PDA

View Full Version : Marvel Comics Guides corrections / maintenance


Denyer
2008-09-15, 04:46 PM
http://tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/

All feedback welcome. Go get 'em, team.

inflatable dalek
2008-09-15, 07:01 PM
The IDW reprint details for Target: 2006 are wrong ( that was done before they'd finished reprinting it and based on what seemed the most likely pattern). I don't have the issues anymore, but IIRC pages 1-10 of UK #86 were in IDW #4, and page 11 in #5. Yes, I know. Obviously there's the trade to add as well, I can try to put together futher reprint detailsof stuff done since the last update (did we ever get a complete list of what was in the "Best of..." collections? The Furman one doesn't seem to be on there at least).

inflatable dalek
2008-09-15, 07:35 PM
Actually sod it, here's what I got so far [Not sure what has or hasn't been traded by IDW yet, nor if Vol.2 of the Best of... Titan stuff is out yet]:

IDW:

Best of UK: Dinobots:

1: UK 45, 46.
2: UK 47, 48.
3: UK 49, 50.
4: Victory; Annual 1986, UK 74.
5: UK 75, 76
6: UK 77, US 8 [The * Panel calling the place Savage Land has been covered up, for copyright reasons I assume]

Best of UK: Space Pirates:

1: UK 182, 183.
2: UK 184, 185.
3: UK 186, 187.
4: UK 130, 131
5: UK 172, 173.

Best of UK: Time Wars:

1: UK 189, Altered image, All In The Minds, Both 1987 Annual.
2: UK 188, 199.

[Will add in later issues as they are published to avoid the Time Wars thing happening again]

Titan:

The Best of Transformers Volume 1: Eye of the Storm:

US: 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73 74 75.

The Best of Simon Furman :

UK 81, 86, 172, 173
US 62, 70, 71, 74
G2 7: [i]Tales of Earth Part 4, 8: Tales of Earth Part 5

The Transformers Magazine:

1: US 42.
2: US 44.
3: US 56.
4: US 57.

Did any of those Transformers: Magazine issues see print? I've never seen one.

General thought unrelated to the updates: The title page for the Annual reprints claim they were first published in the January of their respective years, someone doesn't know how the UK Annual business works.

Wouldn't it have made more sense for Titan to dump the middle two Matrix Quest issues (just variations on a theme and inessential) and include Primal Scream and Yesterdays Heroes instead?

The removal of the Savage Land mention is something I only noticed because I was wondering why IDW had put a big white box across the bottom of the page. HAve any other issues been edited to remove Marvel mentions (Circuit Breaker, possibly Death's Head?) as well?

Denyer
2008-09-16, 12:11 AM
Did any of those Transformers: Magazine issues see print? I've never seen one.
Yes, 'cause I got the cover images from eBay auctions...

HAve any other issues been edited to remove Marvel mentions (Circuit Breaker, possibly Death's Head?) as well?
Not AFAIK... I think it's a representation thing... a shot of a jungle/forest isn't identifiable or protected -- and similarly using a character's name isn't -- but a shot of a jungle/forest with The Savage Land as a caption is.

Memo to self --

UK #152, change note on Jawbreaker's name to point to probable confusion on the part of the editors between the toy and the weapon it was packaged with. Add note about 1988 annual.

Add Weirdwolf to the end of the list of profiles printed in the 1987 annual.

zigzagger
2008-09-16, 05:13 AM
Very, very minor concern I noticed awhile back, only mentioning it now due to the creation of this thread. I noticed in the covers archive, when you select a file link on any given Marvel U.S and/or U.K covers, it leaves out the first couple or so issues. For example:
http://tfarchive.com/comics/covers/marvel.php?dir=Marvel+UK&gal=001-060
http://tfarchive.com/comics/covers/marvel.php?dir=Marvel+US&gal=01-40

Again, just thought I mention it.

inflatable dalek
2008-09-16, 07:27 AM
Not AFAIK... I think it's a representation thing... a shot of a jungle/forest isn't identifiable or protected -- and similarly using a character's name isn't -- but a shot of a jungle/forest with The Savage Land as a caption is.

