<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<blockquote type="cite">
<table class="header-part1" width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<div class="headerdisplayname" style="display: inline;">From: </div>
Francesco Spreafico <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:francesco.spreafico@gmail.com"><francesco.spreafico@gmail.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<div class="headerdisplayname" style="display: inline;">Date: </div>
Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:07:36 +0200</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table class="header-part2" width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<div class="headerdisplayname" style="display: inline;">To: </div>
DCML <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dcml@nafsk.se"><dcml@nafsk.se></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<pre wrap="">Personally, I only care about the quality of the stories, not where
they're published. WDC&S currently prints the best stories created in
maybe the last 20 years. So, with that, Boom is doing an excellent
job. Of course I'm just talking about WDC&S here, starting with issue
703. If you're not buying you're missing something you should be
buying, if you like Disney Comics.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Wow. If I were unfamiliar with Disney stories from the past 20
years--I assume you're limiting the criteria to those--and looked at
the quality of C&S my thought would be "No wonder Disney comics are
in such bad shape." <br>
<br>
Since I am a little familiar with those stories, I think instead that I
whole-heartedly disagree with that assessment as the quality of the
stories selected. While some have their charms, as a whole there is
nothing in the same realm of excellence as Don Rosa's work. For that
matter, Daan Jippes' re-drawings of Barks' Junior Woodchucks stories
are far better. Personally, I was never a fan of William Van Horn, but
his stuff was far better than what I'm seeing in BOOM's C&S as well.<br>
<br>
The stories in C&S remind me a little bit of the stories in some of
the Western Publishing "funny animal" comics from my childhood (and
older copies from my dad's childhood). They're interchangeable. In
the Western days, even as a kid, I thought that there were stories that
featured, say, Bugs Bunny. Those same stories could've (and sometimes
were) been retold with Porky Pig or Woody Woodpecker or, for that
matter, Mickey Mouse as the lead character without being significantly
changed. They were all about plot and not about character (not that I
necessarily could explain the importance of characterization and
character development as a pre-teen). Now an entertaining plot is
important, but without attention to character everything ends up
reading pretty similarly or at least pretty dryly. That is probably
the key problem I see in all of BOOM's current stuff--including C&S
which has some stories that are entertaining, but I would never want to
hold them up as exemplars of the best Disney comics has had to offer in
the past twenty years.<br>
<br>
Carl<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>