Main Menu

Rebellion to publish Scream/Misty Halloween Special in 2017

Started by Professor Bear, 20 July, 2017, 12:08:16 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

SuperSurfer


Fungus

Another great Flint cover. Top marks for still refusing to daub his signature on his work. A mark of class.

And Hannah Berry in the Special. Swoon  :P

Daveycandlish

An old-school, no-bullshit, boys-own action/adventure comic reminiscent of the 2000ads and Eagles and Warlords and Battles and other glorious black-and-white comics that were so, so cool in the 70's and 80's - Buy the hardback Christmas Annual!

Richard

He doesn't need to sign his work, his style is so distinctive.

Professor Bear

Quote from: Richard on 20 July, 2017, 07:31:22 PM
Scream! is a better name and logo. It's probably not a misogynist conspiracy.

No-one seems to be suggesting a misogynist conspiracy, they're just concerned that the wrong logo is given prominence.  It could be argued that Misty has an appeal beyond the North-Of-40 male demographic that Scream! doesn't.

M.I.K.

The wrong logo has not been given prominence. Scream! was a horror comic read by both boys and girls. Misty was targeted entirely towards girls, (boys read it, but it wasn't intended for them). The special is not entirely targeted towards girls and Misty's logo is all unscary and cuddly-looking, thus if any logo were to intentionally be given prominence, Scream! would make the most sense, (though if you ask me, they should definitely both be the same size).


Professor Bear

Scream was just as specifically aimed at boys as Misty was girls, and assumptions about the cross-gender readership of the gender-segregated comics market of the 1980s are at best based on anecdotal evidence.

Scream lasted 15 issues.  Misty lasted 101.  It is not unreasonable to suggest parity was the way to go.

M.I.K.

Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 July, 2017, 12:20:39 AM
Scream was just as specifically aimed at boys as Misty was girls, and assumptions about the cross-gender readership of the gender-segregated comics market of the 1980s are at best based on anecdotal evidence.

Front cover of Misty issue one : "No.1 of a great mystery paper for girls!", free lucky charm bracelet.

Front cover of Scream! issue one : "Not for the nervous!", free Dracula fangs. (Trade Flyer sent out to newsagents prior to launch with the text "The new IPC comic for older boys and ghouls")

Letters pages in Misty (based on a quick skim through) : Almost exclusively female correspondents.

Letters pages in Scream! (based on a quick skim through) : Mixture of male and female correspondents, (though admittedly a bit more male than female)

So, NYAH!

Misty lasted a longer amount of time than Scream!, but if you figure in the amount of time stories from Scream! continued in Eagle, (with Max even later becoming the 'editor' for a while), that boosts the legacy a bit.

But, yes, it's not unreasonable to suggest they should be equally billed.

The Adventurer

To be honest. It should have been a flip-book. Scream! for half, Misty for half.

I love flip-books.

EDIT: It is pretty dumb to have part of Misty's title covered by a selfie-stick.

THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Robo-K33F

How long they each lasted or how popular they were back when each title was still being published doesn't really matter. This is a new one-off aimed at a younger demographic who more than likely haven't ever heard of either Scream! or Misty before. Having a larger Scream! logo on a comic that will be on sale over Halloween surely can't be no bad thing though right?

Are we doing Misty a disservice? I don't think so. We have more female creative talent involved in this than you ever got working on any one issue of Misty. Also, the majority of the strips feature female protagonists.

Most importantly though, we're getting new Scream! and Misty material out there - surely we can all agree that that is a great thing?

A flip cover - no thanks. An expensive back page advert - yes please.

IndigoPrime

Quote from: Robo-K33F on 21 July, 2017, 09:11:45 AMA flip cover - no thanks. An expensive back page advert - yes please.
Heh – spoken like a true person in marketing! And, from my time in that field, and also being a journo today: I agree. Frankly, I'd be much happier if 2000 AD and the Meg were stuffed full of ads, because that means money, but, alas, print ads are a dying breed.

As for the cover, it looks great; and it's a horror thing, and so the cover works for me. It's not like women have been airbrushed out. Perhaps someone should do a cut-out-and-stick-on alt logo for people terribly angry at this perceived slight.

Steve Green

A Misty version of the space spinner with Pat's face underneath.

dweezil2

Whinge, whinge, whinge!

I personally can't wait and hopefully a prelude to a relaunch!
Now how cool would that be?  :) 
Savalas Seed Bandcamp: https://savalasseed1.bandcamp.com/releases

"He's The Law 45th anniversary music video"
https://youtu.be/qllbagBOIAo

Link Prime


Professor Bear

Quote from: M.I.K. on 21 July, 2017, 01:58:50 AM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 21 July, 2017, 12:20:39 AM
MISTY WUZ BETTAH

SCREAM WAS BETTAH

UK magazines like Just 17 had correspondence pages featuring letters that were almost exclusively from male readers, while the New Eagle had lots of letters from girls and female teachers, but these were still gender-specific publications.
And yes, Scream continued into Eagle for six months, but that still puts it 60 issues behind Misty, which also continued in the pages of Tammy for four years so NYAH YER MUM

Anyway, this is all moot AND NOT JUST BECAUSE MISTY WAS BETTER because you have two books that appeal to different genders and you make one logo smaller?  There was zero chance someone wouldn't pick up on that.  The only sensible thing to do now is double down and try to make perceptions of gender bias a part of the marketing gimmick like we're doing now the makers of Ghostbusters and Wonder Woman did.