Looking at the original, it would actually be a fairly sensible deletion even if there were no legal issues, it not only namechacks the original company ("Long time Marvel readers...") but places it firmly after a Avengers story (and as I'm guessing that Avengers arc wasn't reprinted by Marvel UK at that time does that mean the reference was changed for the Brit comic?), all of which is fairly redundant from IDW's point of view.

The best thing is though, I noticed that but not the complete removal of half the last page to be replaced with a Space Pirates! ad.

Assuming it has the same edits in the Classics trades as well, it might be worth adding something on it to the notes section for US8, so anyone coming to the guide from the new reprints doesn't wonder what the entry is going on about in places, something vaguely (but better written) like:

"When reprinted by IDW both the reference to the Savage Land and the final half page showing Josie's new powers were removed due to copyright issues with the Marvel owned concepts"

Might even be worth mentioning in the entry for every issue affected which ones IDW can't reprint for those reasons?

Cliffjumper
2008-09-16, 11:59 AM
Marvel UK text from #27: -

"If you veteran Marvel mavens recognize [sic] this place as the Savage Land, give yourself a pat on the back with a mastodon tusk"

The rest of the box is just blanked out. When I get hold of a scanner, I can see about scanning the Marvel US version (providing I haven't been able to sell it, of course) and the UK version. If that's not a bit nerdy and weird, anyway.

Interestingly (depending on how you define the word) the UK edition also ends after the "But who cares... the Autobots are free" frame - I'm guessing so the flow works better with the following four UK-originated issues rather than "here's Josie Beller, we'll catch up with her in a bit, here's MTMTE off the telly in the meantime"... remember, it was years before Marvel UK actually admitted there title was partially composed of reprints. Weird that the same edit would be made for two totally different reasons, but there we go.

My favourite Marvel UK edit ever is still the cover of US #48 being integrated into "The Flames of Boltax" itself as a story page. Either that or the period where they recoloured Marvel US covers, just because it's an open admission that Yomtov was shit.

General thing mentioned elsewhere: while I don't have the PHP/FTP skills, or time, to actually maintain the guide myself, my pretty much complete (bar a few freebies) TF UK collection is close to hand for any queries, though I am still scannerless (and even when I get around to buying a replacement, am likely to need prodding, and won't scan anything that might damage the comics).

inflatable dalek
2008-09-16, 07:25 PM
Interestingly (depending on how you define the word) the UK edition also ends after the "But who cares... the Autobots are free" frame - I'm guessing so the flow works better with the following four UK-originated issues rather than "here's Josie Beller, we'll catch up with her in a bit, here's MTMTE off the telly in the meantime"... remember, it was years before Marvel UK actually admitted there title was partially composed of reprints. Weird that the same edit would be made for two totally different reasons, but there we go.

kinda fitting for a best of UK comic as well isn't it? Did Marvel UK fill the bottom of the page with anything or just leave it blank? [Notice how this started with you asking for help from other people to overhaul the guide, now its become ask Cliffy ;) ).

Are we updating the guide for the DW stuff as well? [OT, but I was a bit surprised to see the other day that the wiki reports the "Sunstreaker was gay" thing as gospel when the writers themselves deny it and no one else has backed up the claim]

As for more general factual updates, I can put together a list of various bits and bobs I've come across over the years (my personal favourite being Mike Collins story about John Ridgeway creating the character models the UK staff used by tracing round the toys), but a lot of it is from convention anecdotes and may not have the old "citation needed" thing going for it unless there are still transcripts out there.

Cliffjumper
2008-09-16, 08:04 PM
Careful couching with "Rumour has it" or "at [convention]" might do, but it'd have to be relevant - there's enough semi-related cattiness in the thing as it is. And anything sourced from Furman and/or his pet Wildman would have to have "But he's known to be a lying bastard when it suits him" added afterwards. If something can be cited it's great, but IMO it's not hugely essential for a toy tie-in comic guide (especially one that probably borders on libellous in a couple of places).

The rest of the page was a Next: Deception Dam-Busters graphic and an Inter Face profile for Snarl.

As I say, in general I'm still around to help and do the old bit of research, but as point-and-find rather than overhaul. Just opening up a folder and hooking out an issue to find something's the sort of level I'm at.

