Hiya gang!
Last night I reread Roger Rabbit #1. Tonight, I'll move on to #2... :)
When I was finished, I realized I didn't really know what it was that caused
the "Fall of Disney Comics".
It was the Roger Rabbit comics that got me interested in comics. I was really
sad to see Roger Rabbit end and some of the others...
So where did most of the people go? Was it just economics that forced the end?
How about a recap?
Chris Mickey's #1 Fan!!
P.S. For Gladstone: More Mickey!! More Mickey!! More Mickey!! ...and...
Will Roger ever return to comics?
P-P-Please? :)
Author
Topic: 199402
(215 messages)
Chris Lawton
Other old Disney Comics writers.
Message 196 -
1994-02-26 at 21:04:00
David A Gerstein
Comic preview magazine data wanted
Message 197 -
1994-02-26 at 21:34:47
Dear Folks,
Anyone have the new issue of either DIAMOND PREVIEWS or
ADVANCE COMICS? Seems to me we'd have information about a new month
of Gladstones, these being June's issues such as DDA 27, WDC&S 592 and
US 287.
Perhaps there will also be a mention of WDCiC 1, but of course
this will be just resolicited as DD 286 next month. Still, it would
be interesting to hear what they say about the now-aborted series...
Yours,
David Gerstein
"I'm the Fuller Brush Man! I'm givin' g'way free semple!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Anyone have the new issue of either DIAMOND PREVIEWS or
ADVANCE COMICS? Seems to me we'd have information about a new month
of Gladstones, these being June's issues such as DDA 27, WDC&S 592 and
US 287.
Perhaps there will also be a mention of WDCiC 1, but of course
this will be just resolicited as DD 286 next month. Still, it would
be interesting to hear what they say about the now-aborted series...
Yours,
David Gerstein
"I'm the Fuller Brush Man! I'm givin' g'way free semple!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Mark Semich
Donald dailies in DD 284.
Message 198 -
1994-02-27 at 00:32:24
(message from David A Gerstein on Sat, 26 Feb 1994 12:52:39 -0500):
> He also mentioned a few gaps in dates. Maybe Disney has
>banned some strips... but most probably those gaps are where there
>were SUNDAYS! (Not Sundays with a DD strip printed, since there was
>no Sunday strip in 1938.)
The gaps seem to be: 2/13, 2/20, 2/27, 3/3, 3/6, and 3/13.
All of these dates (except for March 3rd which was a Thursday) were
Sundays in 1938. So it looks like there is only one missing strip.
> And BTW, I remembered wrongly that the dailies began in Jan.
>'38. We'll know if these are the first dailies if the first week
>includes:
>
> A) Donald feeding seals at the circus (accidentally)
> B) Donald climbing a mountain
> C) Donald trying to hang a picture and failing.
These are the 1st, 2nd, and 4th strips in 284.. :-) (the 3rd, dated
Feb 9th, involves Donald fixing a flat tire.)
> D) Donald takes a bath in the sidecar of a police motorcycle,
>after filling it with water, only to end up in jail.
>
> This seems like prime banning material, but Disney didn't used
>to have it banned (Gladstone did run it circa 1989), and they've let a
>lot of strips run in recent DDs where Donald ended in jail. Is this
>among the reprints this issue?
Yup!
> He also mentioned a few gaps in dates. Maybe Disney has
>banned some strips... but most probably those gaps are where there
>were SUNDAYS! (Not Sundays with a DD strip printed, since there was
>no Sunday strip in 1938.)
The gaps seem to be: 2/13, 2/20, 2/27, 3/3, 3/6, and 3/13.
All of these dates (except for March 3rd which was a Thursday) were
Sundays in 1938. So it looks like there is only one missing strip.
> And BTW, I remembered wrongly that the dailies began in Jan.
>'38. We'll know if these are the first dailies if the first week
>includes:
>
> A) Donald feeding seals at the circus (accidentally)
> B) Donald climbing a mountain
> C) Donald trying to hang a picture and failing.
These are the 1st, 2nd, and 4th strips in 284.. :-) (the 3rd, dated
Feb 9th, involves Donald fixing a flat tire.)
> D) Donald takes a bath in the sidecar of a police motorcycle,
>after filling it with water, only to end up in jail.
>
> This seems like prime banning material, but Disney didn't used
>to have it banned (Gladstone did run it circa 1989), and they've let a
>lot of strips run in recent DDs where Donald ended in jail. Is this
>among the reprints this issue?
Yup!
Don Rosa
Disney-comics digest #253.
Message 199 -
1994-02-27 at 06:54:24
CHRIS LAWTON:
Naturally, with being constantly reminded that you're "Mickey's
#1 Fan", I'm beginning to get the impression that you're Mickey's #1
Fan. But now I see you saying that what got you interested in Disney
comics was their ROGER RABBIT -- this implies that the first Mickey
comics you ever saw were those that Disney created in 1990-91. THOSE
were stories that made you Mickey's #1 Fan? *THOSE*???
I'm also compelled to say something about the idea that Roger
Rabbit attracted someone to "Disney comics". I might have enjoyed WHO
FRAMED ROGER RABBIT as much as the next guy, but I see him as clearly
the anathema to Disney -- the total opposite of all that was Disney.
Roger Rabbit represents the very type of cartoon character that Disney
was so proud to be NOT associated with for 60 years, but which Disney
finally decided to capitulate to and embrace to cater to the modern
American who grew up on Warner Brothers' manic not-so-wholesome
zaniness. I see nothing in Disney's ROGER RABBIT or MICKEY MOUSE comics
that represented Disney comics. (I also question the whole idea of
taking Roger Rabbit, whose appeal was a cartoon character in the world
of live action, and putting him in comic books where he was a comic
character in a world of...comic characters? Wha...?)
