Batman By Neal Adams TP Book 01

[oasis1313]

The beautiful thing about the Neal Adams Batman is seeing how he (and his fellow inkers, like Dick Giordano) arrive at the version of Batman that existed in 1973. By changing the art (and not just the pencils, but the inking, lettering and colouring), it's impossible for modern readers to see how the Adams Batman developed (without buying the back issues, which are often very expensive). It's one of the big accomplishments of Adams as the Batman artist and, by changing those pages, he completely erases what made his progress so exciting.

And Dick Giordano was such a great penciller, too. He drew the most beautiful characters.

[shaboo]

The chronological Batman omnibuses (and subsequent TPB's) will eventually reach this point but not before they have reprinted ALL the golden and silver age issues.

We REALLY, REALLY need Bronze Age omnibuses from Batman and Superman before 2030! Otherwise half of the potential readers will have died before!

[Ishmael]

We REALLY, REALLY need Bronze Age omnibuses from Batman and Superman before 2030! Otherwise half of the potential readers will have died before!

Yeah, I agree. The whole waiting 'til the Golden Age is completed before doing the Silver and then Bronze Age is foolish. I want all of them, but really want to see the Bronze Age stories. By the time they get to them I may not have the interest or money (given where I"ll be financially at that point in my life).

DC is leaving money on the table by doing it this way.

[oasis1313]

Yeah, I agree. The whole waiting 'til the Golden Age is completed before doing the Silver and then Bronze Age is foolish. I want all of them, but really want to see the Bronze Age stories. By the time they get to them I may not have the interest or money (given where I"ll be financially at that point in my life).

DC is leaving money on the table by doing it this way.

That's why it's nice to be a tiny tiny little corner of Warner Brothers who don't care what you do in the publishing world because it's the trademarks and copyrights that bring in the big money. Like I've said, how cool to have a gig where you get big paychecks and no responsibility.

[Lightning Rider]

Man that bites. Should I just bite the bullet and get the corrected trades? Because otherwise, I think I'd just never read what was perhaps the most defining batman run of all time. Please guide me.

[oasis1313]

Man that bites. Should I just bite the bullet and get the corrected trades? Because otherwise, I think I'd just never read what was perhaps the most defining batman run of all time. Please guide me.

I've pondered what to do about that, too. I have a local book-bindery service and I have had comics collections bound before (that I knew were never going to be trade collections) just to avoid losing track of all the floppies. The paper that the Neal Adams run was initially printed on is not the finest quality paper; I've found books from that era with crumbly pages. Thus you're faced with a choice: Do you buy the garish trade or do you collect expensive back-issues on shoddy paper but WITH the lovely color work of that period? I would say that until DC re-issues Adams artwork properly, bite the bullet and buy the trades. That way you can re-read them at will without worrying about air/moisture/light exposure to the original floppies. I would buy all the trades again in a black and white format you get a cleaner look at the art.

[Lightning Rider]

I've pondered what to do about that, too. I have a local book-bindery service and I have had comics collections bound before (that I knew were never going to be trade collections) just to avoid losing track of all the floppies. The paper that the Neal Adams run was initially printed on is not the finest quality paper; I've found books from that era with crumbly pages. Thus you're faced with a choice: Do you buy the garish trade or do you collect expensive back-issues on shoddy paper but WITH the lovely color work of that period? I would say that until DC re-issues Adams artwork properly, bite the bullet and buy the trades. That way you can re-read them at will without worrying about air/moisture/light exposure to the original floppies. I would buy all the trades again in a black and white format you get a cleaner look at the art.

Thanks for the advice. That's a point I didn't consider.

Yeah I think I'm just going to get the trades then. They're more complete than the omnibus right? Adams didn't do all of O'Neils artwork from what I remember reading.

[Jim Kelly]

I would at least say you should try to find scans online of the original comics. Maybe not a whole story, but enough samples that you can get a good idea of what the Neal Adams art was like.

Denny O'Neil and Frank Robbins shared the bulk of the writing on Batman in the early 1970s. Neal Adams was stretched thin working on other things for DC and Marvel (plus doing cover art), so between 1968 and 1974, he averaged only about five Batman stories a year (including team-ups). The main solo Batman artists were Irv Novick and Bob Brown--with Jim Aparo being the B&B artist.

[oasis1313]

Thanks for the advice. That's a point I didn't consider.

Yeah I think I'm just going to get the trades then. They're more complete than the omnibus right? Adams didn't do all of O'Neils artwork from what I remember reading.

One thing I DON'T like about the omnibuses is their weight. They're very thick, usually hardcover, and you end up fidgeting around trying to find a comfortable place to curl up with an heavy, bulky, unwieldy book. I like the trades better for that reason.

[Lightning Rider]

One thing I DON'T like about the omnibuses is their weight. They're very thick, usually hardcover, and you end up fidgeting around trying to find a comfortable place to curl up with an heavy, bulky, unwieldy book. I like the trades better for that reason.

That's definitely a good point. Sorry if I missed it but are the trades more complete than the omnibus since it's not restricted to Neal Adams?

