Bill Courtney

Neal Adams' "Thrill Kill" Story for Warren Magazines

Thursday, 19. April 2007, 01:01:25

Comic Books and Art

Two MP3 Selections from Dirty Little Secrets by The Thrill Kill Kult Tarzan the Apeman and Tarzan and His Mate

Comments

Anonymous # 19. April 2007, 18:34

Paul writes:

This is an incredible comic. I love how the story unfolds as an independent narrative laid over the images. Very striking indeed. The style is a little too slick, maybe, but still it is so masterfully drawn, it's hard to fault it for that.
The violence is a little disturbing, but it's so well written and so well drawn that it doesn't seem gratuitous at all.

I love that "Don't be FUELISH Mr. Whipple".....its like Burroughs' cut ups and it takes just the right tone here.

That street level perspective is amazingly well done, the guy going through the window, while maybe a tad over the top, is still a really interesting frame.

Bill Courtney # 19. April 2007, 23:52

Yea, the style is slick, as you said, and was different at a time when most people were still doing the styles of Jack Kirby or Bob Kane (the Batman creator). Adams had studied architectural drawing and advertising and really did not do a lot of comic book work, when compared to other illustrators. There was some work he did that was so stunning though at the time that it changed the way comics were drawn forever. His volume of work on Batman for DC was small, a little over a dozen books I understand, but suddenly every one was doing a Neil Adams style "dark" Batman for God knows how long, even after Adams had dropped out of doing comics for the most part.

I think the writer was Archie Goodwin (but the credits are missing from the splash page... the title and credit page) and I like too how it is a separate narrative, like an interview. The violence was excessive maybe(Ivy did not like that... I guess you have to be American to appreciate good roof top sniper art) but it was drawn for Warren Magazines, the same comapny that did the Frazetta war books from earlier. They were not mainstream and the themes were more sexual and violent than what was being done else where. Also, Adams was more known for his superhero work (like Batman or Green Lantern) and not his graphic horror which he also did. That was why I thought this might be a cool thing to post

Ivy # 20. April 2007, 05:51

That is really freaky。

Bill Courtney # 20. April 2007, 09:56

It is a little freaky yes, but some things in life are actually freaky. In the US there is a big culture of movies and books and art and literarure that expresses (or tries to express) many aspects of life, both what is beautiful and what is freaky. Comic books are a special type of art where there is a narrative or story with the pictures and it has been a part of Western culture (Europe and North America) for a long time. Some comics are not so strange perhaps and yet it is interesting to have these other violent types to look at sometimes as well.

The purpose of the blog here is perhaps to explore the less known side of some of Western music and movies and comic book art. Not all of that is violent but some is. I plan on posting some romance comic book covers soon. There are arguments for and against all this stuff and not all things are for all people, and many things are especially not for children. Not all things in life are for children or easily offended people to see and I try to be careful what is posted. I simply do not post a lot of things that over the top and pointlessly disturbing. But really they are just drawings and music and movies... not real life.

The story could have been told without the violent drawings, yes. Maybe it would have been better. What is interesting is that it was done at all and done so well and over 30 years later some people still seek out these creations because they have some impact that is lasting. I hope you try to see these things not in a negative way only.

Anonymous # 23. April 2007, 19:46

Paul writes:

Yeah, it's interesting that the discussion becomes about violence. I definately see Bill's point that there is something about these drawings that is really special. And one point I thought about was that most of the violence here you wouldnt really think twice about in a movie. There is something very....graphic......about the drawings of violence.

I think, though, that the artist makes a serious mistake in tone when he makes the violence "jokey". For instance the image of the woman getting shot with the grocery bags is incredibly well done and well conceived, but that jokey violence is a bit hard to take in that drawing.

It is interesting that this man was trained in architectural drawing. After a few months of school, I can appreciate the precision that academic training gives one, and that is certainly evidenced here. It is also interesting that he played a role in comics history, and I can see why. And it is interesting that he himself found comics uninteresting after a while.

Anonymous # 25. July 2007, 03:37

mike weber writes:

Would almost certainly have been by Archie Goodwin.

Bears an amazing thematic similarity to Peter Bogdanovich's first film, the sadly-not-well-enough-known "Targets".

When did this appear? Adams really got into comics doing "Deadman" for DC, which began in '67. One reason he pretty much left comics is that he apparently had deadline trouble.

Bill Courtney # 31. August 2007, 04:09

I am not sure of the exact date of the release of the Warren Magazine this appeared in right now but will get back to you when I find out. Yes, the writer was Archie Goodwin I found out later. I hope you stay in touch with information. It seems you know some things and I am in no way a wizard with all this stuff. I had heard of that film by Bogdanovich but never really knew what it was about, but I am interested now.

I was never sure why Adams left the comoc field just when he seemed to dominting most of it. I understand Barry Windsor Smith also had deadline problems and disputes over him having to compromise his work led to him leaving the field in the early or mid 70's as well.

Thanks for the information. Bill

Anonymous # 11. June 2008, 15:14

sol writes:

I think one big reason he left was the treatment creators were receiving from the mainstream companies. He was attempting to unionize with other artists but it never really came to fruition. After a certain point in the early to mid seventies he just up and left.

By the way, if you think the above work is slick, you should see the indie stuff he did in the eighties and nineties. The stuff he was doing at that time was so slick so as to be unreadable. It was really curious to see someone who fought for creator rights for so long put out work that was so atrocious. Needless to say, a curious turn of events for someone so talented.

By comparison, his Warren and Batman stuff hold up quite nicely and are portraits of restraint.

Anonymous # 11. June 2008, 18:10

Scott Rowland writes:

Actually, the writer wss Jim Stenstrum, not Archie Goodwin. The story first appeared in Creepy 75, dated November 1975 (http://comics.org/details.lasso?id=29247)