Sunday, August 1, 2010

More on FM #70-79

Here's the cover for #70 (taken from a video). Sorry to say, it just doesn't look retro at all. It looks like one of the new FMs. I'm guessing the insides will be the same. What's the point of doing FM #70-79 if they're not going to look like they're from the period (pulp paper and all)?

Cover Art by Jeff Preston


  1. I agree that they should make the inside exactly like the old style - including pulp paper!
    Not sure about the cover -seems an odd choice but at least it's painted!

  2. Cyberschizoid wrote: "Not sure about the cover - seems an odd choice but at least it's painted!"

    But if you remember, the #80s were about half photo covers, so a couple of those seems right.

    And what's with the "Carnival of Souls" guy on the cover? Where's the Phantom?

  3. Wanna like the idea, can't really say this fills me with any confidence. Herk Harvey's quirky coolness notwithstanding, the FM-ness of this escapes me. And if it's not at least *attempting* to go pulpy-cheap and of the era, I can't really see the value. We'll see how it goes, though. Can't fault the guys for wanting to try it.

  4. Makes me wonder, is there an FM curse? Any time there is mention of a 10-issue run, things go weird. In this case, it's not a rush to 100 issues, it's more like a what's the point? I think only original readers of FM get it, and by this time don't care. Maybe Phil Kim's got some strange life-long obsession to close the gap or something. In any event, it's hardly historic.

  5. Mike C. wrote: "Can't fault the guys for wanting to try it."

    I just wish they had tried a little harder. They should have waited till they got the New FM off the ground before trying this. They rushed it without thinking it through.

  6. John wrote: "I think only original readers of FM get it, and by this time don't care."

    I don't think anybody is going to be stuffing these between #69 and #80 in a box of originals.

  7. its crap, like everything else PK does.