Disney comics ceased publication because people stopped reading
them in DROVES. They took Gladstone's circulations of 80,000 and
decimated them to less than half that. Stores in Oslo that sold 400
issues of Gladstone's Disneys, couldn't sell 1/4 that many Disney
Disneys. Readers around the world recognized Disney's Disneys as having
nothing of the spirit of true Disney comics of the previous 50 years,
and reacted by not buying them. The only people I've noticed who seemed
to like Disney's Disneys were youngsters attracted to their TV titles,
and who thought these were what Disney comics were all about. I can see
a possible anology between this and a fan of old Donald Duck animated
cartoons who thought it would be odd that Dell's Donald comics attracted
ME to Donald, when Dell's comics had little if anything to do with the
Disney Donald.
Bob Foster was the only guy there that seemed to have read a
Disney comic prior to showing up for work, and when he gained more power
toward the end, things improved. But the damage was done. I doubt that
Gladstone will soon revive the Disney line as I can tell in my
convention travels that American readers clearly feel that Disney comics
are now tainted... soiled... not to be trusted... and they aren't
willing to give them the attention they had in the late 80's before
Disney started mucking about. It's like, "Why should I get interested
again? I'll be betrayed like before!" The decrease in interest in the
wake of Disney's Disneys is quite tangible! Gladstone has a steep uphill
battle -- I'm not even betting the farm that I'll get to see my entire
"Lo$" in English.
Naturally, with being constantly reminded that you're "Mickey's
#1 Fan", I'm beginning to get the impression that you're Mickey's #1
Fan. But now I see you saying that what got you interested in Disney
comics was their ROGER RABBIT -- this implies that the first Mickey
comics you ever saw were those that Disney created in 1990-91. THOSE
were stories that made you Mickey's #1 Fan? *THOSE*???
I'm also compelled to say something about the idea that Roger
Rabbit attracted someone to "Disney comics". I might have enjoyed WHO
FRAMED ROGER RABBIT as much as the next guy, but I see him as clearly
the anathema to Disney -- the total opposite of all that was Disney.
Roger Rabbit represents the very type of cartoon character that Disney
was so proud to be NOT associated with for 60 years, but which Disney
finally decided to capitulate to and embrace to cater to the modern
American who grew up on Warner Brothers' manic not-so-wholesome
zaniness. I see nothing in Disney's ROGER RABBIT or MICKEY MOUSE comics
that represented Disney comics. (I also question the whole idea of
taking Roger Rabbit, whose appeal was a cartoon character in the world
of live action, and putting him in comic books where he was a comic
character in a world of...comic characters? Wha...?)
Disney comics ceased publication because people stopped reading
them in DROVES. They took Gladstone's circulations of 80,000 and
decimated them to less than half that. Stores in Oslo that sold 400
issues of Gladstone's Disneys, couldn't sell 1/4 that many Disney
Disneys. Readers around the world recognized Disney's Disneys as having
nothing of the spirit of true Disney comics of the previous 50 years,
and reacted by not buying them. The only people I've noticed who seemed
to like Disney's Disneys were youngsters attracted to their TV titles,
and who thought these were what Disney comics were all about. I can see
a possible anology between this and a fan of old Donald Duck animated
cartoons who thought it would be odd that Dell's Donald comics attracted
ME to Donald, when Dell's comics had little if anything to do with the
Disney Donald.
Bob Foster was the only guy there that seemed to have read a
Disney comic prior to showing up for work, and when he gained more power
toward the end, things improved. But the damage was done. I doubt that
Gladstone will soon revive the Disney line as I can tell in my
convention travels that American readers clearly feel that Disney comics
are now tainted... soiled... not to be trusted... and they aren't
willing to give them the attention they had in the late 80's before
Disney started mucking about. It's like, "Why should I get interested
again? I'll be betrayed like before!" The decrease in interest in the
wake of Disney's Disneys is quite tangible! Gladstone has a steep uphill
battle -- I'm not even betting the farm that I'll get to see my entire
"Lo$" in English.
David A Gerstein
Other old Disney Comics writers.
Message 200 -
1994-02-27 at 21:50:19
Dear Folks,
Chris Lawton commented that:
"Last night I reread Roger Rabbit #1. Tonight, I'll move on
to #2... :) When I was finished, I realized I didn't really know what
it was that caused the 'Fall of Disney Comics'."
When you get to Roger Rabbit #4, in which the main story, like
many others after it, is completely incomprehensible, and then to #6,
in which the art begins going downhill (reaching a low, I find, in
#13), you will see what caused that fall. The stories become very
bizarre, with the villains' motives meaningless and contrived, and the
drawings of characters are woefully unexpressive. Roger in
particular. In one issue (#13 again) Roger is so grotesque he's
uncomfortable to look at!
There are things not to like in the earlier, better issues,
too: they obviously felt that the coloring had to be garish since the
stories revolved around a "toon". As a result, any type of subtlety
was lost.
There ARE some excellent RR stories in the series, though:
I'm referring to the *backup* stories, usually by Doug Rice and Bill
Langley. These stories, such as "Hare Apparent," "Gym Dandy," and
"The Candy Caine Mutiny," are really Roger as he should be in comics.
The main stories in the issue usually draw Roger as the ugliest damned
thing I've ever seen, while these backup stories, with beautifully
smooth linework and a magnificently realized version of Roger, are
very good.
Unfortunately, Disney didn't realize that the good sales were
(apparently) due to Rice and Langley, because when that team stopped
doing regular backups around #10, the series' sales began dropping
quickly! A testament to this is the RR 3-D special that was done
in summer '92 (quite hard to find, IMO), long after the regular series
ended. It was composed of reprints, and ONLY Rice and Langley stories
were considered to be worth reprinting.
