Keskustelujen arkisto

If memory serves, "Mickey and Donald" became "Donald and Mickey" because the Duck was far more popular in comics than Mickey. As to the third change and rebooting at issue 1, ...I don't remember. I do remember that I wish I had hung onto my boxes and boxes of old Gladstones/Disney Comics/first few Gemstones. Oh, well...

Quote from user: Roger NorthMaybe Gladstone thought it would be more politically correct if they change the title from Donald and Mickey to Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse.
But what's politically incorrect about "Donald and Mickey"?

Boy, "politically correct" becomes more and more of a meaningless buzzword every day.

Quote from user: DebbieIf memory serves, "Mickey and Donald" became "Donald and Mickey" because the Duck was far more popular in comics than Mickey.
Didn't Gladstone say that during their Series I run, Mickey Mouse was their highest-selling title? As such, I thought it was strange when they chose not to reinstate the book for Series II. It was also unfortunate that Mickey Mouse Adventures got dropped after the Disney Comics implosion ... surely they could have filled the title with enough classic content to justify its continuation. The new material in that title wasn't bad, either, and fit well with the classic continuity. Mickey Mouse's claim to be a bona fide part of the "Core Four" is a little less solid than those of the Duck books and WDC&S, since for significant portions of recent history (post-implosion Disney Comics and Gladstone Series II) the title was not being published in any form; in contrast, Donald Duck (or its "Adventures" companion) existed for all but when Gladstone Series II and later Gemstone shelved non-prestige books.

Its fluctuated moreso since those days

Sometimes Donald will be the top seller, sometimes Mickey will bomb.
Sometimes Mickey will be the top seller, sometimes Donald will falter.
Sometimes Donald will take precedence.
Sometimes Mickey will take precedence.

In the Gladstone II days, it was Donald that took the top. In the Boom days, it was actually Mickey. As better Mickey stories have been created over the years it just sorta teeter tottered I guess. A pushing by Disney and the most current regimes in recent years to finally try to produce better Mickey material also helps. Say what you will about Boom but Mickey was all over their books and it actually worked in spots. Sales in the old days were certainly a factor but time has blurred the lines a little more.

Sorry. I'm thinking of Gemstone....
I THINK?!?!
Now I've confused myself and dont remember how that sold compared to Donald either. See what you did? LOL

Quote from user: Fritz BaughDisney's Donald Duck Adventures was the only title that started at #1 in 1990 to survive the "Disney Implosion" Mickey Mouse Adventures didn't. I can only assume that DDAD was selling a lot better than MMA.
While I understand the sentiment behind the previously proposed definition of the term "Core Four", i.e., the four Disney comics titles that have survived through every recent publisher's run, if one wanted to be nitpicky, one could argue that it should really should be the "Core Two plus Semi-Core Two", since Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck have been suspended at multiple points, most unambiguously by Gladstone II and Gemstone when they decided to go with prestige-only lines. If one wanted to take the nitpickiness further, one could also argue that neither title existed during the Disney Comics run (although their "Adventures" counterparts did).

When Gladstone I (who published all of the Core Four throughout their run) ended, Donald was the highest-numbered (279), Mickey second (256), and Scrooge dead last (242). Editorial and commercial decisions by subsequent publishers have now put Scrooge far in the lead.

Quote from user: Fritz BaughThe change to DDMM was probably to make a last attempt to goose sales with an all new #1. Since DDMM was cancelled after issue 7, it looks like it didn't work.
I don't know ... that somehow doesn't sound like Gladstone.