Warren Magazine Reading Club! 7 7

[FoggyNelson]

On 12/25/2022 at 1:00 AM, Axe Elf said:

CREEPY #18 - January 1968

According to the Warren Magazine Index...

Warren’s Dark Age

18. cover: Vic Prezo (Jan. 1968)

1) Creepy’s Loathsome Lore: Giant Man-Apes! [Archie Goodwin/Roy G. Krenkel] 1p [frontis] reprinted from Creepy #9 (June 1966)

2) Mountain Of The Monster Gods! [Ron White/Roger Brand] 8p

3) The Rescue Of The Morning Maid! [Raymond Marais/Pat Boyette & Rocco Mastroserio] 10p [art is credited solely to Mastroserio.]

4) Act, Three! [Johnny Craig] 8p

5) Footsteps Of Frankenstein! [Archie Goodwin/Reed Crandall] 8p reprinted from Eerie #2 (Mar. 1966)

6) Out Of Her Head! [Clark Dimond & Terry Bisson/Jack Sparling] 8p

Notes: Editor: James Warren, although Clark Dimond states that both this and Eerie were ghost edited during this time by an editor friend of Jim Warren’s at Gold Key.  This came out a month late but, actually, isn’t too bad of an issue.  The amount of content vs. ads was clearly down but the new material here was quite good.  Raymond Marais’ story was easily the best story so it’s too bad he only wrote one other -----script for Warren.  He did do quite a number of stories for DC’s mystery books.  The Boyette/Mastroserio art team was a good combo as well.  Most of the stories were leftovers from the Goodwin Era since Warren had initiated a freeze on buying new stories or art until his finances became less shaky.  However, the Dimond/Bisson was purchased by the nameless Gold Key editor before the freeze took place.  The headless woman named Rachel in that story was based on Dimond’s fiancé!  Terry Bisson would edit the Warren rival Web Of Horror in 1969-1970 and later would become a major award-winning science fiction writer.  Cover artist Vic Prezio had done a number of covers for Famous Monsters Of Filmland and would be the main cover artist during the Dark Age.  Future comic writer Tony Isabella sent in a letter stating he “was less than wildly enthusiastic about Tom Sutton’s art while still noting that he was a talented newcomer”.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And perhaps the first sign that things were getting tight at Warren Publishing is the fact that for the first month in two years--since December of 1965--there was no magazine published in December of 1967!  And so we are straight on into January of 1968...

I always thought the "CREEPY JAN. #18" in the upper left box on the cover looked really funky on this issue--like someone had hand-lettered it with a Sharpie rather than being printed by typeset.  I guess now I can see that it's because of the change in editors.

And a lot more is changing too.  We have a new cover artist, and new writers and artists on the inside as well.  There's another oddly-punctuated Johnny Craig piece as well.  I think maybe I read some of Terry Bisson's science fiction back in my high school days.  I wouldn't know who Tony Isabella is.

So there are some things to look forward to for me, despite being a rather abbreviated issue with a reprint to boot.

You know why they call it "The Dark Ages," don't you?

Because it was knight time...

This is one of the best action covers of the run👍‼️❤️✔️

[OtherEric]

On 1/11/2023 at 6:12 AM, FoggyNelson said:

Never saw a cover looks so bad but structural strong

Now that you say it, neither have I, Foggy.  It's a weird one!

[Axe Elf]

On 1/11/2023 at 8:13 AM, FoggyNelson said:

This is one of the best action covers of the run👍‼️❤️✔️

I don't know if someone pointed it out here or I saw it somewhere else, but I think the cover of CREEPY #18 is the first cover that doesn't have anything to do with any of the stories inside the issue!

But it's kind of cool that it was basically a copy of the Amazing Stories cover that @OtherEric posted.

[Axe Elf]

This has been one of the more visually attractive CREEPY covers for me, and definitely my favorite of Prezio's so far.  I really had no idea that it was supposed to be a leper, though; it looked more like some kind of ghoul or something.  But apparently it represents the leper in the adaptation of Kipling's "Mark of the Beast."  The Johnny Craig artwork was good enough, though there seemed to be a starker contrast than usual--it was pretty much black and white, with sparse use of grayscale textures--maybe it was just that the scanned pages were whiter than usual.