There are good stories in the TOONTOWN series as well,
although the Roger openers could have been better. However, the
stories with Jessica and the others are superb. Unfortunately, the
fate of this series was sealed even before it had a chance to be a
success.
It's very, very notable that the most successful stories done
with RR -- those early backups -- were the only ones in anything like
the classic Disney comic style... or at least closer to it than the
other RR comic book material. Everything else was done in an
approximation of the Marvel style. It was the attempt to imitate
Marvel that, I find, alienated most fans of Disney comics as they had
been until 1990.
Sincerely,
David Gerstein
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Chris Lawton commented that:
"Last night I reread Roger Rabbit #1. Tonight, I'll move on
to #2... :) When I was finished, I realized I didn't really know what
it was that caused the 'Fall of Disney Comics'."
When you get to Roger Rabbit #4, in which the main story, like
many others after it, is completely incomprehensible, and then to #6,
in which the art begins going downhill (reaching a low, I find, in
#13), you will see what caused that fall. The stories become very
bizarre, with the villains' motives meaningless and contrived, and the
drawings of characters are woefully unexpressive. Roger in
particular. In one issue (#13 again) Roger is so grotesque he's
uncomfortable to look at!
There are things not to like in the earlier, better issues,
too: they obviously felt that the coloring had to be garish since the
stories revolved around a "toon". As a result, any type of subtlety
was lost.
There ARE some excellent RR stories in the series, though:
I'm referring to the *backup* stories, usually by Doug Rice and Bill
Langley. These stories, such as "Hare Apparent," "Gym Dandy," and
"The Candy Caine Mutiny," are really Roger as he should be in comics.
The main stories in the issue usually draw Roger as the ugliest damned
thing I've ever seen, while these backup stories, with beautifully
smooth linework and a magnificently realized version of Roger, are
very good.
Unfortunately, Disney didn't realize that the good sales were
(apparently) due to Rice and Langley, because when that team stopped
doing regular backups around #10, the series' sales began dropping
quickly! A testament to this is the RR 3-D special that was done
in summer '92 (quite hard to find, IMO), long after the regular series
ended. It was composed of reprints, and ONLY Rice and Langley stories
were considered to be worth reprinting.
There are good stories in the TOONTOWN series as well,
although the Roger openers could have been better. However, the
stories with Jessica and the others are superb. Unfortunately, the
fate of this series was sealed even before it had a chance to be a
success.
It's very, very notable that the most successful stories done
with RR -- those early backups -- were the only ones in anything like
the classic Disney comic style... or at least closer to it than the
other RR comic book material. Everything else was done in an
approximation of the Marvel style. It was the attempt to imitate
Marvel that, I find, alienated most fans of Disney comics as they had
been until 1990.
Sincerely,
David Gerstein
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Chris Lawton
Old Disney Comics
Message 201 -
1994-02-27 at 23:53:00
Hiya gang!
DON ROSA:
> Naturally, with being constantly reminded that you're "Mickey's
>#1 Fan", I'm beginning to get the impression that you're Mickey's #1
>Fan. But now I see you saying that what got you interested in Disney
>comics was their ROGER RABBIT -- this implies that the first Mickey
>comics you ever saw were those that Disney created in 1990-91. THOSE
>were stories that made you Mickey's #1 Fan? *THOSE*???
Ouch! A tough hit... well, actually yes, it was "those" stories that first
got me interested. I started a new job in 1990 and there was a newstand
near by that carried the Disney Comics. Well, I bought them, enjoyed reading
them at lunch and that's what got me started. As for the "Mickey's #1 Fan"
stuff, it was not the comics at all that made feel that way. (It was the
fact that it was something that my fiancee and I had in common when we first
met) But as for the comics, The Mickey Mouse Adventures were all I had seen.
I had never even seen a non-duck title before that. (Of course, I never
really looked inside a Disney comic, or any other comic for that matter.
I can't even remember ever reading them as a kid!) So what could I compare
it to? For me, The Disney Comics were the only thing goin'.
> I'm also compelled to say something about the idea that Roger
>Rabbit attracted someone to "Disney comics". I might have enjoyed WHO
>FRAMED ROGER RABBIT as much as the next guy, but I see him as clearly
>the anathema to Disney -- the total opposite of all that was Disney.
>Roger Rabbit represents the very type of cartoon character that Disney
>was so proud to be NOT associated with for 60 years, but which Disney
>finally decided to capitulate to and embrace to cater to the modern
>American who grew up on Warner Brothers' manic not-so-wholesome
>zaniness.
I disagree. Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck *are* different. I don't think the
character of Roger Rabbit would ever utter the words "This means war!". Or
do some crazy violence to another character just because he's there like
Foghorn Leghorn and the Hound Dog.
Roger Rabbit is pure nice guy - just a bit more zany than Mickey and the rest
of the Disney group. In my (humble) opinion, Roger fits in with the rest
of the gang quite well. He does fill a hole that was always there. I think
the folks at Disney were right on when they added Roger Rabbit.
>I see nothing in Disney's ROGER RABBIT or MICKEY MOUSE comics
>that represented Disney comics.
I really can't comment here as I haven't seen enough of Gladstone or others...
>(I also question the whole idea of taking Roger Rabbit, whose appeal
>was a cartoon character in the world of live action, and putting him in
>comic books where he was a comic character in a world of...comic
>characters? Wha...?)
You've got a point here. However, when Roger stayed totally in the cartoon
world some really neat stuff was presented. For example: the comic adaptaions
of new Maroon Cartoons. I have yet to see any other Disney (current publisher
included) Comic seem so fast paced and action filled. It sometimes seemed that
you could actually be watching a real cartoon. A great thing to acomplish with
print.
