Most deceptive cover of all time?

[Sir Tim Drake]

What is the most deceptive cover ever?

I nominate the cover of Amazing Spider-Man #87, which indicates that in the interior story, Spider-Man will reveal his secret identity to MJ, Gwen, Harry and Captain Stacy. The scene on the cover does take place in the story, but a few pages later, Peter changes his mind (or comes to his senses) and plays a sneaky trick to convince everyone that he's not really Spider-Man. If you had bought only one Marvel comic that month and Amazing Spider-Man #87 had been it, as the cover suggests, then you would have gotten a pretty poor deal.

What are some other particularly cruel covers?

[Joe S. Walker]

DC's covers of the late Sixties and early Seventies misrepresented the story inside more often than not, I think. Most disappointing cover? Well, the infamous "Women's Lib Issue" of Wonder Woman must have been a let-down for some people...

[founder81]

THere's an issue of Spider-man during McFarlane's run that shows Spidey and Sabretooth about to rumble. Inside, they NEVER face each other and are on different continients.

[mgs]

THere's an issue of Spider-man during McFarlane's run that shows Spidey and Sabretooth about to rumble. Inside, they NEVER face each other and are on different continients.I HATE it when they do that!

hail howard. ;)

[pennywisdom]

Any cover that proclaims [main character] will die/quit this issue.

They're deceptive and we KNOW they're deceptive. There's really no point to that.

[Sir Tim Drake]

Here's another candidate:

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/216/400/216_4_202.jpg

Indeed it is not an imaginary picture or a "symbolic picture," but the claim that it's not any other sort of cop-out is a baldfaced lie. As we learn upon reading the story, Batman is actually fighting a Superman robot!

[tk421atpost]

How about those covers that proclaim the issue as a "Collector's Item Classic" ? :p

[pennywisdom]

Indeed it is not an imaginary picture or a "symbolic picture," but the claim that it's not any other sort of cop-out is a baldfaced lie. As we learn upon reading the story, Batman is actually fighting a Superman robot!

lol! I had to laugh out loud reading that cover. :)

[TheHistorian]

How about those covers that proclaim the issue as a "Collector's Item Classic" ? :p

You mean like this?

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/1686/400/1686_4_01.jpg


;)

[gentlesatirist]

JLA #152 (March 1978) featured Wonder Woman on the cover (along with Superman, Batman and Red Tornado) but she's nowhere to be found in the inside story.

Don't think this was intentional deception. Probably just miscommunication between the writer/editor and artist Rich Buckler.

WW's own comic was selling so poorly at the time that I doubt DC would have put her on the cover as a sales gimmick.


- FE

[tk421atpost]

What I was referring to was nearly every #1 issue put out by Marvel in the 90's where each and every one was proclaimed as being a "1st Issue Collector's Item Classic" on the top of the cover.

[Greg Hatcher]

I'd go with this one:

http://superman.ws/tales2/wife/0.gif


This actually fooled the news services. Reporters were calling DC and boy, they sure didn't get it about the Earth-2 Superman. I think that one takes the prize for fooling people.


You can actually read the story here, (http://superman.ws/tales2/wife/) and it's pretty good.

[gentlesatirist]

...that's one heck of a beautiful Garcia Lopez/Giordano cover.

And didn't DC pull a similar stunt with Batman #300 around the same time? Don't recall if that involved the Earth-2 version or a future reality, but all was not as it seemed.


- FE

[Joe S. Walker]

You mean like this?

Pic = "Marvel Collector's Item Classics" #1 cover


;)


Don't you think those old Marvel reprint mags with the original covers are a great design? As a kid they really made me wish I could find the old books, which back in those days just didn't happen. (Get the blurb about FF #2 being "as originally printed in 1961!" - i.e. four years earlier.)

[MWGallaher]

A nominee of recent vintage: the 2001 revival of Suicide Squad. Practically every bloody issue had a cover that was almost entirely disconnected from the interior story! An attack by giant ants...who don't show up until the following issue! Meet earth's new landlords...who don't show up (or reveal their plan) until the following issue! Guess who's back? Deadshot? Well, not this issue!

[T GUy]

nearly every #1 issue put out by Marvel in the 90's where each and every one was proclaimed as being a "1st Issue Collector's Item Classic" . Yes, I recall this from the covers of Spider-Man No. 1 and X-Men No. 1... as I spotted copy after copy in dealer's 50p, 3 for £1 boxes.

