Thursday, 23 February 2023

February 24th, 1973 - Marvel UK, 50 years ago this week.

Thanks to Charlie Horse 47 and Killdumpster for their sponsorship of this post, via the magic of Patreon
***

Holy smokes, what magnificence is Marvel UK going to fling at us, this week?

The Mighty World of Marvel #21, Dr Doom vs the Fantastic Four

It really is no fun being Bruce Banner. No sooner is the Gamma-soaked brainbox back from his jaunt to Asia than he's jailed as a traitor.

Still, not to worry, as the President - knowing his secret, thanks to Rick "Blabbermouth" Jones - sets him free.

Not that he's at liberty for long, because that's when the Leader's army of Humanoids promptly captures him.

Back in New York, the origin of Daredevil continues apace. This time, getting a whole 10 pages devoted to it.

And, in another part of New York, Doctor Doom manages to convince the rest of the Fantastic Four that he's Mr Fantastic.

Then again, Alicia Masters managed to convince the rest of the Fantastic Four that she was Sue Storm.

They really aren't very good at recognising their own friends, are they?

Spider-Man Comics Weekly #2

I do believe it's the debut of the deadliest team of villains ever to set foot in a comic book.

That's right. The Enforcers are in town and, apparently, they're out to shake down Betty Brant.

Not that I know just what's meant by the phrase, "Shake down Betty Brant." It's just a plot description for the story, that I got from the internet.

But, whatever it all means, it would seem the Big Man - AKA Fred - is involved.

However, far far away from all that, Don Blake joins a medical mission to a civil-war-torn South American country, only for the leader of the communist faction to order an attack on the doctors.

Can our hero save his colleagues without giving away his secret identity?

19 comments:

dangermash said...

And here it is: my first ever Spider-Man comic, unless you count the odd issue of Pow or Fantastic or whatever with only two pages of story that I don’t remember, probably being too young to understand anything. Although I must have read the amazing Fantasy #15 story at some point because that's all indelibly etched into my brain. I was bought this issue, then issue 3, then was not bought it again until another run somewhere around #16-21. I was gutted to miss out on Doc Ock unmasking Spider-Man in #4. I don’t think it was until #33 that I was bought it every week, and then I was a regular until the advent of Dez.

I was 8 when I got this comic and thought it was amazing. And every year on The Apprentice, Lord Sugar seems to set the candidates a task to create a comic for 8-year olds and I get angry when they come up with little Jimmy and his magic chair that transports him all over the world to have adventures and learn about history and geography. Were these people never 8?

Anonymous said...

Your first Spidey comic was SMCW #2, dangermash? Oooh, so close to being in on the ground floor...

Would it be ok if little Jimmy had a magic chair that taught him physics, and how to play chess?
Just kidding - I completely agree, its surprising how sentimental and patronizing people can be about kids. I'd actually say its better to pitch comics - or books, tv programmes or whatever - intended for 8 year olds at an audience a few years older. Because a, you'll probably underestimate most of them anyway, and b, it gives them something they can grow into and stick with.
Thats one of the things Marvel got right, from around the mid-60s on (although they made the mistake of neglecting younger readers with the arrival of the direct market).

-sean

Anonymous said...

Steve, poor facial recognition seems obligatory in the world super-heroics.
I reckon I could identify the people I know if they were in, say, a Batman mask. Lois Lane on the other hand couldn't even recognize Superman when he had glasses on!

There are communists in Thor this week? Huh. Did the editor of SMCW not get the memo about American cold war propaganda in the British reprints?

-sean

Anonymous said...

*world of super-heroics
Duh. Apologies for the typo.

-sean

Anonymous said...

I’m mostly shocked at how quickly Little Jimmy Osmond is tumbling down the charts now! At #17 with Long Haired Liverpool Lover, from #9!

Anonymous said...

I also had this week's Spider-man, albeit some years after it was published. I don't recall exactly where it came from but suspect the same cousin from whom I sourced thunderbird 4 (he still doesn't suspect).

Don't worry Charlie(?), something tells me a little rotund kid, looking like a cross between Sammy Lee and Evel Knievel, will be back near the top of the charts soon.

DW

Anonymous said...