> Disney comics ceased publication because people stopped reading
>them in DROVES. They took Gladstone's circulations of 80,000 and
>decimated them to less than half that. Stores in Oslo that sold 400
>issues of Gladstone's Disneys, couldn't sell 1/4 that many Disney
>Disneys. Readers around the world recognized Disney's Disneys as having
>nothing of the spirit of true Disney comics of the previous 50 years,
>and reacted by not buying them. The only people I've noticed who seemed
>to like Disney's Disneys were youngsters attracted to their TV titles,
>and who thought these were what Disney comics were all about. I can see
>a possible anology between this and a fan of old Donald Duck animated
>cartoons who thought it would be odd that Dell's Donald comics attracted
>ME to Donald, when Dell's comics had little if anything to do with the
>Disney Donald.
> Bob Foster was the only guy there that seemed to have read a
>Disney comic prior to showing up for work, and when he gained more power
>toward the end, things improved. But the damage was done. I doubt that
>Gladstone will soon revive the Disney line as I can tell in my
>convention travels that American readers clearly feel that Disney comics
>are now tainted... soiled... not to be trusted... and they aren't
>willing to give them the attention they had in the late 80's before
>Disney started mucking about. It's like, "Why should I get interested
>again? I'll be betrayed like before!" The decrease in interest in the
>wake of Disney's Disneys is quite tangible! Gladstone has a steep uphill
>battle -- I'm not even betting the farm that I'll get to see my entire
>"Lo$" in English.
A pretty dismal picture you paint here. I hope you don't win that bet!
As a *very* uneducated Disney comic reader, I'd like to be able to see more.
I'm just now starting to get into the ducks! (although there's still something
about Mickey :)...) I wan't to see how Scrooge got to where he is!
Chris Still... Mickey's #1 Fan!! :) :)
DON ROSA:
> Naturally, with being constantly reminded that you're "Mickey's
>#1 Fan", I'm beginning to get the impression that you're Mickey's #1
>Fan. But now I see you saying that what got you interested in Disney
>comics was their ROGER RABBIT -- this implies that the first Mickey
>comics you ever saw were those that Disney created in 1990-91. THOSE
>were stories that made you Mickey's #1 Fan? *THOSE*???
Ouch! A tough hit... well, actually yes, it was "those" stories that first
got me interested. I started a new job in 1990 and there was a newstand
near by that carried the Disney Comics. Well, I bought them, enjoyed reading
them at lunch and that's what got me started. As for the "Mickey's #1 Fan"
stuff, it was not the comics at all that made feel that way. (It was the
fact that it was something that my fiancee and I had in common when we first
met) But as for the comics, The Mickey Mouse Adventures were all I had seen.
I had never even seen a non-duck title before that. (Of course, I never
really looked inside a Disney comic, or any other comic for that matter.
I can't even remember ever reading them as a kid!) So what could I compare
it to? For me, The Disney Comics were the only thing goin'.
> I'm also compelled to say something about the idea that Roger
>Rabbit attracted someone to "Disney comics". I might have enjoyed WHO
>FRAMED ROGER RABBIT as much as the next guy, but I see him as clearly
>the anathema to Disney -- the total opposite of all that was Disney.
>Roger Rabbit represents the very type of cartoon character that Disney
>was so proud to be NOT associated with for 60 years, but which Disney
>finally decided to capitulate to and embrace to cater to the modern
>American who grew up on Warner Brothers' manic not-so-wholesome
>zaniness.
I disagree. Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck *are* different. I don't think the
character of Roger Rabbit would ever utter the words "This means war!". Or
do some crazy violence to another character just because he's there like
Foghorn Leghorn and the Hound Dog.
Roger Rabbit is pure nice guy - just a bit more zany than Mickey and the rest
of the Disney group. In my (humble) opinion, Roger fits in with the rest
of the gang quite well. He does fill a hole that was always there. I think
the folks at Disney were right on when they added Roger Rabbit.
>I see nothing in Disney's ROGER RABBIT or MICKEY MOUSE comics
>that represented Disney comics.
I really can't comment here as I haven't seen enough of Gladstone or others...
>(I also question the whole idea of taking Roger Rabbit, whose appeal
>was a cartoon character in the world of live action, and putting him in
>comic books where he was a comic character in a world of...comic
>characters? Wha...?)
You've got a point here. However, when Roger stayed totally in the cartoon
world some really neat stuff was presented. For example: the comic adaptaions
of new Maroon Cartoons. I have yet to see any other Disney (current publisher
included) Comic seem so fast paced and action filled. It sometimes seemed that
you could actually be watching a real cartoon. A great thing to acomplish with
print.
> Disney comics ceased publication because people stopped reading
>them in DROVES. They took Gladstone's circulations of 80,000 and
>decimated them to less than half that. Stores in Oslo that sold 400
>issues of Gladstone's Disneys, couldn't sell 1/4 that many Disney
>Disneys. Readers around the world recognized Disney's Disneys as having
>nothing of the spirit of true Disney comics of the previous 50 years,
>and reacted by not buying them. The only people I've noticed who seemed
>to like Disney's Disneys were youngsters attracted to their TV titles,
>and who thought these were what Disney comics were all about. I can see
>a possible anology between this and a fan of old Donald Duck animated
>cartoons who thought it would be odd that Dell's Donald comics attracted
>ME to Donald, when Dell's comics had little if anything to do with the
>Disney Donald.
