I don't really see a reason to think this book won't be a success. This is Fraction's first major superhero comics work since Hawkeye, which was huge. That's a huge selling point.
Printable View
I don't really see a reason to think this book won't be a success. This is Fraction's first major superhero comics work since Hawkeye, which was huge. That's a huge selling point.
[QUOTE=Sam;4405405]I don't really see a reason to think this book won't be a success. This is Fraction's first major superhero comics work since Hawkeye, which was huge. That's a huge selling point.[/QUOTE]
I simply don't like books which star non-superheroes and I know I'm not alone. Other than that, we'll see.
Can’t wait for this! Looks hilarious.
Wait... this is out in July. I was so bummed when I didn't find it today, haha.
I winced when Fraction first came up. Was a big fan until Hawkeye, one of the most important books of the last decade and the one comic I just couldn't stand no matter how I tried (thought Superior Foes was great, though). I've been reluctant to try his work since, but Bendis has had a great start at D.C. and I started feeling like Fraction would, too, before the Leviathan special came out and confirmed it.
[QUOTE=Sam;4405405]I don't really see a reason to think this book won't be a success. This is Fraction's first major superhero comics work since Hawkeye, which was huge. That's a huge selling point.[/QUOTE]
I dont think it'll do amazing sales or anything. Its not a major character, it's going to be a really weird flavor not everyone is going to get, etc. Even the core Super titles only hang around the 40K mark, give or take a few thousand. But I've not doubt Fraction is going to do amazing things with this and I fully expect this to be yet another high-quality book that the majority of people completely miss.
Like most of the best books, this'll do okay but nothing more. That's what I expect, anyway, and I'm sure I'm gonna love it even if I'm the only one buying it!
Funny, in the 1960s SUPERMAN'S PAL, JIMMY OLSEN, was a top ten seller, often in the top five.
[QUOTE=Jim Kelly;4407359]Funny, in the 1960s SUPERMAN'S PAL, JIMMY OLSEN, was a top ten seller, often in the top five.[/QUOTE]
Times have changed quite a bit since the 60s', but we'll see either way in the next few months.
Yeah I mean, by 1970 they had the legendary story of Kirby asking for the lowest seller and getting Jimmy.
[QUOTE=Sam;4405405]I don't really see a reason to think this book won't be a success. This is Fraction's first major superhero comics work since Hawkeye, which was huge. That's a huge selling point.[/QUOTE]
It is for me!
Looks pretty good, not trying to reinvent the wheel or anything, just going with the flow of the character.
Not loving the art, but I can see it growing on me. Otherwise this looks pretty promising.
[QUOTE=Kuwagaton;4408180]Yeah I mean, by 1970 they had the legendary story of Kirby asking for the lowest seller and getting Jimmy.[/QUOTE]
I think that has to be an urban legend--or else Carmine Infantino was lying to Jack.
I'm going by the info provided on [URL="https://www.comichron.com/yearlycomicssales/postaldata.html"]Comichron[/URL] which has postal data for 1960 - 1969. They don't list SUPERMAN'S PAL, JIMMY OLSEN anywhere on the top 50 list for 1969 and this is probably because they don't have any postal statements for that year--although they list SUPERMAN, SUPERBOY and SUPERMAN'S GIRL FRIEND, LOIS LANE as 2, 3 and 4, respectively, with ARCHIE being number 1. But for 1968, JIMMY OLSEN is in 7th place and for 1967 he's in 6th place--so it seems unlikely his sales had dropped that much by 1969.
And speaking for myself, I always associated Jimmy with Archie. It's also funny that the number 1 comic for 1966 - 1969, according to Chomicron, was also my top choice in each year. BATMAN in 1966 and 1967, SUPERMAN in 1968 and ARCHIE in 1969. I'm so average.
I think Jack Kirby was mainly interested in not putting someone else out of a job. It happened that the regular artist on Jimmy's book had been Pete Costanza but he suffered a stroke and couldn't draw anymore. So there was no artist for that book. The amazing thing is that Costanza having lost the use of his right hand now taught himself to do art with his left hand and went on to produce hundreds of oil paintings after his stroke.
[QUOTE=Jim Kelly;4409032]I think Jack Kirby was mainly interested in not putting someone else out of a job. It happened that the regular artist on Jimmy's book had been Pete Costanza but he suffered a stroke and couldn't draw anymore. So there was no artist for that book. The amazing thing is that Costanza having lost the use of his right hand now taught himself to do art with his left hand and went on to produce hundreds of oil paintings after his stroke.[/QUOTE]
That’s amazing. Didn’t Howard Porter recently go through something similar? Crazy what people can achieve through willpower and hard work.
Yeah and honestly, I think Porter is better with his second hand.
[QUOTE=Jim Kelly;4408778]I think that has to be an urban legend--or else Carmine Infantino was lying to Jack.
[/QUOTE]
I don't have the Fourth World omnibus to see how he phrased it, but the story was perpetuated by Mark Evanier and he's a very strong source when it comes to Kirby. It probably more about the job, but I don't think the sales part was out of thin air.