I really wish Combattler V could stand up. Hurgh.

inflatable dalek
2008-09-16, 08:31 PM
Careful couching with "Rumour has it" or "at [convention]" might do, but it'd have to be relevant - there's enough semi-related cattiness in the thing as it is. And anything sourced from Furman and/or his pet Wildman would have to have "But he's known to be a lying bastard when it suits him" added afterwards. If something can be cited it's great, but IMO it's not hugely essential for a toy tie-in comic guide (especially one that probably borders on libellous in a couple of places).

Sounds perfectly sensible.

In terms of what is citable- The introduction to the US comic could probably do with a mention of that Marvel Siver Age Preview thing. I was also wondering about this:

while John Romita led an art team to redesign the toys into workable character models. These would also be used on the Transformers cartoon being co-developed with Sunbow.

Even though I know his claim to have done all of them personally is under some dispute I think it's pretty much acknowledged now the character models were designed by Sunbow, mostly via Dery and then given to Marvel who'd been using more toy based designs for the first issue or so.

Cliffjumper
2008-09-16, 08:41 PM
We could rephrase it slightly. But I am incredibly sceptical as to the level of involvement from Dery, and would rather his name is left out entirely until we get something approaching proof that this man designed so many models and just didn't mention it for so long.

Most of the original character models are simplified versions of the Diaclone box art with only minimal changes anyway. Marvel's only real experience with this sort of thing before was probably Shogun Warriors, where the art seems to have been drawn from the toys - the SW figures were robot-first, though, so the results are fine. It could just be that it took Marvel a little time to realise the idea was unworkable. I dunno, any solid facts to any of it? Easiest thing might be to just cut out the character model stuff in the first place.

Halfshell
2008-09-16, 08:52 PM
Yeah, I think that if you've got no evidence to back up a claim, you're probably just best off not mentioning it.

Otherwise you can end up looking quite stupid.

AndyTurnbull
2008-09-16, 09:54 PM
shit[/I].

.

Not to take away from the Yomtov is shit point but chances are he didn't do the colouring of the covers. Chances are it would have been George Roussos who would have done the ones from 89 onwards. Marvel had a few colourists on staff whose sole responsibility was doing the cover colouring.

Oh yeah Floro Dery's claims are somewhat dubious to say the least. Hell there's more likelihood that Pat Lee pencilled an entire page on his own than him doing all of the model sheets.

Andy

slartibartfast
2008-09-16, 10:13 PM
Autobot is still spelled aulobot on perceptors' universe profile.

inflatable dalek
2008-09-17, 06:18 AM
We could rephrase it slightly. But I am incredibly sceptical as to the level of involvement from Dery, and would rather his name is left out entirely until we get something approaching proof that this man designed so many models and just didn't mention it for so long.

Just mentioning that the designs by Sunbow were used after the first couple of issues. And yup, I wouldn't credit Dery as anything other than the head of a larger team either.

Does anyone know where the Romita thing comes from? It used to be recieved wisdom at one time but I've never seen him mentioned by anyone in interviews and what not (including Uncle Bob, who seems to have a pretty good grasp on was involved at the start).

AndyTurnbull
2008-09-17, 08:44 AM
Just mentioning that the designs by Sunbow were used after the first couple of issues. And yup, I wouldn't credit Dery as anything other than the head of a larger team either.

Does anyone know where the Romita thing comes from? It used to be recieved wisdom at one time but I've never seen him mentioned by anyone in interviews and what not (including Uncle Bob, who seems to have a pretty good grasp on was involved at the start).

I'm fairly certain that comes from the Marvel Age article just prior to the first issue of the Transformers hitting the stands.

Andy

Cliffjumper
2008-09-17, 01:32 PM
IIRC, he is actually credited in the TFU TPB and/or mini-series - something vague like Art Director. Even Dery admits that Romita was in on the design team, though obviously Floro claims he didn't actually do anything. IIRC, he was semi-retired by then, and it might have just been giving someone big-name an 'executive' post to make Hasbro happy.