I also thought the -script was quite good, literarily--it sounded like it was penned by an experienced wordsmith--but I didn't really follow the story.  Guy gets drunk, defaces a monkey god statue, gets bit by a leper, starts to turn into a wild animal, the leper is captured and forced to "unbite" him, and he's ok again.  It feels like maybe the adaptation is just too short; perhaps I should try to read the original story sometime, as I am unfamiliar with it, and it probably makes more sense.

"Carmilla" was engaging, as the 20 page length allowed more character and plot development than the usual 6-8 pagers, as this tale interwove three different timelines--and the plays on her name--Carmilla, Mircalla and Millarca--were fun, but I have to wonder how many generations it will be before she runs out of anagrams.

Again, the art by newcomer Bob Jenney was adequate, and the story was ok--although I'm a little unsure about the connection between Carmilla and the blonde girl throughout the generations--and in the dream--and what happened to her after they destroyed Carmilla--but whatever.  It was a time-passer--and there were a lot of flimsy nightgowns involved.

Not much to say about the reprints, other than that I think they both "look" better than the two newer pieces.

I actually remembered Krenkel's Loathsome Lore on mummies this time; who could forget "Mummy's curse?  Many don't even think they can talk!"

The Dear Uncle Creepy page was peppered with "What the heck is going on?-type letters about the reprints and lack of usual artists in CREEPY #18.  Welcome to the Warren Dark Ages, fans!

[The Lions Den]

On 1/12/2023 at 6:05 PM, Axe Elf said:

This has been one of the more visually attractive CREEPY covers for me, and definitely my favorite of Prezio's so far.  I really had no idea that it was supposed to be a leper, though; it looked more like some kind of ghoul or something.  But apparently it represents the leper in the adaptation of Kipling's "Mark of the Beast."  The Johnny Craig artwork was good enough, though there seemed to be a starker contrast than usual--it was pretty much black and white, with sparse use of grayscale textures--maybe it was just that the scanned pages were whiter than usual.

I also thought the --script was quite good, literarily--it sounded like it was penned by an experienced wordsmith--but I didn't really follow the story.  Guy gets drunk, defaces a monkey god statue, gets bit by a leper, starts to turn into a wild animal, the leper is captured and forced to "unbite" him, and he's ok again.  It feels like maybe the adaptation is just too short; perhaps I should try to read the original story sometime, as I am unfamiliar with it, and it probably makes more sense.

"Carmilla" was engaging, as the 20 page length allowed more character and plot development than the usual 6-8 pagers, as this tale interwove three different timelines--and the plays on her name--Carmilla, Mircalla and Millarca--were fun, but I have to wonder how many generations it will be before she runs out of anagrams.

Again, the art by newcomer Bob Jenney was adequate, and the story was ok--although I'm a little unsure about the connection between Carmilla and the blonde girl throughout the generations--and in the dream--and what happened to her after they destroyed Carmilla--but whatever.  It was a time-passer--and there were a lot of flimsy nightgowns involved.

Not much to say about the reprints, other than that I think they both "look" better than the two newer pieces.

I actually remembered Krenkel's Loathsome Lore on mummies this time; who could forget "Mummy's curse?  Many don't even think they can talk!"

The Dear Uncle Creepy page was peppered with "What the heck is going on?-type letters about the reprints and lack of usual artists in CREEPY #18.  Welcome to the Warren Dark Ages, fans!

Yeah, this is kind of a strange issue, but for some reason I find myself liking it. Kind of like being more attracted to the "girl next door" instead of the "beauty queen".

I dunno. Weird.  

[Axe Elf]

On 1/12/2023 at 5:54 PM, The Lions Den said:

Yeah, this is kind of a strange issue, but for some reason I find myself liking it. Kind of like being more attracted to the "girl next door" instead of the "beauty queen".

I dunno. Weird.  

Maybe Uncle Creepy got a witch to cast a Charisma spell on it, which would help explain why its current market price is elevated relative to that of its contemporaries.

[Axe Elf]

EERIE #14 - April 1968

According to the Warren Magazine Index...

