that they're closing down, and it looks like it's got something to do with rental issues:

The Cartoon Art Museum will not be renewing its lease at 781 Beach Street when it expires at the end of August. As a result, our current location will close on Sunday, August 2, 2026. [...]

Ten years ago, the cartoon community came together to begin a new chapter for the museum. Scores of funders supported our move to Beach Street in Fisherman’s Wharf. Since then, we have faced significant challenges, including the pandemic and the slow recovery that followed. But we have also enjoyed many successes and countless opportunities to celebrate cartoon art and the people who create it.

Not mentioned, rather predictably, is the aforementioned disgrace who undoubtably embarrassed their reputation, and led to many donors withdrawing their support, to the point they now have difficulty affording rental fees. Farago sure knew how to bring a whole institution to its knees.

I took a look at some of the museum's past exhibitions, and noticed they had at least a few that could be considered "woke", or politically motivated. We can probably guess who had a prominent role in greenlighting exhibitions like those. And if that's how it's going to be, perhaps we're not missing much.

The Daily Cartoonist notes that:

The Cartoon Art Museum first opened in 1984. In 1987 Charles M. Schulz funded the museum’s endowment allowing it to open it’s first venue in downtown San Francisco. It moved three times since landing on Beach Street in 2017. The space offered visitors 8,000 square feet gallery space, a screening area, education space, store, library and collections facility. Cartoon Art Museum reports they have over 9,000 original pieces in their collection.

They might have to sell some of those items to different institutions if they need to pay off any debts that came as a result of Farago's serious lawbreaking. I once noticed artist Ethan Van Sciver telling Farago did not do a good job on his part to ensure they'd be able to retain a steady location, and for all we know, he could've been partly the reason they had to move at least 3 times to different buildings. Depending how you view this, it's obviously a shame a museum whose donors included a famous cartoonist wound up being floored by the offensive behavior of a man who first worked with them at least a year after Schultz's passing. Others could say Schultz made a huge mistake wasting any money on their business. And now, there's no telling if they'll be able to recover from such a scandal as Farago's caused them, so what may have been the only museum of its sort on the west coast could now be history of a different kind. What a shame.

Howard the Duck's history

A writer at Cleveland Magazine tells about the history of the late Steve Gerber's Howard the Duck, Marvel's contribution to the anthropomorphic animal genre, which employed a Cleveland-based setting, and interviewed artist Val Mayerik, who was the first to illustrate the anthropomorphic cartoon bird during the Bronze Age. First though:

Working with Marvel comic book writer Steve Gerber, Val Mayerik was the first illustrator to depict the Cleveland-based character when he appeared in a series featuring The Man-Thing in the 1970s. Later, the cigar-smoking, beer-drinking cartoon duck got his own comic book series, which was even developed into a George Lucas-produced film.

That film, most unfortunately, was a failure, and not a good start for Marvel's attempts to enter the live action movie scene. It took until 1998's Blade to get a serious major adaptation produced, and that was more successful. Now, on the subject of how Howard's drawn:

Val Mayerik: "The writer, Steve Gerber; most of the credit goes to Steve. I mean, that character was Steve's alter ego, and Steve passed away quite a while ago. I was the first one to draw Howard, so that that's my pedigree there. Since then, a lot of people have drawn him. The look of the duck has changed a lot, but whenever people request sketches of Howard at conventions, or they want a private commission, I draw Howard in the original way that I had drawn him back in the ‘70s.

I'd say he's right to do it that way. Considering how Marvel was ruined horrifically since the turn of the century in particular, that's why it can do a lot of good to remind people how it all originally began in the Bronze Age, when the feathered fellow was created to serve as a comical adventure, surely the most significant of Marvel's own efforts to experiment with anthropomorphic animals.

Cleveland Magazine: That must have been pretty interesting for you, being from Northeast Ohio, having spent a lot of time in Cleveland — to now be illustrating a duck superhero who is in Cleveland.

VM: "Well, first of all, Howard has no superpowers; he's not really a superhero. Howard is kind of like the Greek chorus for humanity. He's the one who's making the commentary, and he feels he has the right to make the commentary because he's not a human being, so he has a distance which we don't have. It was fun. At the time when the character first appeared, it wasn't really clear that it was going to be that popular, and that it was going to catch on the way it did. I only drew a few early issues of Howard when Marvel decided to give Howard his own title; I was working on other projects that I was really having fun with, and so they gave it to another artist who was a very good artist, and I don't think I was back on the book for quite a few years."

That's an interesting part of Howard's creation: he may have been an anthropomorphic animal, but not one with serious science-fantasy powers. Then again, it's not like every story out there starring anthropomorphic animals does that either, but what matters with Howard the Duck is that he was meant to serve as a satirical adventure, and it's too bad awful scribes and editors like Joe Quesada led to the ruin of such characters with potential. Something I wish veterans like Mayerik would have the courage to discuss. Failure to do so is precisely why such classic creations have suffered so badly.