Isn't there some old saying about pride coming before a fall?

[Lone Ranger]

I really don't like covers that do not bring attention to the fact that the book is either a reprint or mostly a reprint.

I bought Marvel Presents 8 hoping to seeing a crossover between the Guardians and the Silver Surfer. Turns out it is mainly just a reprint of Silver Surfer #2.

Marvel Features #8 (what is it with the #8?) is mainly a reprint from TTA #44.


http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/2259/200/2259_2_08.jpg

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/1991/200/1991_2_08.jpg

[Red Oak Kid]

Hey LR, is this cover true? Or was did the Lone Ranger use one of his robots to save his secret identity?

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/538/400/538_4_100.jpg

[Lone Ranger]

Hey LR, is this cover true? Or was did the Lone Ranger use one of his robots to save his secret identity?



I don't know - this one is on my 'want list'. I shall report the truth the minute I get my hands on it.

Actually - Lone Ranger is 'unmasked' a lot in the series but usually he disguises himself as a 'regular joe' and walks into a saloon in order to get some info.

[InfoBroker]

One of the things that was so annoying about this cover is that it really is a wonderful cover. Well drawn, great teaser, prefect lure.

It was amazing that they didn't actually write a story that involved Green Lantern of Earth really caught in a situation like this. It would have been a great story, even knowing that somehow, a last minute action would save Hal Jordan's sentencing and execution.

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/1448/200/1448_2_055.jpg





This is not the real Green Lantern of Earth. These are not the real Guardians. These are not the real Green Lanterns from other sections of the Galaxy.

These are all actors. This is a scene from the Green Lantern Television series. For three panels or so, the story inside cuts to the filming of this scene. Talk about hokey.

I always wondered how the Television writers knew so much about the Guardians and the traditions of the Green Lantern Corps.



- jb the stalling-on-his-taxes ib :cool:

[Matt_K]

Ooh I hate these deceitful covers. About as bad today where the covers aren't deceitful, they're just entierly irrelevant. Like when I bought Ultimate Fantastic Four #1 which has a big group shot of the FF on it and they don't appear in it at all. And UFF #2 has a shot of Reed stretching everywhere and they STILL don't appear in it.

[Kirk G]

I always thought that the Avengers Vol. 1 issue about #34 where the scarlet witch is shown on the cover instead of Jan (Wasp)... or is it visa versa, was a pretty good gaff...but I imagine it ranks uup there with the deceptive. She never appears with the Avengers in the fight at all...she's overseas...

[InfoBroker]

I had forgetten about that mistake with the Scarlet Witch on the second part of the classic Serpent storyline. However, the Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver did make an appearance in Thor the next month, with their powers restored and the first inklings of their mutant powers being linked to the experimentations of the High Evolutionary.

So there was some compensation...

- jb the ib :cool:

[InfoBroker]

Like when I bought Ultimate Fantastic Four #1 which has a big group shot of the FF on it and they don't appear in it at all. And UFF #2 has a shot of Reed stretching everywhere and they STILL don't appear in it.

So who or what does appear/happen in these early issues of Ultimate FF?

-jb the curious ib :cool:

[sparky828]

...that's one heck of a beautiful Garcia Lopez/Giordano cover.

And didn't DC pull a similar stunt with Batman #300 around the same time? Don't recall if that involved the Earth-2 version or a future reality, but all was not as it seemed.


- FE

I think it was the Earth-2 version, but I can't be 100% sure. I was 7 or 8 at the time. I do remember feeling ripped off. Fortunately, the Englehart/Rogers 'TEC was probably around the same time, so that may have taken the sting out of the betrayal.

Oh, and I agree about the Garcia-Lopez/Giordano cover. A classic.

[InfoBroker]

So I'm trying to think where Marvel truely pulled a nasty bait-n-switch cover.

Avengers #11 would almost qualify, but Stan adjusted the plot around at the last minute to compensate Spidey fans a bit for what was originally a bad story gimmick.


By 1970 they were making some lame covers, exxagerating the interior story considerably. But hard core deception of the type DC pulled similar to the Green Lantern cover?

hmmmm...

I suppose some would argue that X-men #42 was deceitful deception.

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/1576/200/1576_2_042.jpg

Spoiler
But I consider it more retcon when they brought Prof X back a couple of years later.
[/Spoiler]

I keep coming back to Amazing Spider-man #87 tonight. I can't think of any earlier Marvel comics that annoyed me like this one did in 1970.