AndyTurnbull
2008-09-17, 03:42 PM
I'm sure he was still on the bullpen in charge of Romita's Raiders - the inhouse inking and art correction team even though he'd pretty much stopped doing full comics work at that time.

I'd love to see a Floro Dery v Pat Lee in a bullshit-off contest.

Andy

inflatable dalek
2008-09-17, 07:38 PM
IIRC, he was semi-retired by then, and it might have just been giving someone big-name an 'executive' post to make Hasbro happy.


Yeah, that sounds about right, and would explain why he never gets mentioned. Is it also possible he did some of the "Headless Ratchet" style designs they initially used before deciding to be uniform with the cartoon?

[Obviously as we're into wildly speculative territory now none of this is good for the Guide, just curious really].

Cliffjumper
2008-09-17, 07:55 PM
Nah, the early stuff's blatantly swiped from either the Diaclone box art (which aside from some recolouring for the likes of Sunstreaker and Trailbreaker, is the Transformers box art), or using the same "toy with some extra joints" principal as Shogun Warriors.

Diaclone box art for Wheeljack: -
http://counter-x.net/footnotes/car_robot/images/CarRobo18-2.jpg
He looked like that for most of the early issues. I seem to remember he's more or less standing the same way in the big role-call spread.

There are a couple of intermediate character models in there (a frame with Ratchet having a windscreen in front of his head springs to mind, plus Megatron's early head design and fusion cannon trigger - the latter, and some early faces, made it into some early animated toy commercials, which bringing us around full-loop, were turned into A4 posters for some early issues of TF UK - I've scanned a mildly irrelevant one a while ago), but most of it is pretty firmly in one or the other.

IIRC the comic hit the stands in something like April, US comic coverdates being spectacularly ahead at that stage (Transformers being dated as a bi-monthly around the start if Furman's run was to bring this into line was a company-wide attempt to bring the dating into line a bit, even though the comic wasn't being published bi-monthly), and the mini was bi-monthly, so that's a lot of development going on there while the thing's actually in print. By #3, things are pretty consistent, if not quite how they'd end up (though that might just have been Frank Springer's style at the time).

inflatable dalek
2008-09-18, 08:23 AM
Have updated post three to include Marvel stuff from The Best of Simon Furman and the Magazine (I know the latter is easy enough to do, I just thought having it all in one place would help the poor sap putting it on the site).

It should be noted though that the contents of these have been taken from secondary sources, if anyone who actually has their mits on one and knows different do tell us.

I was rather pleasently surprised to see the Furman book doesn't have the Wrath of... two parter. Which means Furman hasn't backtracked over if he thinks its any good or not and IDW haven't been evily mercenary by putting something not collected anywhere else in a overpriced hardback after all.

I think that's all up to date as far as Marvel stuff goes, yes?

Denyer
2008-09-24, 12:01 AM
Done (I think): UK/US issue notes for recent reprints -- with the exception of Time Wars which I'll add in once the reprint series is complete, Jawbreaker/Weirdwolf notes.

Also: removed the "Later Reprinted In" details from UK entries where they concern US stories; added details for Classic Transformers V1/V2.

The Best of Simon Furman :

UK 81, 86, 172, 173
US 62, 70, 71, 74
75.

edit:
Very, [I]very minor concern I noticed awhile back, only mentioning it now due to the creation of this thread. I noticed in the covers archive, when you select a file link on any given Marvel U.S and/or U.K covers, it leaves out the first couple or so issues. For example:
http://tfarchive.com/comics/covers/marvel.php?dir=Marvel+UK&gal=001-060
http://tfarchive.com/comics/covers/marvel.php?dir=Marvel+US&gal=01-40

Again, just thought I mention it.
Weird. That's presumably been an issue since the server move. Think I've fixed it with code substitution.

inflatable dalek
2008-09-24, 06:20 AM
Done (I think)

My comprehensive check suggests you got it right, including my deliberate mistake.

The entries for the G2 stuff does make it seem as if it reprints the whole issue rather than just the Tales of Earth bits though (I know, overly pedantic git alert).


Errr, didn't Cliffy once threaten violence on anyone who put the best of Furman in the guide?

