Second-Longest-Running BA Series?

[Warlord]

Still kinda amazes me that Warlord lasted 133 issues.

 

(thumbs u Started out very strong and kind of lost it's way after 20 or so issues...

 

Jim

 

[FlyingDonut]

Still kinda amazes me that Warlord lasted 133 issues.

 

(thumbs u Started out very strong and kind of lost it's way after 20 or so issues...

 

Jim

 

 

Issue 16. When Grell started to miss deadlines and the inking was done by Vinnie Colletta.

[joe_collector]

Defenders: 1972-1986

 

Warlord lasted until 1988.

 

I also reread the editorial, and it stated that Warlord was the ONLY post-1970 comic from Marvel/DC to still be published in 1988. There was no notation of a new/spinoff differentiation, and it was clearly meant to state that other than Conan, Warlord was the only BA mainstream comic to reach 1988.

[joe_collector]

Here's a scan:

[MR.COMICBOOK]

Cerebus: 300

Conan: 275

Peter Parker: 263

Warlord: 133

3 of the 4 were non-superheroes. interesting?

[joe_collector]

And 3 of the 4 were directly based on Conan.

[FlyingDonut]

Here's a scan:

 

Well, it simply isn't true - Peter Parker was going on just fine in 1988.

[joe_collector]

I know that, and it's likely what Jimbo said, that they *meant* new characters or concepts, not retreads and spinoffs.

[TupennyConan]

And 3 of the 4 were directly based on Conan.

 

[lookwhoitis]

Cerebus: 300

Conan: 275

Peter Parker: 263

Warlord: 133

 

Wow! I have full runs of Conan and PPSSM and am 5 issues away from completing Cerebus!

 

but I seriously doubt I will be collecting Warlord...

[Marvel 25th-migration]

Here's a scan:

 

Well, it simply isn't true - Peter Parker was going on just fine in 1988.

 

Not to mention Web, New Mutants, X-Factor, West Coast Avengers, Alpha Flight, GI Joe, Transformers....I could go on for a long time here.

 

I get what they were trying to say, but if you're going to go out patting yourself on the back at least get the language right. Who edited that editorial?

 

[TupennyConan]

Here's a scan:

 

Well, it simply isn't true - Peter Parker was going on just fine in 1988.

 

Not to mention Web, New Mutants, X-Factor, West Coast Avengers, Alpha Flight, GI Joe, Transformers....I could go on for a long time here.

 

I get what they were trying to say, but if you're going to go out patting yourself on the back at least get the language right. Who edited that editorial?

 

 

 

 

Wait for it...

[sakaridis]

Here's a scan:

 

Well, it simply isn't true - Peter Parker was going on just fine in 1988.

 

Not to mention Web, New Mutants, X-Factor, West Coast Avengers, Alpha Flight, GI Joe, Transformers....I could go on for a long time here.

 

I get what they were trying to say, but if you're going to go out patting yourself on the back at least get the language right. Who edited that editorial?

 

 

 

 

Wait for it...

 

Actually, I think he's right.

 

The way the editorial is worded, it doesn't exactly mean what the writer shoots for. I didn't catch it before, because I knew what he was trying to say (as we all did), but it's really poorly written. "The only comic launched since 1970" covers EVERY book that published its first issue from January 1970 up to the time the editorial was published.

 

Still, hurray for Warlock. It was a pretty cool book for a number of years...

[joe_collector]

"The only comic launched since 1970" covers EVERY book that published its first issue from January 1970 up to the time the editorial was published.

 

Of course, but like other comments, you realize that's not what the writer intended and that it's to be compared against other similar-era books. Pretty basic stuff, and we could spend decades parsing through some of the garbage posted on here, but people get the gist and move on.

 

But they did miss PPSSM, which is a real error.

[sakaridis]

"The only comic launched since 1970" covers EVERY book that published its first issue from January 1970 up to the time the editorial was published.

 

Of course, but like other comments, you realize that's not what the writer intended and that it's to be compared against other similar-era books. Pretty basic stuff, and we could spend decades parsing through some of the garbage posted on here, but people get the gist and move on.

 

But they did miss PPSSM, which is a real error.

 

(thumbs u

[jjonahjameson1]

"The only comic launched since 1970" covers EVERY book that published its first issue from January 1970 up to the time the editorial was published.

 

Of course, but like other comments, you realize that's not what the writer intended and that it's to be compared against other similar-era books. Pretty basic stuff, and we could spend decades parsing through some of the garbage posted on here, but people get the gist and move on.

 

But they did miss PPSSM, which is a real error.

 

Hmmm...I guess Savage Sword of Conan (1974-1995?) didn't count because a) it was a magazine, and b) it wasn't an 'original concept' publication, much like PPTSS?

 

[joe_collector]

You were right the first time, it was not in consideration (like Heavy Metal, etc.) because it was a magazine.

[awe4one]

"The only comic launched since 1970" covers EVERY book that published its first issue from January 1970 up to the time the editorial was published.

 

Of course, but like other comments, you realize that's not what the writer intended and that it's to be compared against other similar-era books. Pretty basic stuff, and we could spend decades parsing through some of the garbage posted on here, but people get the gist and move on.

 

But they did miss PPSSM, which is a real error.

 

When I read the editorial I thought it was clear they were talking about original characters and not spin-offs...but then again maybe I was reading too much into it.

 

Jim

[joe_collector]

That's was what they *meant* but unlike the "similar era", it's nowhere in there, perceived, intended or otherwise.

[Marvel 25th-migration]

"The only comic launched since 1970" covers EVERY book that published its first issue from January 1970 up to the time the editorial was published.

 

Of course, but like other comments, you realize that's not what the writer intended and that it's to be compared against other similar-era books. Pretty basic stuff, and we could spend decades parsing through some of the garbage posted on here, but people get the gist and move on.

 

But they did miss PPSSM, which is a real error.

 

Technically, they missed dozens of books. But if you only want to include books started in the 70s that made it to 1988 they also missed Conan. So that's 2 'similar era books' that meet their (implied) criteria they forgot. But the Marvel Star Wars series and Defenders had similar runs.

 

I'm not in the business of 'realizing' the intentions of professional writers. I'll leave that to you and George Lucas fanboys. Professional writers should be able to make their intentions clear. Pretty basic stuff.