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/1570/400/1570_4_0087.jpg


Duds and flat covers yes, but outright annoyed? Can't think of any yet. I need to do some more pondering...


Hey things are fun here in Minnesota tonight. We've had over 14 inches of snow in the past 24 hours, and it is still snowing.

[Cei-U!]

I think Marvel had fewer deceptive covers overall because they did not use the "design the cover first and build a story around it" approach both Weisinger and Schwartz used. It's not hard to imagine the writers' struggle to include a cover scene into an existing script, no matter how awkward the fit.

The story in Batman #300 depicts an alternate future for the Earth-1 Caped Crusader. Think of it as a tamer Dark Knight Returns.

And jb, do you suppose your trouble with Amazing #87 might be due to its DC-style "save the secret identity" plot? Even ignoring the lame execution of same in this instance, that kind of silliness (e.g., Mike Murdock) never seemed to work with the Marvel characters. (Then again, those are my least favorite DC stories too.)

Cei-U!
I summon the random thoughts!

[InfoBroker]

I think Marvel had fewer deceptive covers overall because they did not use the "design the cover first and build a story around it"

You've nailed it Kurt. Stan was also the perfect editor when it came to covers. He would rework them, solicite for alternate covers, punch things up, touch up and refine. He was also very sensitive to his growing fan base at the time. He didn't want to cheat them. Anyway that was the feeling I came away with throughout that period of silver-age goodness.

If he didn't actually have it written down, I assumed he had collected an intutive mental list of basic editorial principles that he wanted Marvel to adhere to. It certainly came across that way to my 12 to 15 year old sensibilities anyway.

...And jb, do you suppose your trouble with Amazing #87 might be due to its DC-style "save the secret identity" plot?

That would be one of them. A major one, and it was part of that above mentioned list of principles that consitituted Marvel in 1966, and was betrayed in 1970.

But my troubles and the reason this issue bothers me so much expands to include other violations of those principles. With Spider-man it is all the more frustrating because these characters meant (and still mean) so much to me. Stan, Steve and John made them so real, so important that to see them doing things that violated their core structures aggrievates the inner fibers of my creative sensibilities.

I think there is a point in this kind of creative work, where the really good characters, developed by the really good creators, take on a life of their own. They literally become real, larger than life entities that frame every aspect of how they will behave in a given situation, even to the point of dictating to the creator the kinds of situations they will get invovled with.

Of course the poor to mediocre creator lacks the sensitivity to hear them, but that's a different topic for a different thread.

Good characters ease the effort to frame a good story. But It makes it harder for a creator to engage and finish a drawing or story when the situation is poorly constructed or concieved artificially.

I don't think Stan the creator had lost contact with his most important characters. Because there were a handful of good Stan Lee stories told after this issue. But I do think Stan the editor was under a LOT of pressure to improve comic sales in a time when the entire market was dwindling. It forced contrivances like this.

I can sense the anguish that I think John Romita went through struggling to make something of this cover. He does a good job despite the inherent wrongness of the situations. But I'll bet he worked harder on this cover, felt more discomfort here than all the beautiful covers he did in his first year of Amazing. (Er, except #41, that one just doesn't gell well compared to the jewels around it).

I don't think I'm projecting my own feelings into the situation too heavily either. Not based on the few times I met John, his son, and the various interviews I have read over the years.

- jb the empathetic ib :cool:

[Jonathan Bogart]

So who or what does appear/happen in these early issues of Ultimate FF?
Reed Richards, Ben Grimm, Sue and Johnny Storm, and Victor Von Doom, going through the motions of a story that leads up to them getting their powers.

[Jesse Hamm]

http://superman.ws/tales2/wife/0.gif

Supes has a gorilla thumb! A nod to Julie Schwartz, maybe?

[Cei-U!]

I think there is a point in this kind of creative work, where the really good characters, developed by the really good creators, take on a life of their own. They literally become real, larger than life entities that frame every aspect of how they will behave in a given situation, even to the point of dictating to the creator the kinds of situations they will get invovled with.


I can attest to that. In writing Lash House (an unpublished novel about the DC characters), I had to rework a lot of my original scenes because the characters wouldn't let me write it the way I wanted it. At a certain point, you know that Superman would never say this or Batman do that.