> Bob Foster was the only guy there that seemed to have read a
>Disney comic prior to showing up for work, and when he gained more power
>toward the end, things improved. But the damage was done. I doubt that
>Gladstone will soon revive the Disney line as I can tell in my
>convention travels that American readers clearly feel that Disney comics
>are now tainted... soiled... not to be trusted... and they aren't
>willing to give them the attention they had in the late 80's before
>Disney started mucking about. It's like, "Why should I get interested
>again? I'll be betrayed like before!" The decrease in interest in the
>wake of Disney's Disneys is quite tangible! Gladstone has a steep uphill
>battle -- I'm not even betting the farm that I'll get to see my entire
>"Lo$" in English.
A pretty dismal picture you paint here. I hope you don't win that bet!
As a *very* uneducated Disney comic reader, I'd like to be able to see more.
I'm just now starting to get into the ducks! (although there's still something
about Mickey :)...) I wan't to see how Scrooge got to where he is!
Chris Still... Mickey's #1 Fan!! :) :)
Torsten Wesley Adair
Disney-comics digest #253.
Message 202 -
1994-02-28 at 01:40:08
> that represented Disney comics. (I also question the whole idea of
> taking Roger Rabbit, whose appeal was a cartoon character in the world
> of live action, and putting him in comic books where he was a comic
> character in a world of...comic characters? Wha...?)
Ahem. Actually, Roger Rabbit is a comic strip actor. Like Fabio and
other male models, Roger makes his living by being photographed for comic
strips.
To discover the REAL Roger Rabbit, read Gary Wolf's (I think that's the
right name) Who Censored Roger Rabbit? .
Torsten Adair's doppleganger torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE,USA (via NZ)
> taking Roger Rabbit, whose appeal was a cartoon character in the world
> of live action, and putting him in comic books where he was a comic
> character in a world of...comic characters? Wha...?)
Ahem. Actually, Roger Rabbit is a comic strip actor. Like Fabio and
other male models, Roger makes his living by being photographed for comic
strips.
To discover the REAL Roger Rabbit, read Gary Wolf's (I think that's the
right name) Who Censored Roger Rabbit? .
Torsten Adair's doppleganger torsten at cwis.unomaha.edu Omaha, NE,USA (via NZ)
David A Gerstein
Of mice and rabbits
Message 203 -
1994-02-28 at 03:40:07
Dear Folks,
Fer gosh sakes! I may not shout about it all the time, but
*I* am, no-holds-barred, Mickey Mouse's greatest fan. Well, okay, the
greatest fan of _Gottfredson's_ Mickey. And the Mouse of the earlier
cartoons.
(CHRIS: This means war! ;-)
On to the Roger Rabbit bit... Actually, Gary Wolf liked the
Disney version of Roger enough to use *that*, I believe, as the basis
of his more recent Roger book, _Who P-P-P-Plugged Roger Rabbit_
(1991). The title alone shows how closely this one adheres to the
film version... I don't know how compatible it is with the earlier
Roger book, but I'm given to guess... not much.
* * * * *
I am going to forcibly stop myself from continuing a goofy
(sorry, Goofy) thread of arguing about who is Mickey's biggest fan,
and from going on any more about Roger Rabbit things not related to
the comic book version. If people want to talk about them, I'll be
glad to air a discussion on rec.arts.disney.
BTW, my favorite cheese is Camembert -- Mickey's favorite!
Your friend,
David Gerstein
"Boy! A box! Another minute and that cannibal tom cat would
be picking me out of his teeth!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Fer gosh sakes! I may not shout about it all the time, but
*I* am, no-holds-barred, Mickey Mouse's greatest fan. Well, okay, the
greatest fan of _Gottfredson's_ Mickey. And the Mouse of the earlier
cartoons.
(CHRIS: This means war! ;-)
On to the Roger Rabbit bit... Actually, Gary Wolf liked the
Disney version of Roger enough to use *that*, I believe, as the basis
of his more recent Roger book, _Who P-P-P-Plugged Roger Rabbit_
(1991). The title alone shows how closely this one adheres to the
film version... I don't know how compatible it is with the earlier
Roger book, but I'm given to guess... not much.
* * * * *
I am going to forcibly stop myself from continuing a goofy
(sorry, Goofy) thread of arguing about who is Mickey's biggest fan,
and from going on any more about Roger Rabbit things not related to
the comic book version. If people want to talk about them, I'll be
glad to air a discussion on rec.arts.disney.
BTW, my favorite cheese is Camembert -- Mickey's favorite!
Your friend,
David Gerstein
"Boy! A box! Another minute and that cannibal tom cat would
be picking me out of his teeth!"
<David.A.Gerstein at Williams.edu>
Don Rosa
Disney-comics digest #254.
Message 204 -
1994-02-28 at 06:07:08
CHRIS LAWTON:
I have read your last set of comments. I am quite surprised at
what made you a "Disney comics fan" and suspect that you actually
AREN'T. If it's Roger Rabbit that you like, either the comic book or the
movie, I would suggest that Disney is NOT what you should be reading (or
watching) at all. Roger Rabbit and "Maroon Cartoons" are exaggerated
imitations (if possible) of Tex Avery's Columbia, MGM and Warner
Brothers cartoons of the 30's and 40's... as I said, the very sort of
cartoons that were the OPPOSITE of the restrained and artistic Disney
type. Nothing in Roger Rabbit was a tribute to Disney. I think you are
going to be sadly disapponted when you finally see what REAL Disney
(i.e. DELL Disney) comics are all about.
I have read your last set of comments. I am quite surprised at
what made you a "Disney comics fan" and suspect that you actually
AREN'T. If it's Roger Rabbit that you like, either the comic book or the
movie, I would suggest that Disney is NOT what you should be reading (or
watching) at all. Roger Rabbit and "Maroon Cartoons" are exaggerated
imitations (if possible) of Tex Avery's Columbia, MGM and Warner
Brothers cartoons of the 30's and 40's... as I said, the very sort of
cartoons that were the OPPOSITE of the restrained and artistic Disney
type. Nothing in Roger Rabbit was a tribute to Disney. I think you are
going to be sadly disapponted when you finally see what REAL Disney
(i.e. DELL Disney) comics are all about.
