Things We All Thought We Knew, But We're Wrong 1 1

[pemart1966]

On 8/7/2020 at 4:47 AM, waaaghboss said:

Not really a "we", but id always assumed the last golden age cap story had him blown up on a plane with bucky based on the reprint in cap 400 of avengers 4. 

 

Now I'm not  so sure...

The flashback events in Avengers 4 were not part of the Golden Age Captain America stories.  The flashback was an effort to explain the time gap between CA's last war time appearance and his first silver age appearance.

Edited August 17, 2020 by pemart1966

[Electricmastro]

2 hours ago, valiantman said:

Seems strange to list all these books for Uncle Scrooge and leave Four Color #178 off the list just because he isn't on the cover. 1947 is signifcantly earlier than all these 1950s books.

Reminds me of how much enthusiasts tend to considerably focus more on covers than interiors, like with Wonder Woman’s case. I suspect that even the otherwise iconic Action Comics #1 would be talked about much less had Superman appeared on Action Comics #2’s cover instead of #1’s, in spite of #1 being his first appearance all the same.

Edited August 17, 2020 by Electricmastro

[valiantman]

28 minutes ago, Electricmastro said:

3 hours ago, valiantman said:

Seems strange to list all these books for Uncle Scrooge and leave Four Color #178 off the list just because he isn't on the cover. 1947 is signifcantly earlier than all these 1950s books.

Reminds me of how much enthusiasts tend to considerably focus more on covers than interiors, like with Wonder Woman’s case. I suspect that even the otherwise iconic Action Comics #1 would be talked about much less had Superman appeared on Action Comics #2’s cover instead of #1’s, in spite of #1 being his first appearance all the same.

It is an interesting discussion, particularly when the first cover appearance occurs immediately (Hulk #181 vs. Hulk #180) or several years later (Uncle Scrooge introduced in 1947, first cover in 1951).

[Electricmastro]

7 minutes ago, valiantman said:

It is an interesting discussion, particularly when the first cover appearance occurs immediately (Hulk #181 vs. Hulk #180) or several years later (Uncle Scrooge introduced in 1947, first cover in 1951).

Or even More Fun Comics #73 debuting the widely-known hero known as Aquaman. I suppose his 40s and 50s appearances don’t get as much fanfare since none of the comics from that time featured him on the cover, not until 1960.

[bpc3qh]

5 hours ago, Electricmastro said:

Reminds me of how much enthusiasts tend to considerably focus more on covers than interiors, like with Wonder Woman’s case. I suspect that even the otherwise iconic Action Comics #1 would be talked about much less had Superman appeared on Action Comics #2’s cover instead of #1’s, in spite of #1 being his first appearance all the same.

So I think this is a fascinating question, particularly because of how iconic Action #1 is (and, for that matter, how so many of the early Superman covers are particularly iconic). It's interesting that the two D.C. characters who endured the best from the get-go had awesome debut covers, and basically every iconic SA character also had an iconic first appearance cover. It also seems like, generally, Batman and Superman just had way more awesome covers than any of the other GA D.C. characters who faded over the course of the 1940s.

Then again, is it a chick and egg thing? Are the characters only iconic b/c of the covers, vice versa, or a little of both? (Dr. Strange is an obvious SA exception where the first appearance isn't an iconic cover). Is it just easier to create an awesome cover for Batman or Superman v. Wonder Woman or Jay Garrick or Alan Scott?

[pemart1966]

...that all of the Golden Age Batman stories signed by Bob Kane were drawn by Bob Kane.

I remember as a kid thinking "Why does Bob Kane draw so differently from story to story?"  "Why doesn't he just stick with, what I would much later discover was,  the Sprang style??  That's the best one!" 

[valiantman]

12 hours ago, bpc3qh said:

So I think this is a fascinating question, particularly because of how iconic Action #1 is (and, for that matter, how so many of the early Superman covers are particularly iconic). It's interesting that the two D.C. characters who endured the best from the get-go had awesome debut covers, and basically every iconic SA character also had an iconic first appearance cover. It also seems like, generally, Batman and Superman just had way more awesome covers than any of the other GA D.C. characters who faded over the course of the 1940s.

Then again, is it a chick and egg thing? Are the characters only iconic b/c of the covers, vice versa, or a little of both? (Dr. Strange is an obvious SA exception where the first appearance isn't an iconic cover). Is it just easier to create an awesome cover for Batman or Superman v. Wonder Woman or Jay Garrick or Alan Scott?

Superman was lucky to have the Action Comics #1 cover and then no other covers for six issues.  That has kept the majority of Superman's "earliest appearance" value in Action Comics #1.

Compare that to Detective #27 which has a great Batman cover image, then Detective #29, then Detective #31, then Detective #33.  There are several great books in the first six issues of Batman which have another awesome Batman cover.

In my opinion, that is one of the reasons that Detective #27 will always be "behind" Action Comics #1 in value.  "Earliest appearance" Batman dollars are spread across several quality books, while "Earliest appearance" Superman dollars are highly concentrated in Action #1.

[Electricmastro]

That the “Baron” signed in various Lev Gleason comics was thought to have been Hanna-Barbera animator Tom Baron, but turned out to be movie director Allen Baron:

https://pappysgoldenage.blogspot.com/2008/12/number-442-boxing-day-noir-americans.html