|
Post by Rob Allen on Feb 23, 2023 17:37:10 GMT -5
There was a hysterically funny parody of Cloak & Dagger somewhere online a few years ago but I can't find it now. Does anyone else remember it? Found it! I started reading Kate Beaton's new book Ducks (which is excellent) and I recognized her art style from my memory of this parody! It's NSFW due to cartoon boobs, so just a link here: www.harkavagrant.com/nonsense/cloakdagger.png
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2023 20:21:20 GMT -5
Another I really liked and thought it had a lot of potential because the writer was a novelist with some success in the genre (Robert Weinberg), and that genre was very popular at the time (urban fantasy) in the early 2000s, and I liked the character designs was a 4 issue mini done for Marvel in 2001, when Jemas and Quesada were actively recruiting creators from outside comics to make comics and hopefully bring their audience with them to comics. It was called Nightside, an urban fantasy/crime/horror comic with a strong female lead (the titular Nightside) Weinberg was looking to tell stories with the character in multiple mediums) prose and comics and cross promote them, and try to catch the Buffy crowd that was quite prominent at the time. And the 4 issue mini was actually quite good, it just didn't sell well at all, and everything fizzled. I think Marvel at this time was trying to be experimental and see if stuff outside superheroes would sell (Mike Carey's Spellbinders came from the same efforts, Elsa Bloodstone had her introductory mini at about the same time, etc.) but I don't think Marvel customers were open to this stuff at that time so it was a bad fit. Marvel would do some urban fantasy comic adaptations of popular series in that genre soon after this (such as Sherrilyn Kenyon's Lords of Avalon and even Stephen King's Dark Tower books came out of this impetus), but Nightside was never seen again. -M I picked this up when it came out, and agree, I thought it had a lot of potential as well. In fact, as a mostly superhero reader, this was one of the few titles that got my attention outside of that genre, so I think it resembles this category well.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 2, 2023 3:16:46 GMT -5
There was a hysterically funny parody of Cloak & Dagger somewhere online a few years ago but I can't find it now. Does anyone else remember it? Found it! I started reading Kate Beaton's new book Ducks (which is excellent) and I recognized her art style from my memory of this parody! It's NSFW due to cartoon boobs, so just a link here: www.harkavagrant.com/nonsense/cloakdagger.pngThat's hilarious! For how long did she have the, well, "tit window"? I googled and now she seems to have a more sensible costume.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Mar 2, 2023 4:32:37 GMT -5
Found it! I started reading Kate Beaton's new book Ducks (which is excellent) and I recognized her art style from my memory of this parody! It's NSFW due to cartoon boobs, so just a link here: www.harkavagrant.com/nonsense/cloakdagger.pngThat's hilarious! For how long did she have the, well, "tit window"? I googled and now she seems to have a more sensible costume. I have no idea. I've actually never read a C&D story. When I first saw the parody I barely knew who the characters were, and I don't know much more now.
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Mar 2, 2023 4:46:58 GMT -5
That's hilarious! For how long did she have the, well, "tit window"? I googled and now she seems to have a more sensible costume. It's more like an x-tremely plunging neckline rather than a window. And that was her original look, as reflected in this early appearance of Cloak & Dagger in PPSSM #70...
...and that look persisted for quite some time afterward as far as I recall.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 2, 2023 6:23:23 GMT -5
That's hilarious! For how long did she have the, well, "tit window"? I googled and now she seems to have a more sensible costume. It's more like an x-tremely plunging neckline rather than a window. And that was her original look, as reflected in this early appearance of Cloak & Dagger in PPSSM #70...
...and that look persisted for quite some time afterward as far as I recall.
This is the last one Now the dagger is on the back
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 2, 2023 10:26:29 GMT -5
Yet another great costume design made dull. Oh look it's that Hopeless guy again.
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on May 11, 2023 16:24:47 GMT -5
Yet another great costume design made dull. Oh look it's that Hopeless guy again. It actually looks like a pretty solid costume redesign to me, especially the cut out on the back.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 11, 2023 16:44:18 GMT -5
That's hilarious! For how long did she have the, well, "tit window"? I googled and now she seems to have a more sensible costume. I have no idea. I've actually never read a C&D story. When I first saw the parody I barely knew who the characters were, and I don't know much more now.
Kate Beaton might not have known much about them either - I remember seeing a very funny strip she did on Thor and the Enchantress, apparently knowing nothing more about the characters than what she was told by someone or other. I don't know much about Cloak and Dagger myself but still found this funny.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on May 11, 2023 17:33:28 GMT -5
Kate Beaton on The Enchantress: "When I was signing books in Frankfurt, someone asked me to draw The Enchantress, and I had never heard of her, so he produced a picture, and I asked questions about her while I drew. It turns out I think she is pretty great." No cartoon boobs here, but posting the image doesn't seem to work. Link: www.harkavagrant.com/nonsense/enchantresssm.png
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on May 13, 2023 0:10:31 GMT -5
Kind of surprised at how with the exception of Spawn none of Image's flagship characters have any bearing on the company today. Sure, tastes change and popularity wanes, but I wouldn't have expected the Image of 1992/93 to have vanished this thoroughly. Spawn's still around, but Shadowhawk, Youngblood, Maxx are completely gone; Savage Dragon only sells, I believe, about 1000 copies an issue (and I'm not even sure Image is aware that they still publish it); and while "BIG" is hard to define, I would have figured that these characters would either have lasted longer than they did whether anyone wanted them to or not or at least produce some sort demand from even a small contingent of old readers today expressing an interest in their return.