Harry Fluks
Updates for story-codes
Message 205 -
1994-02-28 at 11:06:08
I got some remarks from Per and David about the new version of the 'story-
codes' file on ftp. I'll make the discussion public in case anyone knows
more.
The debate is about the 'intermezzos' in the European 'pocket books'
between the Italian stories. There are pages between the various
stories making the entire contents of a book one story.
David wrote to me:
> I now have decisive proof that
> the Intermezzos in older pocket books are French -- I have a French
> pocket book from the late 1960s. It contains Scarpa's "MM as the
> Emperor of Calisota," as well as some other stories... The issue has
> the intermezzos, well prior to when the Germans published
> pocket-books.
And Per wrote, that he thought (or knew?) that the intermezzos are
Italian, he even knew the name of the artist (?)
Could you give us some more information, Per? (Or someone else?)
--Harry.
codes' file on ftp. I'll make the discussion public in case anyone knows
more.
The debate is about the 'intermezzos' in the European 'pocket books'
between the Italian stories. There are pages between the various
stories making the entire contents of a book one story.
David wrote to me:
> I now have decisive proof that
> the Intermezzos in older pocket books are French -- I have a French
> pocket book from the late 1960s. It contains Scarpa's "MM as the
> Emperor of Calisota," as well as some other stories... The issue has
> the intermezzos, well prior to when the Germans published
> pocket-books.
And Per wrote, that he thought (or knew?) that the intermezzos are
Italian, he even knew the name of the artist (?)
Could you give us some more information, Per? (Or someone else?)
--Harry.
Harry Fluks
Disney comics fans
Message 206 -
1994-02-28 at 11:25:53
DON ROSA to Chris Lawton:
> I have read your last set of comments. I am quite surprised at
> what made you a "Disney comics fan" and suspect that you actually
> AREN'T.
There are so many kinds of Disney comics that I think one can say one's
a Disney comics fan without having seen one single Dell comic story.
I know one fan who has seen nothing more than the Danish Vicar and Branca
stories, and he LIKES them.
He doen not know what he's missing, of course... but you can't say that
he's NOT a Disney comics fan.
--Harry.
> I have read your last set of comments. I am quite surprised at
> what made you a "Disney comics fan" and suspect that you actually
> AREN'T.
There are so many kinds of Disney comics that I think one can say one's
a Disney comics fan without having seen one single Dell comic story.
I know one fan who has seen nothing more than the Danish Vicar and Branca
stories, and he LIKES them.
He doen not know what he's missing, of course... but you can't say that
he's NOT a Disney comics fan.
--Harry.
Darin Reid
Disney comics fans
Message 207 -
1994-02-28 at 11:46:43
:)DON ROSA to Chris Lawton:
:)> I have read your last set of comments. I am quite surprised at
:)> what made you a "Disney comics fan" and suspect that you actually
:)> AREN'T.
:)
:)There are so many kinds of Disney comics that I think one can say one's
:)a Disney comics fan without having seen one single Dell comic story.
:)
:)I know one fan who has seen nothing more than the Danish Vicar and Branca
:)stories, and he LIKES them.
:)He doen not know what he's missing, of course... but you can't say that
:)he's NOT a Disney comics fan.
:)
I don't mean to disturb the peace-level of the list but I must say this:
Don:
You are not the sole judge of what a "real" Disney comic is, and I feel
that your responses to Chris are quite rude, and out of place.
A Disney comic is a comic put out/or liscenced to be put ot by Disney. I
see no reason why someone should be given a hard time for liking Roger
Rabbit.
-Darin
:)> I have read your last set of comments. I am quite surprised at
:)> what made you a "Disney comics fan" and suspect that you actually
:)> AREN'T.
:)
:)There are so many kinds of Disney comics that I think one can say one's
:)a Disney comics fan without having seen one single Dell comic story.
:)
:)I know one fan who has seen nothing more than the Danish Vicar and Branca
:)stories, and he LIKES them.
:)He doen not know what he's missing, of course... but you can't say that
:)he's NOT a Disney comics fan.
:)
I don't mean to disturb the peace-level of the list but I must say this:
Don:
You are not the sole judge of what a "real" Disney comic is, and I feel
that your responses to Chris are quite rude, and out of place.
A Disney comic is a comic put out/or liscenced to be put ot by Disney. I
see no reason why someone should be given a hard time for liking Roger
Rabbit.
-Darin
Harry Fluks
Replies to Don and Fredrik (Disney-comics digest #253.)
Message 208 -
1994-02-28 at 12:47:27
Don Rosa:
~~~~~~~~~
> I am currently assisting the Germans in translating "Guardians
> of the Lost Library", and they have been supplied all my recent
> corrections and changes by Gladstone. So, you might tell your friend at
> GP that if they wait to use the German version, they will be getting the
> version with all the corrections and all colored.
I'm afraid it won't help much if I tell them that: they already bought the
Danish version including the colours...
BTW: The Dutch version of Lo$ part 4 was published last week. It does not
contain a cover of part 5. So either part 5 will be a back-up story in the
next DD Extra, or part 5 will not be in that issue at all, which means GP
editor Jos Beekman gave me the wrong information...
Fredrik: (about our Disney comics database)
~~~~~~~~
> Why not just state that every line beginning with a semi-colon (or
> whatever) is treated as a comment and let this be true for the issue
> files as well? That way you can squeeze in all the extra info you want.
Right. I'll do that, but I prefer a space over a ';' (for readability).
