|
Post by driver1980 on Jan 15, 2024 15:50:13 GMT -5
Best M.A.S.K. toy ever:
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 15, 2024 17:20:43 GMT -5
Not sure where or if there's an exact line of demarcation between those who liked GI Joe and those who didn't, but I can tell ypu which side of it my friends and I were on.
We had nothing but disdain for GI Joe, because no matter how many times they called it "America's movable fighting man" on the commercials and in the ads in comics, was a doll, a stupid doll.
Toy soldiers from Marx and Multiple, etc. we loved, but those thongs were dolls. "Fighting man from head to toe, my @$$," we used to say.
And they cost four bucks. That's about 40 bucks today. Any toy that cost that much couldn't be properly played with, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by jason on Jan 15, 2024 20:21:06 GMT -5
Re-reading some of the Mad parodies of superhero films, I would have loved to have seen Mort Drucker do the art for an actual Superman or Batman comic. Even though his art was based off of the movie versions of the characters, he still did excellent renderings of them.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 15, 2024 20:24:44 GMT -5
Not sure where or if there's an exact line of demarcation between those who liked GI Joe and those who didn't, but I can tell ypu which side of it my friends and I were on. We had nothing but disdain for GI Joe, because no matter how many times they called it "America's movable fighting man" on the commercials and in the ads in comics, was a doll, a stupid doll. Toy soldiers from Marx and Multiple, etc. we loved, but those thongs were dolls. "Fighting man from head to toe, my @$$," we used to say. And they cost four bucks. That's about 40 bucks today. Any toy that cost that much couldn't be properly played with, anyway. Dude, not even GI Joe with there Kung Fu grip ?
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Jan 15, 2024 20:56:23 GMT -5
Re-reading some of the Mad parodies of superhero films, I would have loved to have seen Mort Drucker do the art for an actual Superman or Batman comic. Even though his art was based off of the movie versions of the characters, he still did excellent renderings of them. Here's an example of Drucker working "straight" at DC in the fifties...
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 15, 2024 22:55:49 GMT -5
Not sure where or if there's an exact line of demarcation between those who liked GI Joe and those who didn't, but I can tell ypu which side of it my friends and I were on. We had nothing but disdain for GI Joe, because no matter how many times they called it "America's movable fighting man" on the commercials and in the ads in comics, was a doll, a stupid doll. Toy soldiers from Marx and Multiple, etc. we loved, but those thongs were dolls. "Fighting man from head to toe, my @$$," we used to say. And they cost four bucks. That's about 40 bucks today. Any toy that cost that much couldn't be properly played with, anyway. Dude, not even GI Joe with there Kung Fu grip ? Kung fu? I thought he was gripping something else...
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 15, 2024 23:02:31 GMT -5
Re-reading some of the Mad parodies of superhero films, I would have loved to have seen Mort Drucker do the art for an actual Superman or Batman comic. Even though his art was based off of the movie versions of the characters, he still did excellent renderings of them. MDG beat me to it. Especially check out his work on the Mlle. Marie stories in Star Spangled War Stories.
|
|
|
Post by tartanphantom on Jan 15, 2024 23:16:40 GMT -5
Re-reading some of the Mad parodies of superhero films, I would have loved to have seen Mort Drucker do the art for an actual Superman or Batman comic. Even though his art was based off of the movie versions of the characters, he still did excellent renderings of them. MDG beat me to it. Especially check out his work on the Mlle. Marie stories in Star Spangled War Stories. I'm a big fan of this short and underappreciated run.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 15, 2024 23:19:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 16, 2024 5:27:58 GMT -5
Every time I see Drucker or Marie Severin artwork in serious titles, I keep thinking where's the punchline.