Cliffjumper
2008-09-24, 12:29 PM
Only if it included "Wrath" or any other 'new' reprints. I'll settle for a snarky comment instead in that case.

zigzagger
2009-02-23, 06:09 AM
A real minor thing.

Links to Skullgrin (http://tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/profiles/tfuskullgrin.php) and Landmine's (http://tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/profiles/tfulandmine.php) profiles don't seem to be on the Universe (http://tfarchive.com/comics/marvel/profiles/) page. They were in the back of issue #72 .

inflatable dalek
2009-08-14, 07:31 PM
Right, as I'm in the middle of a big honking 25th Anniversary read through of the comics (Jazz really is a bastard isn't he? Giving Sparkplug a heart attack, blowing up a human in that odd annual story) it's time for some reprint updates/corrections!

I got as far as the start of Time Wars last time, so to resume...:

Best of UK: Time Wars

1: UK 189, Altered image, All In The Minds, Both 1988 Annual.
2: UK 188, 199.
3: UK 200, 201.
4: UK 202, 203.
5: UK 204, 205.

Best of UK: City of Fear

1: UK 164, 165.
2: UK 166, 167.
3: UK 168, 169.
4: UK 152, 153.
5: UK 170, 171.

[Yep, that orderings right. Don't ask me why they didn't just stick Enemy Action in the last issue rather than break up a straight run of linked stories].

In terms of corrections, I notice this in the errors section for UK #74:

The Dinobots start out at the Ark, despite walking out in #70


According to the Wiki, Grimlock's line in Command Performances! was changed in the UK to: "Oh, we understand, all right. Once again, you've clearly demonstrated how unfit you are to lead the Dinobots. We'll have no part in this fool's errand. Back to the Ark, Dinobots. We've got some talking to do..."

Making them head back to base rather than leaving. If Tom's able to check the issue to confirm that I'd say that's an error removed from #74 and a note on the changed dialogue added to #70.

Cliffjumper
2009-08-14, 08:15 PM
Yeh, some of it was done from US scans and never revised, so it's quite possible I got that wrong. There's probably a bit of that - I didn't directly compare printings unless something leapt out at me, and I didn't have a full complement of US issues at the time either. It could do with a rewrite, especially for that sort of thing.

inflatable dalek
2009-08-17, 12:54 PM
OK, I'd suggest this added note for UK #70:

The UK team have altered Grimlock's dialogue to better fit in with their own upcoming stories. Instead of leaving the Autobots he now has the Dinobots return to the Ark to discuss their situation, a conversation we see in #74. Whilst the original lines have Grilock starting to slip into his TV counterparts broken English the UK version keeps his original more normal sounding way of speaking.

Another minorish thing, the last two issues of Target:2006 both claim to have the same fact file for Galvatron in them.

inflatable dalek
2009-12-15, 08:52 AM
And more as I continue through my ever so slightly sluggish read through (I really need to get a move on to reach the end of G2 this year...).

From the Extras bit for UK#167:

Death's Head - a one-page advert-cum-strip by Simon Furman and Bryan Hitch. This was a private advertisement placed by Furman so he held copyright in Death's Head, and not Marvel.

Most interviews/features I've read claim that the ad was placed by Marvel (though Furman may have had the idea being the one who was initially hugely impressed with the look Senior gave the character) in order to make sure they could claim ownership of the character instead of Hasbro. I've certainly never seen any suggestion Furman himself owns Death's Head.

The exception is the introduction to the Fallen Angel trade- Where it claims Death's Head had been created prior to being featured in Transformers as a new lead for a series of US style books but when these were delayed Furman decided to use him in the title he was already writing to try him out. As no one else seems to support this I wonder if whoever wrote the article was using contemporary Marvel paperwork where they were basically lying in order to further make sure Hasbro wouldn't try to claim the character (assuming the article isn't just plain bollocks of course).

Incidentally, is that the earliest appearance of High Noon Tex or just its first showing in Transformers after doing the rounds in other comics? I'd been under the impression it had been published prior to his first TF showing in order to clinch the copyright (which is why Hitch drew rather than Senior, he was basically the only guy on hand when they needed something done instantly).