> > - (start) date, in the form yy/mm/dd
>
> Isn't the international standard yy-mm-dd? If I didn't get some kind of
> explanation, yy/mm/dd would confuse me at least.
OK, I'll change it (back) to yy-mm-dd, if that's the standard. (BTW: I don't
like the form yymmdd: that makes it less readable.)
> > - title or description
>
> This is where I have my only major disagreement with you. I think this
> should be in the issue files. Unnecessary? Well, that field will be
> filled with spaces in the issue files anyway, right?
No, I was thinking of a 'variable length' field at the end of the line, so
a story without title can save a lot of space in an 'issue file'.
> And that way, it
> will be easier to fit in (say) the Danish titles of Ole's index or any
> other future non-american indices. The story files would include a
> description, normally the original English title in the same form that
> you propose above. The issue file title would then be in Per's format
> (which I too prefer, if we have to go with your proposal). The obvious
> disadvantage with all this would obviously be that someone will have
> to type in BOTH the story file description AND the issue file title
> for any new entries. Well, you can't have everything. :-)
But I don't like to have information twice. In the many Barks reprints, the
titles (or descriptions) don't change, so one entry in a 'story file' should
be enough.
> > - remarks
>
> Why not just on comment lines like those I suggested above?
The 'remarks' wouldn't be transferred to a 'list file' in that case. But maybe
we want it that way.
> The only thing that I really missed from your post was info about how
> you plan to make the programs, especially the user interface. Will you
> have command line parameters, or do you plan to invent your own
> database language?
I plan to make a few (quite simple) programs to generate the lists we already
have from the 'database'. Other access can be done using 'grep' or 'find',
'sort' etc. Maybe we can make more advanced programs for database access, but
we can postpone that to later.
> The latter would certainly be preferrable if we
> still plan to make an email service out of this (like someone proposed
> when this was discussed in the past). Also; will the user be able to
> do case-insensitive searches and the like?
I know nothing of e-mail services, so someone would have to help me with
that if we get that far.
> Another feature I'd like to see in the program(s) is generation of
> (optional) legends for each output produced. Such a legend would
> consist of a short natural language description of what the output
> consists of and explanations for used abbreviations.
I'll keep that in mind as an extra 'feature' of my programs...
Thank you for your comments.
--Harry.
Harry PTT Research ()_() Dutch Disney comics freak
Fluks Leidschendam (_) H.W.Fluks at research.ptt.nl
"Yeah... I've _heard_ of coral barques!"
~~~~~~~~~
> I am currently assisting the Germans in translating "Guardians
> of the Lost Library", and they have been supplied all my recent
> corrections and changes by Gladstone. So, you might tell your friend at
> GP that if they wait to use the German version, they will be getting the
> version with all the corrections and all colored.
I'm afraid it won't help much if I tell them that: they already bought the
Danish version including the colours...
BTW: The Dutch version of Lo$ part 4 was published last week. It does not
contain a cover of part 5. So either part 5 will be a back-up story in the
next DD Extra, or part 5 will not be in that issue at all, which means GP
editor Jos Beekman gave me the wrong information...
Fredrik: (about our Disney comics database)
~~~~~~~~
> Why not just state that every line beginning with a semi-colon (or
> whatever) is treated as a comment and let this be true for the issue
> files as well? That way you can squeeze in all the extra info you want.
Right. I'll do that, but I prefer a space over a ';' (for readability).
> > - (start) date, in the form yy/mm/dd
>
> Isn't the international standard yy-mm-dd? If I didn't get some kind of
> explanation, yy/mm/dd would confuse me at least.
OK, I'll change it (back) to yy-mm-dd, if that's the standard. (BTW: I don't
like the form yymmdd: that makes it less readable.)
> > - title or description
>
> This is where I have my only major disagreement with you. I think this
> should be in the issue files. Unnecessary? Well, that field will be
> filled with spaces in the issue files anyway, right?
No, I was thinking of a 'variable length' field at the end of the line, so
a story without title can save a lot of space in an 'issue file'.
> And that way, it
> will be easier to fit in (say) the Danish titles of Ole's index or any
> other future non-american indices. The story files would include a
> description, normally the original English title in the same form that
> you propose above. The issue file title would then be in Per's format
> (which I too prefer, if we have to go with your proposal). The obvious
> disadvantage with all this would obviously be that someone will have
> to type in BOTH the story file description AND the issue file title
> for any new entries. Well, you can't have everything. :-)
But I don't like to have information twice. In the many Barks reprints, the
titles (or descriptions) don't change, so one entry in a 'story file' should
be enough.
> > - remarks
>
> Why not just on comment lines like those I suggested above?
The 'remarks' wouldn't be transferred to a 'list file' in that case. But maybe
we want it that way.
> The only thing that I really missed from your post was info about how
> you plan to make the programs, especially the user interface. Will you
> have command line parameters, or do you plan to invent your own
> database language?
I plan to make a few (quite simple) programs to generate the lists we already
have from the 'database'. Other access can be done using 'grep' or 'find',
'sort' etc. Maybe we can make more advanced programs for database access, but
we can postpone that to later.
> The latter would certainly be preferrable if we
> still plan to make an email service out of this (like someone proposed
> when this was discussed in the past). Also; will the user be able to
> do case-insensitive searches and the like?
I know nothing of e-mail services, so someone would have to help me with
that if we get that far.
> Another feature I'd like to see in the program(s) is generation of
> (optional) legends for each output produced. Such a legend would
> consist of a short natural language description of what the output
> consists of and explanations for used abbreviations.
I'll keep that in mind as an extra 'feature' of my programs...
Thank you for your comments.
--Harry.
Harry PTT Research ()_() Dutch Disney comics freak
Fluks Leidschendam (_) H.W.Fluks at research.ptt.nl
"Yeah... I've _heard_ of coral barques!"
