Camelot 3000

[Enigmatic Undead]

The original maxi-series was way ahead of it's time in many respects. I thought this series was a lot of fun and the Brian Bolland artwork is fantastic. A companion piece/sequel to Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur (as Mike W. Barr stated at the end of the first issue) it combines Arthurian knights and futuristic sci-fi works incredibly well.

[Billy Batson]

I've been meaning to read this.

[foxley]

I really enjoyed it. A solid knowledge of the Arthurian mythos will help you pick up some of the subtleties.

[Enigmatic Undead]

Terry Austin takes over inks with issue #7 and I think he did some really spectacular work.

[FanboyStranger]

I have something of a love/hate relationship with Camelot 3000. The first time I read it, I thought it was spectacular, and Bolland's art truly blew my mind. The second time, I was less than enthralled with a lot of heavy handedness, although I still loved the Bolland art. It's odd that everytime I re-read it, I get something new, but I don't always have a positive reaction to what I find (which maybe says more about me than the work itself). I find it a frustrating work in that regard-- it's certainly quality work and a great example of the changing tone in comics at the time, but it's very much a flawed classic, in my opinion. It's something that everyone should read at some point, but beyond the art, I don't feel it's a great comic-- just a very good one.

[Rheged]

I have something of a love/hate relationship with Camelot 3000. The first time I read it, I thought it was spectacular, and Bolland's art truly blew my mind. The second time, I was less than enthralled with a lot of heavy handedness, although I still loved the Bolland art. It's odd that everytime I re-read it, I get something new, but I don't always have a positive reaction to what I find (which maybe says more about me than the work itself). I find it a frustrating work in that regard-- it's certainly quality work and a great example of the changing tone in comics at the time, but it's very much a flawed classic, in my opinion. It's something that everyone should read at some point, but beyond the art, I don't feel it's a great comic-- just a very good one.

Interesting. I loved it when it came out, also, but I can't remember the last time I re-read it. Can you recall anything specifically that you noticed upon re-reading, that you didn't care for?

[Sandy Hausler]

I really enjoyed it. A solid knowledge of the Arthurian mythos will help you pick up some of the subtleties.

I loved it as well, but after decades the repeated delays between issues (and REAL LONG delays -- almost a year at one point) still pisses me off. Only Kevin Smith ever came close to that kind of delay (His Daredevil -- Target was never completed to my recollection and his Spider-Man/Black Cat team up was not completed for a REAL LONG time.)

Sandy Hausler

[Fan of Bronze]

I loved it as well, but after decades the repeated delays between issues (and REAL LONG delays -- almost a year at one point) still pisses me off. Only Kevin Smith ever came close to that kind of delay (His Daredevil -- Target was never completed to my recollection and his Spider-Man/Black Cat team up was not completed for a REAL LONG time.)

Sandy Hausler

Straczynski had a similar gap in publication of his The Twelve.

[ROM Spaceknight]

Thanks for the reminder about this great series, everyone. I read Camelot 3000 when it was released back in the '80's, and thought it was amazing - superb story & truly stunning artwork by Bolland, made all the more impressive by printing this on the then-new high-quality paper.

I haven't read the series since it was released, and definitely want to buy a collected edition. So, which do you all think is better - the 2013 Trade that came out last summer, or the 2008 HC? I would think the 2013 Trade may have better reproduction only because it's newer, but since I haven't seen any of these collections I have no way to be sure...Thanks in advance for any info. on this.