Of course the poor to mediocre creator lacks the sensitivity to hear them, but that's a different topic for a different thread.

I heard and heeded. I only overruled a character once, when I refused to let Hector Hall call Wonder Woman the c-word.

Cei-U!
I put my foot down!

[InfoBroker]

I heard and heeded. I only overruled a character once, when I refused to let Hector Hall call Wonder Woman the c-word.


Do you think it was your inner sensibilites saying that "if you want to behave that way, do it off-panel where I don't have to witness it," or do you think that the elegant grandeur of Wonder Woman's personna whispered in your ear that such at thing could never happen in her presence, no matter how low-life the scumbag might be who trys to utter it.

Sort of like Guy Gardner having to back down to that Bat guy in those classic Justice League Comics from the 1980s.

- jb the "glad your foot went down" ib :cool:

[Cei-U!]

Do you think it was your inner sensibilites saying that "if you want to behave that way, do it off-panel where I don't have to witness it," or do you think that the elegant grandeur of Wonder Woman's personna whispered in your ear that such at thing could never happen in her presence, no matter how low-life the scumbag might be who trys to utter it.

Sort of like Guy Gardner having to back down to that Bat guy in those classic Justice League Comics from the 1980s.

- jb the "glad your foot went down" ib :cool:

It was entirely a case of my refusing to use a word I hate and deplore when others use it. I would rather censor my muse than be a hypocrite. Anyway, it worked out okay. I was able to make Hector an asshole without resorting to that, largely through extensive deployment of the f-bomb.

Cei-U!
I summon the #%@*!

[Cei-U!]

What are some other particularly cruel covers?

I hated covers that promised art by one guy and stuck us with a lesser artist on the interior: Curt Swan outsides, Sheldon Moldoff insides; Jack Kirby outsides, Dick Ayers insides; Neal Adams outsides, Bob Brown insides; etcetera.

Cei-U!
I summon the caveat emptor!

[dan bailey]

I hated covers that promised art by one guy and stuck us with a lesser artist on the interior: Curt Swan outsides, Sheldon Moldoff insides; Jack Kirby outsides, Dick Ayers insides; Neal Adams outsides, Bob Brown insides; etcetera.

Cei-U!
I summon the caveat emptor!

i must think a lot more of bob brown than you do ...

... or maybe i'm thinking of bob powell. hmmm.

[Richard Onley]

And jb, do you suppose your trouble with Amazing #87 might be due to its DC-style "save the secret identity" plot? Even ignoring the lame execution of same in this instance, that kind of silliness (e.g., Mike Murdock) never seemed to work with the Marvel characters. (Then again, those are my least favorite DC stories too.)

Cei-U!
I remember being very, very annoyed by that cover--and its inane resolution--when it was first published. But remember how beautifully they carried it off in Spider-Man #12?

[Richard Onley]

Stan was also the perfect editor when it came to covers. He would rework them, solicit for alternate covers, punch things up, touch up and refine. He was also very sensitive to his growing fan base at the time. He didn't want to cheat them. Anyway that was the feeling I came away with throughout that period of silver-age goodness.

Even as a young kid, I always thought word balloons looked cheesy on comic covers. When Marvel adopted an unstated policy of never using them, I was pleased with the dramatic effects that resulted. Then, beginning with two issues of Daredevil, the balloons started appearing. Fan reaction in the letter columns was negative, but Stan kept insisting that covers with balloons sold better, so "Hey, true believer, who are we to quibble and quake with the purchasing power of mighty Marveldom assembled, effendi? Excelsior!"--which I saw as cheap pandering. By 1970, Marvel's front covers were only slightly less entertaining than their back covers, and seemed more like billboards than art.

[InfoBroker]

I remember being very, very annoyed by that cover--and its inane resolution--when it was first published. But remember how beautifully they carried it off in Spider-Man #12?

..and #39, my first Spider-man comic, and what a great place to start. The only "cheat" I felt was that the cover hinted that the unmasking was happening in broad daylight, with supposed crowds watching from below. But the story was so well done, I didn't care about it. And the cover itself. WOW! It is a legend.

#12 works so well because, as you know, the scene is real, it really happens.


but the supproting casts conclusions...

Inside, Stan and Steve make every aspect of that encounter seem like it could have been any ordinary teenager tackling Doc Ock. A brilliant set up.



