|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 16, 2020 13:55:48 GMT -5
I agree with the attractiveness of split panel covers but I think the problem with this one is that the panels look like they were just thrown together at random, with no effort to come up with a nice pattern or arrangement of some kind. Instead, we have a set of panels of different sizes slapped down on the same page. If you took out the words and pictures, that arrangement of rectangles would not please the eye as an abstract pattern. The fact that this cover was needed as a replacement may have had something to do with it's composition. I don't know how long they actually had to produce it but let's not forget, the reason it was needed as a replacement was because of the banner ad. The size of the banner ad had to affect the hasty composition of this cover. So it may not be a perfect pattern as a result but given what it is, I think it succeeds. The panel layout is not that dissimilar from the interior panel layout of a page. The action sequences are laid out in a good flow (we're taught to read left-to-right and our eyes naturally follow suit. The panel of Cap being tossed through a window is set perfectly) Saving the largest panel to show both teams together (or against each other given that Wolverine's claws are out) makes sense to me as well. That's the only plausible explanation. Who was the art director at the time? I can't imagine John Romita approving such a last minute, slap-dash effort when he was in charge, assuming he vetted every cover himself. |
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Mar 16, 2020 14:08:53 GMT -5
I like Milgrom a lot usually, also as an inker. I found he was a great inker for Golden by the way which you might not think he would've been the right choice for.
Sometimes they did co-ordinate the banner ad color with the lefthand box color, and that helped a bit. I'll probably never get Avengers Annual #10 again because of price but I did have it at the time. To be honest I didn't really like the Rogue character a whole lot, first a villain and then a superheroine, should make for a good conflict but so often it was just her apologizing for the hundredth time or having those thought-balloons indicating her internal sufferation. If you thought her a major character I guess that's why Avengers Annual #10 is considered key but it's not key to me. I would say the Ms. Marvels with Mystique moreso, and Iron Fist #14 (all of which I did want to get). I was very surprised they chose Rogue, much younger though, as the main focus on the first X-Men movie. The first appearance she is a villain with an evil grin (enough that I hated her) and seems older than she was ever shown as again. I also find her calling absolutely everyone 'Sugah' to be kind of irritating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 16, 2020 14:35:57 GMT -5
Plus, Rogue was an older lady in her debut and transformed into a babe when she joined the X-men.
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 16, 2020 18:23:52 GMT -5
Plus, Rogue was an older lady in her debut and transformed into a babe when she joined the X-men. Claremont later said he always intended her as a late teen who put streaks in her hair, and it was the artists who mis-interpreted her age based on that detail. But his own scripts say otherwise. In her first appearance in Avengers Annual #10 (1981), she's called a "woman" by both Hawkeye and The Vision:  And a "lady" by Iron Man:  Now you could argue that these characters are responding to what Rogue looks like, and that she looks older than she is. But in her first appearance in X-Men (#158), the narrator calls her a woman as well:  But by the time of her next appearance in #170, she had become a "young woman."  And by the Japan story in X-Men #172-3, several times Logan calls her "kid," a term he'd use for Kitty Pryde but not for Colossus, who is supposed to be what, nineteen?  |
|
|
|
Post by dbutler69 on Mar 16, 2020 18:35:48 GMT -5
I like Milgrom a lot usually, also as an inker. I found he was a great inker for Golden by the way which you might not think he would've been the right choice for. Sometimes they did co-ordinate the banner ad color with the lefthand box color, and that helped a bit. I'll probably never get Avengers Annual #10 again because of price but I did have it at the time. To be honest I didn't really like the Rogue character a whole lot, first a villain and then a superheroine, should make for a good conflict but so often it was just her apologizing for the hundredth time or having those thought-balloons indicating her internal sufferation. If you thought her a major character I guess that's why Avengers Annual #10 is considered key but it's not key to me. I would say the Ms. Marvels with Mystique moreso, and Iron Fist #14 (all of which I did want to get). I was very surprised they chose Rogue, much younger though, as the main focus on the first X-Men movie. The first appearance she is a villain with an evil grin (enough that I hated her) and seems older than she was ever shown as again. I also find her calling absolutely everyone 'Sugah' to be kind of irritating. Yeah, I never cared for Rogue myself. I think she's fairly popular and her appeal escapes me. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 16, 2020 18:44:07 GMT -5
Plus, Rogue was an older lady in her debut and transformed into a babe when she joined the X-men. Claremont later said he always intended her as a late teen who put streaks in her hair, and it was the artists who mis-interpreted her age based on that detail. But his own scripts say otherwise. In her first appearance in Avengers Annual #10 (1981), she's called a "woman" by both Hawkeye and The Vision: And a "lady" by Iron Man: Now you could argue that these characters are responding to what Rogue looks like, and that she looks older than she is. But in her first appearance in X-Men (#158), the narrator calls her a woman as well: But by the time of her next appearance in #170, she had become a "young woman." And by the Japan story in X-Men #172-3, several times Logan calls her "kid," a term he'd use for Kitty Pryde but not for Colossus, who is supposed to be what, nineteen? I don't think any of those references are hard rules. If Rogue is anywhere from 16-18 she could be referred to either way, especially by Wolverine, to whom most of the X-Men are probably kids. In the time period he grew up, a younger female could even be considered a woman.
