<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>First off, I would like to thank both Jonathon and
Gary for their most recent contributions to the ML. I will get to some of
what they wrote later on.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have a lot I want to write about, but I am not
sure I will be able to organize it as well as I would like to, plus I will be
repeating some things I have said in the past. So in advance I will
ask you to bear with me.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>At the end of 2006, it seemed like Gemstone had a
bad news/good news situation. The bad news was that the pocket books and
the Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck titles were being cancelled.
This was indeed very bad news and very depressing for all of us Disney comics
fans here in North America. However, we were then told there was good
news. We were told that Gemstone was not just going to cut titles, but was
going to publishing more stories in different formats. One would be large
black and white collections similar to Marvel's "Essential" and DC's "Showcase"
lines. Two would be a much bigger emphasis on trade paperbacks
(TPBs). In fact, I think at the end of the news we were told we would
see more Duck and Mouse stories in 2007 than in 2006!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Well, this obviously did not happen. Lets
look at both things did not occur.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>First off the B/W collections never
materialized. From what I have read and heard, Gemstone was just not able
to publish these for what would be a reasonable price. This ended up
having *two* bad consequences. Obviously this meant that we would not be
seeing the number of 3 panel stories we would have (more on 3 panel stories
later). So whoever liked reading these stories now would miss out on
them. However, there was a second unintended consequence. Since
Gemstone had already purchased a number of 3 panel stories, Gemstone ended up
putting them in the two remaining monthly titles. So this now had the
effect of making less room for the more traditional 4 panel stories in US and
WDC&S. :( So even if you did not like these stories and did not buy
these pocket books, these 3 panel stories now ate the limited amount of pages of
the two monthly titles.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>A little aside with my views on these 3 panel
stories. Jonathan did an *excellent* job of expressing his views on these
stories and I agree with just about everything he wrote about them.
Despite this, I stupidly am going to share *my* thoughts about them even though
I will not be able to express myself near as well as Jonathan did. I guess
I am just a glutton for punishment! :)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Two important points. One, I see (and think
most other readers do) a *big* difference between the 3 panel stories of Scarpa
and Cavazzano and the more recent Egmont produced 3 panel stories. So when
I complain about 3 panel stories, I do *not* mean stories by Scarpa, Cavazzano,
etc. Two, the point is that *generally* I do not find the Egmont 3 panel
stories to be near the quality of the 4 panel stories. That is a
generalization though. Were there Egmont 3 panel stories I enjoyed a
lot? Yes. Were/are there Egmont 4 panel stories I think are pretty
lousy? Yes. However, I like a *much* higher percentage of Egmont 4
panel stories than Egmont 3 panel stories.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Despite the fact that I do not like these 3 panel
stories near as much as the 4 panel stories, I bought each and every issue of
Donald Duck Adventures and Mickey Mouse Adventures. Moreover, I would
*still* gladly be buying these titles if they were still being printed and I
would have bought the B/W collections if they had ever materialized.
However when it comes down to having only 2 monthly titles, I
definitely prefer them to have 4 panel stories instead of three panel
ones. Do others on the ML "wince" when they see a 3 panel story in a new
issue of US and WDC&S? I must admit that I do and imagine many other
people feel the same way. That is why I was *thrilled* when Gary wrote
that he thinks most of them have been printed by now. That means US and
WDC&S will soon be back to their old selves!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I would be curious what other think about these
Egmont 3 panel stories. If you do not like them, what do you find lacking
in them? I found/find two basic problems with them. One, the stories
seem more childish and written for a younger audience. I know that may
sound silly and that most of Disney comics are written for kids (I know *you*
don't Don Rosa! :)). However, I always felt like I was reading much
more juvenile stories. Two, even though the stories were longer,
ironically they seem to have less plot and less story to tell. They mostly
seemed to spend 30+ pages stretching out a so-so story that could have just as
easily been told in 10 or so pages.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Now look at the other thing we were told would
happen in 2007-- more TPBs and on a regular basis. This also did not
happen as well. In fact, I think Gemstone is only publishing 2 TPBs this
year; I think there were 3 in 2006! I think what I and a lot of other
people are wondering is why is it taking so long for there to be more TPBs
and perhaps is Gemstone *ever* going to get serious about publishing TPBs?
Now if Gemstone thought they would not sell well, I could understand that.
However, from all that I had read, Gemstone *does* like this format and even
thinks this format may very well be the future of comics in North America.
So if Gemstone still thinks this, why are they not publishing more of
them? Perhaps if Gary, David, Travis, etc. could explain this it would at
least be a little easier to accept.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Which bring me to the idea of a 3rd monthly
prestige title. Jonathan, I love the idea of it being titled "Mickey and
Donald" or "Donald and Mickey", but to tell you the truth I don't care what it
would be titled as long as Gemstone published it! :) Once again I think
the confusion I and other have about there not being a 3rd monthly title comes
from comments from people at Gemstone. The reason we were told that US and
WDC&S remained was that these monthly prestige titles *did* work
financially. Well, if 2 monthly titles work, is there any reason to thing
a 3rd would not?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>So it is not only the lack of TPBs and a 3rd
monthly title that are cause for sadness, but *also* the fact that we fans
really have never been given a good reason *why* they are not published.
So if Gary, David, Travis, etc. could tell us *why*, I know I would *greatly*
appreciate it and imagine many others would as well. Of course, I realize
that Gemstone in *no way* has to tell us their reasons for why they publish and
do not publish certain things. I am *very* thankful each and every time
someone from Gemstone contributes to the ML and never take it for granted.
If someone could just answer the *why* questions about the TPBs and 3rd titles
it would enlighten things for a lot of us Disney comics fans.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sorry for rambling on so much about so much. And
Jonathan did express his views *much* better than I did! In fact,
Jonathan, did you ever consider doing some comic book work? :)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I would ask and implore people here on the ML to
contribute and add to this conversation. I can't speak for Jonathan, but
feel free to say why everything I wrote is wrong and idiotic! It
doesn't matter *what* we have to say but is more important that we
all speak up and make the DCML as lively and interesting as
possible!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dean Rekich</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>