Of course for me, I never really got lured by the cover. I read the reprint in Annual #3 about three years before I finally got my hands on the real comic book. So my perspectives when first seeing that cover were already altered. But it is as you say, beautiful.

- jb the ib :cool:

[Matt_K]

I have an old Amazing Spiderman (#31 I think) which proclaims on the cover "The Final Chapter!" This was possibly not entirely accurate.

[InfoBroker]

#31 is titled If This be My Destiny, great title, great story, and a great cover.

#33 is titled The Final Chapter, and in the scope of the Master Planner Trilogy, yea it is. Also a great cover, one of my all time favorites. I don't see any deception here. If you're scoping it to the entire Spider-man mythos, yea I suppose you can classify it as deceptive, but it's a stretch to frame it that way.

I consider this comic to be the epitome Spider-man tale. The best single issue of Spider-man ever done.

- jb the ib :cool:

[Sir Tim Drake]

#31 is titled If This be My Destiny, great title, great story, and a great cover.

#33 is titled The Final Chapter, and in the scope of the Master Planner Trilogy, yea it is. Also a great cover, one of my all time favorites. I don't see any deception here. If you're scoping it to the entire Spider-man mythos, yea I suppose you can classify it as deceptive, but it's a stretch to frame it that way.

I consider this comic to be the epitome Spider-man tale. The best single issue of Spider-man ever done.

- jb the ib :cool:

I don't think anyone can argue wth that. Amazing Spider-Man #33 is a story of surpassing greatness.

But speaking of deceptive cover blurbs, how about New Teen Titans #2, which asks "Can This Truly Be the End of the New Teen Titans?" Considering that it's only the second issue, I think the answer to that question is pretty obvious. :)

[Joe S. Walker]

I'd rate ASM #25 (the issue with Jameson and the spider-robot) as the real masterpiece of Ditko's run.

[gentlesatirist]

...that on the cover of the 1965 Marvel Collector's Item Classics, the Ant-Man story is referred to as an "out-of-print classic."

Because back then, monthly comics were kept in print for, what, 8-10 years, at least?


- FE
Wickliffe OH

[gentlesatirist]

...good cover artist/bad interior artist trap, that's the way I felt about some issues of JLA from the early 80s that had Perez covers and Heck interiors. Oh cruel fate!


- FE
Wickliffe OH

[Lone Ranger]

Batman #476 really pissed me off at the time.

As I recall, Bruce considered revealing his secret to Vicki Vale, but never went through with it.

The cover suggests otherwise.

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/141/200/141_2_0000476.jpg

[Apathy Boy]

Strangely enough, this was about the only issue of SPIDER-WOMAN in which the title character wasn't tied up.

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/2461/400/2461_4_06.jpg

[Paradox]

Ah, someone ELSE who remembers that Spider-Woman was a bondage queen early in her career. :)

I wonder how little Miss "Tough as nails S.H.I.E.L.D Agent" today would feel about that stuff. :)

[MWGallaher]

World's Finest #235 is a classic example of the deceptive cover.

Batman rushes desperately toward us, too late to stop (what appears to be) a giant hand that is squeezing Superman's torso so hard that his head literally pops off of his body!


Needless to say, Superman was not actually decapitated in the story.

[MacDougal]

I think it's Star Wars #6, from the Marvel series. Luke and Vader are locked in a light sabre duel. Obviously, this didn't happen in either the 1st movie, nor the Marvel adaptation.

[Lone Ranger]

This one was very deceptive:

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/1449/200/1449_2_122.jpg

As you probably know - Aquaman didn't die.

[Dennis K]

I know it's not among the most deceptive covers ever, but the recent Hawkman cover with Deadman on it, no such scene in the book really takes place.

[Dennis K]

Strangely enough, this was about the only issue of SPIDER-WOMAN in which the title character wasn't tied up.

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/2461/400/2461_4_06.jpg


Somebody's got a bondage fetish!

[InfoBroker]

I think the Nick Cardy death cover is a whole LOT better. I'll grudgingly tolerate a deception if it is visually stunning.

http://www.comics.org/graphics/covers/1488/200/1488_2_30.jpg

- jb the ib :cool:

[gentlesatirist]

...the use of color on that cover! How could anyone not love the Silver Age?!?


- FE

[Apathy Boy]

Somebody's got a bondage fetish!Um...

Err...

*Ties up Boston Brand before he brings attention to any more of my secrets*