The Doctor Who: A Cold Day In Hell trade is well worth a flick through for anyone interested in what was going on at Marvel UK at that time, it's fairly clear the push for new US style titles and all the crossovers that ensued was the result of Richard Starkins really pushing to create a Marvel UK "Universe". I wonder if the memo about Transformers no longer being part of the wider Marvel continuity never got to the UK offices or if they just chose to ignore it?

Bit of a useless random stream of consciousness there.

inflatable dalek
2010-05-01, 04:13 PM
The entry for US #56 gets the cover artist wrong, twas Dan Reed.

Cliffjumper
2010-05-01, 04:38 PM
I'm seriously leaning towards asking for the whole thing to be taken offline until someone has the chance to give it a proper revision, or even a complete rewrite. At the moment it's at best obsolete, and is giving out disinformation in a Rob Jung kind-of way.

inflatable dalek
2010-05-01, 04:45 PM
If you take it down I'll have to use the wiki as first reference for my trade reviews. Do you want to inflict that on me?

Tangent 1: The Galvatron and the Volcano storyline really comes up as horribly padded when you sit down and analyse it properly. Everyone does everything twice (running up the volcano at Galvatron, Death's Head interrupting a fight and getting an arm injury as a result, even Ultra Magnus "dying").

Tangent 2: Did you know that when Fleetway did that 2000 AD Sci Fi Special thing with the olde characters like the Spider in it they didn't actually have the rights to any of them? Apparently they assumed that when Maxwell brought the company he brought everything but he actually only acquired the rights to comics published after 1969. Much legal fun followed.

EDIT: Rob Jung?

Cliffjumper
2010-05-01, 05:50 PM
If you take it down I'll have to use the wiki as first reference for my trade reviews. Do you want to inflict that on me?

Aye, and I'll end up on those twats' Distressingly Common Misconceptions About Transformers LOL Because Not Everyone Has Spent The Past Decade Researching A Toyline LOL page at this rate.

inflatable dalek
2010-05-02, 01:48 PM
The only problem with a total rewrite is in order to do it properly without having to rely on things like the wiki (which is a secondary source and not always guaranteed reliable) or scans (which usually don't do the whole issue, things like the editorial and next issue boxes) is to have all the issues directly to hand. And as far as I'm aware you're the only person round here who 's got the complete Marvel set.

Cliffjumper
2010-05-02, 02:01 PM
But I'm lazy.

I would actually love to find the time/willpower to scan the whole lot cover to cover as an archival project for the whole comic rather than just the strips, but I know full well I'd get to #9 and my fatally short attention span would then have me doing a Daimos episode guide or a Pete Wisdom checklist (If It's Not Written By Warren Ellis It's Not Pete Wisdom).

inflatable dalek
2010-05-03, 06:50 PM
To be honest I do think you're a bit hard on it, at most it only really needs minor alterations, mainly to cover changes the UK comic made to US issues (as well as what's mentioned them cunningly recolouring Skids and Broadside in Totalled to make them seem less obviously like characters who shouldn't be there).

Other than that, unless your opinions on the issues themselves have changed drastically making the reviews painful to read it still stands up fine.

Super Kid
2010-09-12, 03:35 PM
Just been flicking through this and it's a great resource but a couple of things that have sprung out at me.

In UK #24, you mention that the letters page says that the Insecticons will be appearing soon but they don't turn up until issue #82.Their first appearance is actually in issue #66.

The section on UK #12 refers to Starscream gunning down the Man of Iron but that was actually a change(or, at the very least, a clarification)made when it was reprinted in US #34.In UK #12 there's nothing to say for definite that the character is Starscream and the cover and dialogue imply that it's Skywarp.

inflatable dalek
2010-09-12, 03:43 PM
Good catch on the Man of Iron thing, I've noticed that before but it had slipped my mind entirely until you mentioned it.

There are currently very vague plans to do a complete revamp of the comics guide as a collective team effort (with both cliffy's blessing and him fully involved, it's not a sneaky chuck out his stuff whilst he's distracted by a GI Joe toy thing) but with various real life things in the way it hasn't got much further than "Hey wanna do this at some point?" "Sure" yet. So don't worry folks, we're not completely ignoring all the points made here, it's just a slow burning thing.