14. cover: Vic Prezio (Apr. 1968)

1) Eerie’s Monster Gallery: The Mummy [Archie Goodwin/Wally Wood & Dan Adkins] 1p [frontis]   reprinted from Eerie #5 (Sept. 1966)  

2) The Stalkers [Archie Goodwin/Alex Toth] 6p   reprinted from Creepy #6 (Dec. 1965)

3) Pursuit Of The Vampire! [Archie Goodwin/Angelo Torres] 6p   reprinted from Creepy #1 (Jan. 1965)

4) Howling Success! [Archie Goodwin/Angelo Torres] 7p   reprinted from Creepy #3 (June 1965)

5) Untimely Tomb! [Anne T. Murphy & Archie Goodwin/Angelo Torres] 7p   reprinted from Creepy #5 (Oct. 1965)

6) Curse Of The Full Moon! [Archie Goodwin/Reed Crandall] 8p   reprinted from Creepy #4 (Aug. 1965)

7) Blood And Orchids! [Archie Goodwin/Al McWilliams] 7p   reprinted from Creepy #4 (Aug. 1965)

Notes: All reprint issue.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL

Well, welcome to vacation week, I guess--unless there's anything anyone would like to add!

[OtherEric]

Me, without a comment for the reading group?  You wound me, @Axe Elf!

Eerie 14 thoughts:

Cover: Prezio provides a very good cover that fits the story quite nicely.  It's nice to see that, even in the dark ages, they seem to be working very hard to provide covers that go with the issues.  I suspect the Creepy #18 cover was intended for Famous Monsters originally... where I could easily see an article discussing early Amazing Stories, where the swipe would be a nice touch.

On to the stories: Other than the monster gallery, these are all reprints from Creepy, not Eerie.  (13 was also all non-Eerie reprints, although I didn't catch it there.) I'll give them credit for that, it lets them get slightly earlier material, and if for some reason somebody was collecting Eerie but not Creepy, it would give them new material. I suppose they did admit this on the cover, calling it "Tales in the Creepy Tradition!"  The reprints are all good choices, the mini-spotlight on Angelo Torres is nice.

They actually did a good job of subbing in Cousin Eerie for Uncle Creepy this issue, I didn't catch any glaring textual errors this time.  The last story does refer to the next Ghoulsome Goody, but that could be the next issue as well as the next story.  Bonus points to them for catching the mid-story comment by the host and updating that as well.

All in all, this is a quite solid issue.  The only complaint is that it's all-reprint past the cover, at a point when the annuals were not part of the regular numbering.  As Creepy Yearbook 1968.5, this would be fine.  As an unheralded all-reprint issue of Eerie... I would be very unhappy grabbing this off the stands if I had been reading both Creepy & Eerie since the start.  But as a casual reader picking up a random issue, it's a good package.

[Axe Elf]

On 1/15/2023 at 12:01 AM, OtherEric said:

As Creepy Yearbook 1968.5, this would be fine.

Heh, I like that.

[LloydJBailey]

Super long shot, but does anybody have an Eerie 109 high grade copy they  can sell to me? 

[OtherEric]

I know it's poor form to go back to a previous week's book, but since this is a semi-vacation week anyway:

How the heck did none of us flag the reason the Creepy #19 is hard to find as "1st Vampiress Carmilla" !?!

[Axe Elf]

On 1/18/2023 at 2:43 PM, OtherEric said:

I know it's poor form to go back to a previous week's book, but since this is a semi-vacation week anyway:

How the heck did none of us flag the reason the Creepy #19 is hard to find as "1st Vampiress Carmilla" !?!

Not sure what you're referring to?

[OtherEric]

On 1/18/2023 at 1:00 PM, Axe Elf said:

Not sure what you're referring to?

It was mostly (but not quite entirely) a joke, based on the fact the issue adapted the story Carmilla, which is where Warrant got the title for their magazine and the host character therein.  I assume the reason they can get away with such an otherwise blatant Vampirella- inspired character is that they can point to the original story (which dates to 1872) as the source.

[Axe Elf]

On 1/18/2023 at 3:08 PM, OtherEric said:

It was mostly (but not quite entirely) a joke, based on the fact the issue adapted the story Carmilla, which is where Warrant got the title for their magazine and the host character therein.  I assume the reason they can get away with such an otherwise blatant Vampirella- inspired character is that they can point to the original story (which dates to 1872) as the source.

Ohhh...  although Carmilla isn't the only Warrant character to be a fairly blatant Warren-inspired character.  I mean "Warrant" itself is pretty blatantly "Warren"-inspired.

So does Vampiress Carmilla also go by Mircalla and Millarca in the Warrant books as well?  (I bought them but I didn't read them yet!)