Fabio Gadducci
Pocket books...
Message 209 -
1994-02-28 at 13:58:07
>I got some remarks from Per and David about the new version of the 'story-
>codes' file on ftp. I'll make the discussion public in case anyone knows
>more.
>
>The debate is about the 'intermezzos' in the European 'pocket books'
>between the Italian stories. There are pages between the various
>stories making the entire contents of a book one story.
>
>David wrote to me:
>
>> I now have decisive proof that
>> the Intermezzos in older pocket books are French -- I have a French
>> pocket book from the late 1960s. It contains Scarpa's "MM as the
>> Emperor of Calisota," as well as some other stories... The issue has
>> the intermezzos, well prior to when the Germans published
>> pocket-books.
>
>And Per wrote, that he thought (or knew?) that the intermezzos are
>Italian, he even knew the name of the artist (?)
>
>Could you give us some more information, Per? (Or someone else?)
>
Ahem...
As the owner of the whole collection of Italian pocket-books since 1957, I
can assure you that the author was Italian. It was Giuseppe Perego, one of
the few contributors to Disney books who were employed by Mondadori (all
the others, included Scarpa and Carpi, worked freelance): he was the author
of almost all the covers of "Albi della Rosa", also, and of some other
books (some "Topolino", some pocket-book). He is also the writer of thre
Intermezzos: it is a pity that his drawning is so crude that makes the
Intermezzos almost not readable...
Perego did the Intermezzos till n.67 (I think) of the second series of
pocket books (the first runs 71 issues from 1957 to 1971 in a higly
irregular schedule, the current series is a monthly, with more than 200
issues so far), when Mondadori decided to stop them: from that issues, the
pocket books became simply anthologies of previously published stories,
losing, IMHO, most of his appeal...
A last thing: all the other European editions of pocket books are simply
reprintings of the Italian edition (same cover and all), comprising the
French and German edition Per and David were referring to.
And this is for Harry: I talked to Becattini, and he told me that he will
send you personally a copy of the Index (or maybe I'll send you a copy,
with all the other stuff I have to send you). And this is for all of you:
who sent money to "Al fumetto Club", and never received anything? Write me,
and I'll try to do something...
Bye for now,
Fabio (no, NOT the model...)
================================================================
Fabio Gadducci Dip. di Informatica
Home: +39-50-541725 Universita` di Pisa
Off.: +39-50-887268 Corso Italia 40, 56100 PISA (ITALY)
FAX: +39-50-887226 E-mail:gadducci at di.unipi.it
================================================================
>codes' file on ftp. I'll make the discussion public in case anyone knows
>more.
>
>The debate is about the 'intermezzos' in the European 'pocket books'
>between the Italian stories. There are pages between the various
>stories making the entire contents of a book one story.
>
>David wrote to me:
>
>> I now have decisive proof that
>> the Intermezzos in older pocket books are French -- I have a French
>> pocket book from the late 1960s. It contains Scarpa's "MM as the
>> Emperor of Calisota," as well as some other stories... The issue has
>> the intermezzos, well prior to when the Germans published
>> pocket-books.
>
>And Per wrote, that he thought (or knew?) that the intermezzos are
>Italian, he even knew the name of the artist (?)
>
>Could you give us some more information, Per? (Or someone else?)
>
Ahem...
As the owner of the whole collection of Italian pocket-books since 1957, I
can assure you that the author was Italian. It was Giuseppe Perego, one of
the few contributors to Disney books who were employed by Mondadori (all
the others, included Scarpa and Carpi, worked freelance): he was the author
of almost all the covers of "Albi della Rosa", also, and of some other
books (some "Topolino", some pocket-book). He is also the writer of thre
Intermezzos: it is a pity that his drawning is so crude that makes the
Intermezzos almost not readable...
Perego did the Intermezzos till n.67 (I think) of the second series of
pocket books (the first runs 71 issues from 1957 to 1971 in a higly
irregular schedule, the current series is a monthly, with more than 200
issues so far), when Mondadori decided to stop them: from that issues, the
pocket books became simply anthologies of previously published stories,
losing, IMHO, most of his appeal...
A last thing: all the other European editions of pocket books are simply
reprintings of the Italian edition (same cover and all), comprising the
French and German edition Per and David were referring to.
And this is for Harry: I talked to Becattini, and he told me that he will
send you personally a copy of the Index (or maybe I'll send you a copy,
with all the other stuff I have to send you). And this is for all of you:
who sent money to "Al fumetto Club", and never received anything? Write me,
and I'll try to do something...
Bye for now,
Fabio (no, NOT the model...)
================================================================
Fabio Gadducci Dip. di Informatica
Home: +39-50-541725 Universita` di Pisa
Off.: +39-50-887268 Corso Italia 40, 56100 PISA (ITALY)
FAX: +39-50-887226 E-mail:gadducci at di.unipi.it
================================================================
Andrew Krieg 5-5379
Disney-comics digest #253.
Message 210 -
1994-02-28 at 17:04:53
>Michael T. Gilbert has done a few Mickey's (he and Janet collaborated in
>many cases) as well as a couple Duck stories, and they're quite good, and
>already worked out in American idiom. As I remarked on before, this sort of
>thing oughta breathe a little fresh air into an admittedly somewhat stale US
>Disney comics environment.
Did Michael pencil any of these stories, or did he and his wife just write
them?
>many cases) as well as a couple Duck stories, and they're quite good, and
>already worked out in American idiom. As I remarked on before, this sort of
>thing oughta breathe a little fresh air into an admittedly somewhat stale US
>Disney comics environment.
Did Michael pencil any of these stories, or did he and his wife just write
them?