Alicia's a red-head to convince her team-mates she's Sue Storm.

Also, is the Enforcers the prototype for every subsequent supervillain team?

Phillip

Anonymous said...

What should we make of the New Seekers premiering in the chart at #27 with Pinball Wizard barely 3 years after Tommy /The Who??? One hit wonders??? Charles

Anonymous said...

The New Seekers, one hit wonders? Was it not them who did 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing'?

-sean

McSCOTTY said...

New Seekers had 2 number 1 hits in the UK "I'd like to teach the world to sing" and " You won't find another fool like me" my mum and dad loved the latter and played it a lot . They had a few top 10 hits in the UK and worldwide so not really a one hit wonder band. No idea why they chose to cover "Pinball Wizard" unless it was to preempt \ make money of the film in 1975 that would have been in production or discussed around mid to late 1973.???

Anonymous said...

Phil-

I woulda thought the Frightful Four were the original Marvel supervillain team, but I overcame my natural-born laziness and looked it up (for once) and the Enforcers came out a year before, in 1964.
Not what I would call an auspicious debut for a time-honored tradition!
I would guess the ORIGINAL supervillain team in all comics woulda been the Injustice Society. (1947)

On the subject of supervillains, my curiosity got the better of me and I checked out the U-tubes to see Modok as he appeared in the latest Ant Man movie. Yeesh.
It just looks dumb. Without his funky mask on, he looks like a giant baby, not scary. And he's really kind of an idiot in that movie. I don't if you can make a movie version of Modok that doesn't look stupid, but does he gotta BE stupid, too?
That's his whole deal! Why have a giant head if you're not smart!

M.P.

Matthew McKinnon said...

MP:

I haven’t seen it either but a Google search turned this article up -

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/modok-corey-stoll-ant-man-quantumania-marvel-1235534305/

- and the costume and mask look OK to me…?

Anonymous said...

Oh, that was MODOK in the Ant Man trailer then? Eh.

Also, I see Adam Warlock is in the one for GotG 3 (I am always up on the latest developments!) Not convinced by him either, but then the films aren't for me anyway.

-sean

Anonymous said...

M.P. - Yes, why can't Marvel films comprehend how idiotic MODOK would look on the big screen? I mean, don't they do trial screenings, in front of sample audiences, to gauge how the public will react? That's been done as long ago as when Humphrey Bogart & Lauren Bacall were starring in films.

The fact that (largely) disembodied heads look silly - let alone giant heads - is why the Mighty Boosh (admittedly a weird comedy that's hard to understand) character Tony Harrison exists:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Mighty+Boosh+%2B+Tony+Harrison&rlz=1C1TEUA_enGB467GB467&oq=Mighty+Boosh+%2B+Tony+Harrison&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30i625l3j0i22i30j0i22i30i625l2j0i390.10572j1j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:d8f4ea67,vid:5WipL4gUveY

Incidentally, Moorcock's intonations in interviews occasionally sound a bit like Tony Harrison (but only very occasionally!)

As regards supervillain teams, I think the Frightful Four were a bit more developed. They had some daft names too, but not as bad as "Fancy Dan" !

I don't mind Marvel films making a mockery of certain characters, but Adam Warlock should be left out of it.

Phillip

Anonymous said...

It would appear West Ham have actually won, and hammered Forest. Just as DW stopped getting getting up in the morning...

Now why couldn't they do that against Spurs?

-sean

Anonymous said...

Given it was the leisurely 1am game, I gave it a watch. Not sure what West Ham were thinking, tactically, as they kept kicking the ball towards the Forest goal. Luckily a couple hit the post but inevitably four went in. Worse still , there were several times when the easy backwards pass was on and they stupidly played the ball forward. The strikers also need to be reminded of their tactics because there were times when they ran away from the Forest defenders. You don't achieve stodgy, goalless performances with that kind of madness...

DW

Anonymous said...

If they don't sort themselves out, they'll avoid relegation.

-sean

Anonymous said...

Darn! I didnt see a Westham win! They’re so elusive this year!

Anonymous said...

Never mind that now, Anon (Charlie presumably) - the important thing is that Celtic are two up against Rangers.

-sean