Edited January 18, 2023 by Axe Elf

[The Lions Den]

On 1/18/2023 at 4:08 PM, OtherEric said:

It was mostly (but not quite entirely) a joke, based on the fact the issue adapted the story Carmilla, which is where Warrant got the title for their magazine and the host character therein.  I assume the reason they can get away with such an otherwise blatant Vampirella- inspired character is that they can point to the original story (which dates to 1872) as the source.

This is something that would look good on the CGC label...  

[The Lions Den]

On 1/18/2023 at 6:16 PM, Axe Elf said:

So does Vampiress Carmilla also go by Mircalla and Millarca in the Warrant books as well?  (I bought them but I didn't read them yet!)

From what I remember, she's still just Carmilla...so far.   

[Jayman]

On 1/19/2023 at 9:08 AM, The Lions Den said:

From what I remember, she's still just Carmilla...so far.   

I think Caramello is my favorite! 

[Axe Elf]

I suppose I should say SOMETHING about EERIE #14, even if I don't have much to add to my previous reviews of the stories reprinted therein.  I do remember when I recognized this cover from the original story way back in June when we read CREEPY #6--and I always wished we had seen more of Toth's stylized lettering.

I think it's kind of cool that Prezio has become adept at producing covers to represent existing stories, as opposed to Frazetta just painting whatever the heck he wanted, and Goodwin coming up with a story based on the painting.  Other than his first contribution of the unrelated CREEPY #18 cover, I believe all his covers since have reflected their issue's content.

@OtherEric made an astute observation about all the stories being reprinted from early CREEPY issues, rather than early EERIE issues, which at least allowed them to be "new to EERIE," if not entirely new.  I was wondering why they wouldn't have a little greater variety in their sources, rather than just the first six issues of CREEPY--and two stories alone from CREEPY #4?  So that kind of explains it--they wanted stories that hadn't previously been printed in EERIE and which were printed before EERIE #2 hit the shelves.  I also thought it was sloppy selection to have three stories drawn by Angelo Torres all in a row, but I guess if you think of it as a "mini-spotlight" as @OtherEric suggested, that makes more sense too.

On the other hand, having a Mummy Monster Gallery reprint right after the reprint of the Mummy's Curse Loathsome Lore in CREEPY #19 also seems a little sloppy, so who knows if the redundancy was intentional or not.

And finally, I almost posted this in regards to the letters page in last week's CREEPY #19, with all the "what the heck is happening?!?" letters, but I decided against it at the last minute.  But with the first letter of this issue's Dear Cousin Eerie page also ranting about all the changes, I guess I'm going to have to.

The fan confusion and anger basically reminds me of Jay's "what the heck is happening?!?" rant at the end of Dogma, where his direction was reportedly to "do it like Daffy Duck":

(Language NSFW Warning!)

And then Cousin Eerie kisses him on the cheek and everything is ok again.

Edited January 20, 2023 by Axe Elf

[FoggyNelson]

On 1/20/2023 at 6:27 PM, Axe Elf said:

I suppose I should say SOMETHING about EERIE #14, even if I don't have much to add to my previous reviews of the stories reprinted therein.  I do remember when I recognized this cover from the original story way back in June when we read CREEPY #6--and I always wished we had seen more of Toth's stylized lettering.

I think it's kind of cool that Prezio has become adept at producing covers to represent existing stories, as opposed to Frazetta just painting whatever the heck he wanted, and Goodwin coming up with a story based on the painting.  Other than his first contribution of the unrelated CREEPY #18 cover, I believe all his covers since have reflected their issue's content.

@OtherEric made an astute observation about all the stories being reprinted from early CREEPY issues, rather than early EERIE issues, which at least allowed them to be "new to EERIE," if not entirely new.  I was wondering why they wouldn't have a little greater variety in their sources, rather than just the first six issues of CREEPY--and two stories alone from CREEPY #4?  So that kind of explains it--they wanted stories that hadn't previously been printed in EERIE and which were printed before EERIE #2 hit the shelves.  I also thought it was sloppy selection to have three stories drawn by Angelo Torres all in a row, but I guess if you think of it as a "mini-spotlight" as @OtherEric suggested, that makes more sense too.

On the other hand, having a Mummy Monster Gallery reprint right after the reprint of the Mummy's Curse Loathsome Lore in CREEPY #19 also seems a little sloppy, so who knows if the redundancy was intentional or not.