The company was founded on characters I'm not sure today's Image fans could even name.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2023 0:42:49 GMT -5
Kind of surprised at how with the exception of Spawn none of Image's flagship characters have any bearing on the company today. Sure, tastes change and popularity wanes, but I wouldn't have expected the Image of 1992/93 to have vanished this thoroughly. Spawn's still around, but Shadowhawk, Youngblood, Maxx are completely gone; Savage Dragon only sells, I believe, about 1000 copies an issue (and I'm not even sure Image is aware that they still publish it); and while "BIG" is hard to define, I would have figured that these characters would either have lasted longer than they did whether anyone wanted them to or not or at least produce some sort demand from even a small contingent of old readers today expressing an interest in their return. The company was founded on characters I'm not sure today's Image fans could even name. Jim Lee's Wild CATS currently have a series at DC, so they're still around too, just not part of Image any more as Wildstorm got sold to DC by Jim Lee. That includes some of the Stormwatch characters that were Image but are now running around the DC Universe instead, not to mention The Authority characters who have roles in the DCU now but had their start at Image. A lot of Liefeld's stuff(like Youngblood) is tied up in legal limbo since Rob ended up losing/selling some of his characters in some kind of Gordian knot of a thing with one of the studio partners I don't know the specifics of, but they ere still getting regular exposure until the legal issues made it near impossible to use them until its straightened out. Maxx just had a Batman x-over mini-series just a year or two ago as well (but Keith has left Image, so it came from IDW and DC I believe). Again a lot of those characters weren't Image characters, they didn't own them and can't use them. They belonged to the individual studios and Image can't do anything with them unless their creators are doing it and publishing them through Image. Even the ones still in use, like Spawn, aren't owned by Image. Image is a publisher and not a content creator, so they have no vested interest in keeping those characters in print unless the creator wants to do so and is paying them their cut to do so. It's different than Marvel and DC who own the IP they publish and have a vested interested in keeping that IP active no matter who they hire to create the content. A lot of the Image creators are getting better money to do other things right now as well. So yes, it is surprising some of them didn't have staying power, but they weren't Image owned characters so having a bearing on the company isn't really a measure of their success or lack there of. In the book world Conan was published by Lancer/Ace but has no bearing on those publishers after their deal to publish them expired even though they went on to other publishers. They did other things (until they didn't because of shake ups in book publishing including mergers and buyouts). Image operates much more like a traditional book publisher in that they own nothing they publish than traditional content creation house in comics who also publish their own books. So I get the gist of what your saying, but it doesn't quite apply to Image the way it would to other comic publishers because of the nature of their business model. -M
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on May 13, 2023 14:31:37 GMT -5
Kind of surprised at how with the exception of Spawn none of Image's flagship characters have any bearing on the company today. Sure, tastes change and popularity wanes, but I wouldn't have expected the Image of 1992/93 to have vanished this thoroughly. Spawn's still around, but Shadowhawk, Youngblood, Maxx are completely gone; Savage Dragon only sells, I believe, about 1000 copies an issue (and I'm not even sure Image is aware that they still publish it); and while "BIG" is hard to define, I would have figured that these characters would either have lasted longer than they did whether anyone wanted them to or not or at least produce some sort demand from even a small contingent of old readers today expressing an interest in their return. The company was founded on characters I'm not sure today's Image fans could even name. Jim Lee's Wild CATS currently have a series at DC, so they're still around too, just not part of Image any more as Wildstorm got sold to DC by Jim Lee. That includes some of the Stormwatch characters that were Image but are now running around the DC Universe instead, not to mention The Authority characters who have roles in the DCU now but had their start at Image. A lot of Liefeld's stuff(like Youngblood) is tied up in legal limbo since Rob ended up losing/selling some of his characters in some kind of Gordian knot of a thing with one of the studio partners I don't know the specifics of, but they ere still getting regular exposure until the legal issues made it near impossible to use them until its straightened out. Maxx just had a Batman x-over mini-series just a year or two ago as well (but Keith has left Image, so it came from IDW and DC I believe). Again a lot of those characters weren't Image characters, they didn't own them and can't use them. They belonged to the individual studios and Image can't do anything with them unless their creators are doing it and publishing them through Image. Even the ones still in use, like Spawn, aren't owned by Image. Image is a publisher and not a content creator, so they have no vested interest in keeping those characters in print unless the creator wants to do so and is paying them their cut to do so. It's different than Marvel and DC who own the IP they publish and have a vested interested in keeping that IP active no matter who they hire to create the content. A lot of the Image creators are getting better money to do other things right now as well. So yes, it is surprising some of them didn't have staying power, but they weren't Image owned characters so having a bearing on the company isn't really a measure of their success or lack there of. In the book world Conan was published by Lancer/Ace but has no bearing on those publishers after their deal to publish them expired even though they went on to other publishers. They did other things (until they didn't because of shake ups in book publishing including mergers and buyouts). Image operates much more like a traditional book publisher in that they own nothing they publish than traditional content creation house in comics who also publish their own books. So I get the gist of what your saying, but it doesn't quite apply to Image the way it would to other comic publishers because of the nature of their business model. -M Thank you so much for this, mrp! I knew, of course, that Image presented itself as a creator owned company, but was fairly ignorant of how the details worked.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on May 20, 2023 18:53:49 GMT -5
Do you remember him? In the current continuity he is a kind of joke. I always had the impression that DC wanted their own version of the Punisher, (with this, Vigilante, Peace-Maker etc) but they always missed that "something".
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on May 20, 2023 18:59:58 GMT -5
Do you remember him? In the current continuity he is a kind of joke. I always had the impression that DC wanted their own version of the Punisher, (with this, Vigilante, Peace-Maker etc) but they always missed that "something". He was always a joke.
|
|