Why was the cover to Marvel Collectors' Item Classics #19 a new Jack Kirby production? All previous MCIC covers had been reprints of the classic Fantastic Four comics they were taken from, but not this one. This one has a new rendition of the classic 1964 Fantastic Four #27 cover. Was the original artwork misplaced?
I'm not sure which one I prefer, as I frankly like aspects of both. The original Kirby art with its brisk Chic Stone inks has great energy and an almost Kabuki feel to the stance of the characters. On the later 1969 revision with John Verpoorten inking the King, the art is more naturalistic (as Kirby ever got that is) and has plenty of energy if somewhat less drama.
Why the change?
Rip Off
I think with Subby being hot at the time they wanted to give him a more Gene Colan look...note: The flaty top is goner and the shoulders broader and there is a darker overall tone on the figure...I'm betting it was deliberate...not just due to the pencils and inks... I like the FF better in the original cover but Subby's broader more dynamic look fits the period.
ReplyDeleteI hadn't thought of that. That's an interesting notion. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteRip Off
Also, Dr Strange is in his more colourful mystic regalia ( rather than the more sombre outfit in which he made his debut-and one I prefer).
ReplyDeleteAre these Marvel Collectors comics worth buying and reading? I'm not a huge Marvel fan from these years, I'm more a DC guy. But I can score a bunch of these really cheap.
ReplyDelete