In UXM #183 there is some discussion of whether Peter is a man or "just a boy" as Nightcrawler says. Cain Marko calls him "boy" which is a taunt of course, but Peter responds angrily that he's not a boy, so clearly this is a grey area (he is stated to be "nearly twenty"). Logan also tells Peter that Kitty isn't a kid any more, even though she is stated to be 14 at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 16, 2020 22:05:30 GMT -5
Of course it could be that Claremont changed his script to match what the artists had drawn, so his memory of the incident might be accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Mar 16, 2020 22:06:26 GMT -5
I just thought how great a Michael Golden Spider-Woman comic would've been. We got a really great run from Leialoha though.   |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 16, 2020 22:20:10 GMT -5
Yeah, just looking at those Golden pages in Avengers Annual #10 is always a treat.
|
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 17, 2020 9:08:32 GMT -5
Yeah that would have been great. Her lower body looks a bit funny in that commission though. (I'd still probably ask for her if I was getting one!)
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 17, 2020 19:23:40 GMT -5
I like Milgrom a lot usually, also as an inker. I found he was a great inker for Golden by the way which you might not think he would've been the right choice for. Sometimes they did co-ordinate the banner ad color with the lefthand box color, and that helped a bit. I'll probably never get Avengers Annual #10 again because of price but I did have it at the time. To be honest I didn't really like the Rogue character a whole lot, first a villain and then a superheroine, should make for a good conflict but so often it was just her apologizing for the hundredth time or having those thought-balloons indicating her internal sufferation. If you thought her a major character I guess that's why Avengers Annual #10 is considered key but it's not key to me. I would say the Ms. Marvels with Mystique moreso, and Iron Fist #14 (all of which I did want to get). I was very surprised they chose Rogue, much younger though, as the main focus on the first X-Men movie. The first appearance she is a villain with an evil grin (enough that I hated her) and seems older than she was ever shown as again. I also find her calling absolutely everyone 'Sugah' to be kind of irritating. Yeah, I ever cared for Rogue myself. I think she's fairly popular and her appeal escapes me. Yeah, she's supposed to be able to absorb other people's powers, right? I always thought that was a really lame concpet - something like the Taskmaster, a character I dislike for similar reasons. And yes, that phonetically written accent is so annoying.
Lucky for me both characters came out towards the end of my Marvel-reading days so I didn't have to put up with them for long.
|
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Mar 17, 2020 20:28:01 GMT -5
There had been the Super-Adaptoid and The Mimic starting in '60s Marvel comics, but they did bring some pathos in her not wanting to touch or be touch later on I guess. I never quite felt Rogue or Gambit really deserved to be X-Men never mind Bishop, Cable, Jubilee, Marrow... I'm as bad as the people who liked the old team who could only go so far as Havok and Polaris in terms of expansion. And yet I could go for Jamie Madrox, The Multiple Man, just because he went back a couple years before Rogue. Banshee certainly had his appearance and even apparent age change over time since #28 in the '60s. So I guess Rogue wasn't the first to do that though in a shorter span of time. He seemed to be a villain at first too...  |
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Mar 18, 2020 7:09:50 GMT -5
or  #77 & 106: so much high energy for panel covers. |
|
|
|
Post by dbutler69 on Mar 18, 2020 8:06:16 GMT -5
Yeah, I ever cared for Rogue myself. I think she's fairly popular and her appeal escapes me. Yeah, she's supposed to be able to absorb other people's powers, right? I always thought that was a really lame concpet - something like the Taskmaster, a character I dislike for similar reasons. And yes, that phonetically written accent is so annoying.
Lucky for me both characters came out towards the end of my Marvel-reading days so I didn't have to put up with them for long.
Yeah, that's another thing. I can't stand the power to absorb or mimic others' powers. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 18, 2020 10:24:32 GMT -5
I actually like the "mimic" power, but I dislike Rogue for many of the other reasons mentioned.
|
|
