Least favorite Disney comics stories

[Spectrus]

May 16, 2018 16:41:39 GMT Scrooge MacDuck said:

May 16, 2018 10:13:56 GMT Spectrus said:

"Top" 3

"Ring Thrice and I'll Clobber You, My Lad!" - inducks.org/story.php?c=D+98058 the ultimate in violence, twisted emotional logic, wrong characterizations and all that other negative stuff
"Rock Around the Clock" - coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=D+99070 similar in some ways, the "amazon" people are absolutely horrible beings, but Donald and Daisy are pretty awful as well
"The Last Duck on Earth" - coa.inducks.org/story.php?c=D+2000-088 a gross mischaracterization of Donald, a disturbing apocalyptic scenario

Those are representative for a large part of the respective author's "work", by the way - those just seem to stick out for being ESPECIALLY bad.

Whatever the writing may be, though, the art looks very good from the first pages as shown on INDUCKS. I'm not saying it's Marco Rota, but it's unbelievably more skillful and generally pleasing to the eye than, say, Bird-Bothered Hero. 

Could you give a summary of The Last Duck on Earth, though? Does it have anything to do with the classic Vincent Price film The Last Man on Earth? In what way does it mischaracterize Donald? (I wouldn't consider a "disturbing apocalyptic scenario" a flaw as such. Perhaps I wouldn't like it, perhaps I would. I'm all for experimenting with the boundaries of what you can in a Duck story, and if you can do The Call of C'rruso, why not an apocalypse with red seas and evil white whales or whtever?)    

I hate "The Call of C'rruso" too! With a passion! But I was afraid that if I mentioned it, ramapith would criticize me for picking on the Shaws too much again. But yeah, stories like this almost completely turned me off Disney comics as a kid...

Anyhow, Bancells and Pasquale may have certain skills, but both are certainly limited technically (Pasquale arguably more so than Bancells), and their art gives off an incredibly negative, aggressive and destructive vibe. Which is of course what Disney comics are all about, right? (/sarcasm off)

Summary of "Last Duck on Earth"? - Donald is annoyed by people and wishes he were alone. In the end he couldn't be more happy to be nearly suffocated in an overly full bus. That's it, really, as for actual content.

But then of course you have all the nonsense (which Mr. Gilbert had done before, but never quite to such an effect). There is a "time tornado" that sucks Donald and Helper 10.000 years into the future. The future consists of an empty, destroyed, ugly, polluted, completely devastated planet which has long been abandoned by humanity (the only thing that's left is stones, some buildings, red sea and those white abominations "living" in the red sea). So Donald and Little Helper occupy themselves by playing poker with stones (!). There is some sense of drama when Gyro and the nephews use their time machine device to search for Donald and can't find him at first. This part isn't actually so bad, but it's still bad writing. At the end, before travelling back to the present, Doanld accidentally causes the "time tornado" himself (ooooh, a time paradox!) and it reaches the stupid conclusion.

One of the many awful things about this story is that it never really seems to make much of the apocalyptic scenario; we're just doomed (ahem) to endure it for almost the entire length of the story, but the ducks don't see any reason to perhaps think about our current lifestyle? It's just presented as a given that this is how the future of our planet will look like. Very weird.

With some proper scriptwriting and a better artist it could have been turned into something, but as it stands, it's just horrible.

[Scrooge MacDuck]

May 16, 2018 18:29:42 GMT Spectrus said:

I hate "The Call of C'rruso" too! With a passion! But I was afraid that if I mentioned it, ramapith would criticize me for picking on the Shaws too much again. But yeah, stories like this almost completely turned me off Disney comics as a kid...

Anyhow, Bancells and Pasquale may have certain skills, but both are certainly limited technically (Pasquale arguably more so than Bancells), and their art gives off an incredibly negative, aggressive and destructive vibe. Which is of course what Disney comics are all about, right? (/sarcasm off)

Summary of "Last Duck on Earth"? - Donald is annoyed by people and wishes he were alone. In the end he couldn't be more happy to be nearly suffocated in an overly full bus. That's it, really, as for actual content.