[oasis1313]

That's definitely a good point. Sorry if I missed it but are the trades more complete than the omnibus since it's not restricted to Neal Adams?

It depends. I have a couple New Teen Titans omnibus collections and they're total 10-pound clunkers. It seems best to just put them on a tabletop and read them that way like Guttenberg Bibles. I've recently bought some X-Men omnibus collections in softcover and they're a bit easier to manage than hardcover (AND they take up a little less room), but they're not as thick. During the transition between Robin/Dick-->Nightwing and the first introduction of Tim Dreck, DC released a black-and-white portfolio of George Perez covers from the run, and they are just beautiful. There are a lot of Perez art details (I believe he inked his own pencils for these) that aren't apparent in the colored comics or trades. Marvel used to occasionally issues trades of "Visionaries"--collections from noteworthy artists. I think a black-and-white TP from Neal Adams Bat-Era would be to die for.

[Lightning Rider]

It depends. I have a couple New Teen Titans omnibus collections and they're total 10-pound clunkers. It seems best to just put them on a tabletop and read them that way like Guttenberg Bibles. I've recently bought some X-Men omnibus collections in softcover and they're a bit easier to manage than hardcover (AND they take up a little less room), but they're not as thick. During the transition between Robin/Dick-->Nightwing and the first introduction of Tim Dreck, DC released a black-and-white portfolio of George Perez covers from the run, and they are just beautiful. There are a lot of Perez art details (I believe he inked his own pencils for these) that aren't apparent in the colored comics or trades. Marvel used to occasionally issues trades of "Visionaries"--collections from noteworthy artists. I think a black-and-white TP from Neal Adams Bat-Era would be to die for.

I meant specifically to that era of Batman. I don't mind the clinkyness for Ross/Dini's book but that has its own feel to it. I was just wondering if, to read the most of O'Neil's run as I can, it's more complete to buy the trades than the Omnibus, since the Omnibus will only feature Adams work.

[oasis1313]

I meant specifically to that era of Batman. I don't mind the clinkyness for Ross/Dini's book but that has its own feel to it. I was just wondering if, to read the most of O'Neil's run as I can, it's more complete to buy the trades than the Omnibus, since the Omnibus will only feature Adams work.

I would say that O'Neil's writing is not on par with Adams' artwork, and I would look strictly for Adams' work. There were a lot of standalone stories back then so you don't need a dozen clunkers to concentrate a big cross-over event in one place. I have a lot of the trades, but O'Neil didn't write all of them. Neal Adams did some breathtaking on other books, too, notably Green Lantern/Green Arrow and the Uncanny X-Men. A particular favorite of mine is a standalone story from that era called "Night of the Reaper" for the sole reason that the expression Adams drew on the face of the "bad guy" at the end (won't tell you more in case you haven't seen it) was utterly heart-wrenching.

[Jim Kelly]

You're missing out on some great stories if you get the books that only feature Neal Adams art. The League of Assassins stories, the Man-Bat stories--these had some Adams art but they also had work by the likes of Irv Novick, Bob Brown and Frank Robbins.

At the time, Dennis O'Neil was considered the greatest writer in comics and having him work with Adams was the absolute best that DC could offer. They won awards for their work. But I can see how O'Neil's style was of the period. Just like with Stan Lee--his writing in the 1960s was considered perfection--there's a certain tone to Lee's writing that is hard to take if you're not used to it.

Since comics are created for the moment--and individual titles live or die by their sales figures--I think that a writer or artist has to appeal to the tastes of the time and not worry about how they'll be received fifty years later.

[oasis1313]

You're missing out on some great stories if you get the books that only feature Neal Adams art. The League of Assassins stories, the Man-Bat stories--these had some Adams art but they also had work by the likes of Irv Novick, Bob Brown and Frank Robbins.

At the time, Dennis O'Neil was considered the greatest writer in comics and having him work with Adams was the absolute best that DC could offer. They won awards for their work. But I can see how O'Neil's style was of the period. Just like with Stan Lee--his writing in the 1960s was considered perfection--there's a certain tone to Lee's writing that is hard to take if you're not used to it.

Since comics are created for the moment--and individual titles live or die by their sales figures--I think that a writer or artist has to appeal to the tastes of the time and not worry about how they'll be received fifty years later.

Thanks for reminding me to mention some of the grand old gentlemen. I'm not a big Denny O'Neil fan for several reasons so I tend to set Neal Adams' artwork as a visual storyteller far above O'Neil's scripting. You're right about creators being creatures of their times: I used to cringe whenever Reed would yell, "Somebody's got to carry Sue!" and I'd go, "Dude, her leg isn't broken." But I always get misty when I see Stan cameo in a Marvel movie, and pray he'll be around to do it many more times. I believe there were three Neal Adams trades, 1 through 3, but only #1 appears to be in print now. Otherwise, there is the $100+ omnibus. I pulled out my "Batman in the Seventies" trade, which is nice but extremely limited. I think a black and white omnibus of Adams' artwork would be most welcome.