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Jan 16, 2024 8:44:02 GMT -5
On the other hand, everyone and their brother bought multiples of every Power of the Force Star wars toy released in the 1990s and kept them on their cards and in their boxes. As a result, they're all worthless now. I proudly opened and played with my toys then, and I proudly open and play with them now. If I find an accessory burdensome, I toss it in a box for safekeeping and continue with my fun. If something breaks, I Krazy Glue it. Honestly, they still look pretty good even if I absolutely play with them and worry very little about their collectibility. I just have to be very careful in describing condition if/when I sell them, but they still get good money. Just not crazy money. I have no problem explaining to people why this 44 year old still plays with toys. I think I'd have a far harder time trying to explain why I buy toys and don't play with them (keep them MIB). Yep, trying to game the prospector/collector market is usually a fool's errand. It's because so few were kept intact that there is so much demand for the few that are. Mass-producing a deliberate collector's item seems self-defeating. And damn, that is a NICE collection. I don't play with mine for my own sake, but it was a lot of fun revisiting my old Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and superhero toys with my own kids. We played a lot before bed, and I enjoyed having a new context to enjoy them with. I have a small collection of toys and figures for my desk at work. I want to get some TMNT representation, and I saw that they reissued the original toys recently. I am tempted to buy them because all of the pieces and accessories are intact whereas mine are long since scattered to the winds, but my old toys that I played with together my kids are far more special and meaningful than a pristine copy.
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Jan 16, 2024 9:17:56 GMT -5
Every time I see Drucker or Marie Severin artwork in serious titles, I keep thinking where's the punchline. Marie's run on KULL with her brother John would change your mind. Some of the most beautiful artwork of that era.
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Jan 16, 2024 10:24:06 GMT -5
It's funny how the things that make certain collectibles so desirable are the things that collectors don't want in them. Periodicals were meant to be consumable and disposable, so preserving them in their original pristine state wasn't on anyone's mind compared to functional things like stamping for easy tracking of status, removing annoying inserts that degrade the reading experience, etc. As a result, there are very few that are intact and well-preserved, so those few are in demand and hard to find. It's just a funny thing. I threw broken scraps and pieces of old Transformers and whatnot toys in the trash that would sell for hundreds/thousands if they were unopened in their box, but I was a kid. Why would I not open and play with them? When I was a kid, I loved the Hostess ads in comics, and loved that they featured DC, Marvel, Harvey, etc. characters. So one day, the genius that I am, I sat down and carefully cut all of the hostess ads out of all of my comics. I put them into a binder, and when I was done, I had a moment of clarity and realized what I had done. I literally did the Darth Vader "NOOOOOOO", as the camera dolly'd up and away from me, showing me sitting in a pile of mutilated comics. Good times.
|
|
|
Post by jason on Jan 16, 2024 10:43:17 GMT -5
Every time I see Drucker or Marie Severin artwork in serious titles, I keep thinking where's the punchline. I'm reminded of the time Fred Hembeck drew a Spider-Man story for Marvel's infamous Assistant Editor's Month, but the thing is the story, while using Fred's distinct artwork, was 100% serious (aside from the usual quips from Spidey). (This talk of serious art by artists known more for comedy makes me wonder if Sergio Argones ever did anything serious, closest thing I can think of is him drawing the story about the 50s comic book controversy for one of those "Big Book of ____" TPBs)
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 16, 2024 12:27:45 GMT -5
It's funny how the things that make certain collectibles so desirable are the things that collectors don't want in them. Periodicals were meant to be consumable and disposable, so preserving them in their original pristine state wasn't on anyone's mind compared to functional things like stamping for easy tracking of status, removing annoying inserts that degrade the reading experience, etc. As a result, there are very few that are intact and well-preserved, so those few are in demand and hard to find. It's just a funny thing. I threw broken scraps and pieces of old Transformers and whatnot toys in the trash that would sell for hundreds/thousands if they were unopened in their box, but I was a kid. Why would I not open and play with them? When I was a kid, I loved the Hostess ads in comics, and loved that they featured DC, Marvel, Harvey, etc. characters. So one day, the genius that I am, I sat down and carefully cut all of the hostess ads out of all of my comics. I put them into a binder, and when I was done, I had a moment of clarity and realized what I had done. I literally did the Darth Vader "NOOOOOOO", as the camera dolly'd up and away from me, showing me sitting in a pile of mutilated comics. Good times. Yeah, but there's never going to be an Omnibus Edition of those Hostess ads, so do you know what that binder's worth now?
|
|