And finally, I almost posted this in regards to the letters page in last week's CREEPY #19, with all the "what the heck is happening?!?" letters, but I decided against it at the last minute.  But with the first letter of this issue's Dear Cousin Eerie page also ranting about all the changes, I guess I'm going to have to.

The fan confusion and anger basically reminds me of Jay's "what the heck is happening?!?" rant at the end of Dogma, where his direction was reportedly to "do it like Daffy Duck":

(Language NSFW Warning!)

And then Cousin Eerie kisses him on the cheek and everything is ok again.

Thanks for a good read👍‼️

[Axe Elf]

CREEPY #20 - May 1968

According to the Warren Magazine Index...

20. cover: Albert Nuetzell (May 1968) reprinted from Famous Monsters Of Filmland #4 (Aug. 1959)

1) Thumbs Down! [Anne T. Murphy/Al Williamson] 6p   reprinted from Creepy #6 (Dec. 1965)

2) Inheritors Of Earth [Hector Castellon] 8p

3) Beauty Or The Beast! [Len Brown/MR. Giordano & Sal Trapani] 8p   [art credited solely to Trapani]

4) The Cask Of Amontillado! [Archie Goodwin/Reed Crandall] 8p   from the story by Edgar Allan Poe, reprinted from Creepy #6 (Dec. 1965)

5) The Damned Thing! [Archie Goodwin/Gray Morrow] 8p   from the story by Ambrose Bierce, reprinted from Creepy #4 (Aug. 1965)

6) A Vested Interest [Ron Parker/George Tuska] 6p   reprinted from Creepy #8 (Apr. 1966)

Notes: The first new stories since the freeze appeared but neither were particularly good.  The Castellon story was originally written by by Clark Dimond & Terry Bisson but Castellon didn’t understand the -script and changed the story so drastically that Bisson & Dimond’s names were dropped.  The Ms. Corey mentioned in the story was based on Terry Bisson’s fiancé.  As the money crunch continued, it became clear that Warren had two horror magazines to publish but only enough of a budget for one, so each issue between here and early 1970 had reprinted stories for half or more of its content.  The Nuetzell cover appears to be a tree-frog, with an arm growing out of one eye.  Pretty dreadful image (and not in a good way).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is definitely one of the uglier covers so far, being done primarily in shades of turd and bile, but a tree-frog with an arm growing out of one eye?  That's not how I see it at all.  Rather than a two-eyed creature facing right (with an arm growing out of one eye socket), I see a one-eyed acorn-creature creature facing left, with one arm growing out from under each shoulder ridge, which themselves are extensions of the overarching cycloptic eye ridge.

I'm already looking forward to reading two new stories this week, but the anticipation is all the keener after meeting Clark Dimond's fiancé in "Out of Her Head" ("Josie and the Pussycats meets Scooby Doo") from CREEPY #18, and now we get to meet the other half of the duo's other half--Terry Bisson's fiancé--in this issue!

It's interesting that the Index says Warren had TWO horror magazines to publish but only enough of a budget for one, when in actuality they had three--in addition to the two horror COMIC magazines, they were also still publishing Famous Monsters of Filmland during this period, were they not?  Does anyone know how that title was doing during these "Dark Ages"?  Seems like FMoF kind of anchored the company, going strong from 1958 right through the end in 1983, but I'm curious if it suffered any from the crunch the way that CREEPY and EERIE did.

I suppose these times really did seem dark, when virtually everything else Warren had attempted to publish had folded within 10 issues or so.  After Dark's four issues had landed him in court on pornography charges in 1957.  Famous Monsters was the comeback sequel, and it became the pillar of the company for the remainder of its existence.  But then there was Famous/Wildest Westerns in 1959, which folded after 6 issues.  Spacemen in 1961 folded after 8 issues and a Yearbook.  Screen Thrills Illustrated was done after 10 issues in 1963.  Monster World couldn't survive as a FMoF clone on its own, and folded after 10 issues in 1964, a year that also saw a "Famous Films" fumetti series end after only 3 issues.  CREEPY and EERIE sandwiched 4 issues of the doomed Blazing Combat series in 1965, and both the Teen Love Stories and On the Scene titles failed after 3 issues each in 1967.

So here in the beginning of 1968 it probably did seem a little as if CREEPY and EERIE (at 20 and 14 issues respectively) were just living on borrowed time at this point...