But then of course you have all the nonsense (which Mr. Gilbert had done before, but never quite to such an effect). There is a "time tornado" that sucks Donald and Helper 10.000 years into the future. The future consists of an empty, destroyed, ugly, polluted, completely devastated planet which has long been abandoned by humanity (the only thing that's left is stones, some buildings, red sea and those white abominations "living" in the red sea). So Donald and Little Helper occupy themselves by playing poker with stones (!). There is some sense of drama when Gyro and the nephews use their time machine device to search for Donald and can't find him at first. This part isn't actually so bad, but it's still bad writing. At the end, before travelling back to the present, Doanld accidentally causes the "time tornado" himself (ooooh, a time paradox!) and it reaches the stupid conclusion.

One of the many awful things about this story is that it never really seems to make much of the apocalyptic scenario; we're just doomed (ahem) to endure it for almost the entire length of the story, but the ducks don't see any reason to perhaps think about our current lifestyle? It's just presented as a given that this is how the future of our planet will look like. Very weird.

With some proper scriptwriting and a better artist it could have been turned into something, but as it stands, it's just horrible.

Hm. So nothing to do with the Vincent Price film. Pity, though that wouldn't have helped with the dark subject matter.

Overall what you describe does sound bad… though I'm not convinced on the art… but not terrible. You call it "nonsens", but I'd consider all the time-travel stuff the main appeal of the story. Like, it may be ill-thought-out as far as consequences go, but a lone man stranded in time, stuck in ruins and threatened by monstrosities living in a blood-red sea? Surprisingly unDisneylike, perhaps, but you've got to admit this is original. It's bizarre, but it's not bland. Last Duck on Earth actually tried, even if by your account it failed; the same goes for C'rruso and for Knock Thrice. This is plenty more than you can say about, again, Bird-Bothered Hero, or other late-era American material, or a lot of Giuseppe Perego's stuff. For that reason, while I wouldn't necessarily call them good, I certainly wouldn't consider these stories among the "worst". Barking up the wrong tree is still better than having no voice at all. 

(I can sympathize with having been traumatized as a youngling with C'rruso, though. Eesh.)

[Spectrus]

May 16, 2018 19:24:08 GMT Scrooge MacDuck said:

Hm. So nothing to do with the Vincent Price film. Pity, though that wouldn't have helped with the dark subject matter.

Overall what you describe does sound bad… though I'm not convinced on the art… but not terrible. You call it "nonsens", but I'd consider all the time-travel stuff the main appeal of the story. Like, it may be ill-thought-out as far as consequences go, but a lone man stranded in time, stuck in ruins and threatened by monstrosities living in a blood-red sea? Surprisingly unDisneylike, perhaps, but you've got to admit this is original. It's bizarre, but it's not bland. Last Duck on Earth actually tried, even if by your account it failed; the same goes for C'rruso and for Knock Thrice. This is plenty more than you can say about, again, Bird-Bothered Hero, or other late-era American material, or a lot of Giuseppe Perego's stuff. For that reason, while I wouldn't necessarily call them good, I certainly wouldn't consider these stories among the "worst". Barking up the wrong tree is still better than having no voice at all. 

I must admit that I have very little experience with that late-era US stuff, although some of it has crept into the Donald Duck magazine lately. What I've seen of it is bland, forgettable, thin, but not actively repulsive - which I can unequivocally say for all those stories I mentioned (and several more I haven't mentioned - I'll save them for a rainy day).

To me, originality is not a feat within itself. Honestly, I'll take bland over "original but completely messed up" six days of the week...

As for Perego, he illustrated some pretty good stories, but he obviously doesn't stand out as a particularly good artist.

May 16, 2018 19:24:08 GMT Scrooge MacDuck said:

(I can sympathize with having been traumatized as a youngling with C'rruso, though. Eesh.)

The worst thing that this was actually the title story of LTB 330 (so something you should look forward for when you see the preview...) - and it came directly after an issue (329) which also had a (horrible, violence-filled) Shaw title story and ended with another (completely illogical and stupid) Shaw story! We were literally flooded with their stuff at the time, and they just seemed to go from one nadir to another. Truly dark times for our beloved LTB. (Am I allowed to say that this annoys me to no end - they had no less than eighteen!!!! title stories, when Casty had, guess what, exactly one!!!!)

But in reality, after I survived the ordeal of LTB 320 (which started with yet another awful Shaw story, where Donald saws a man into two halves, and ended with "The Last Duck on Earth") without burning my Disney collection, "C'rruso" was almost harmless. That's how bad I think "Last Duck..." is!  

Edit - Forgot to mention that I normally love Time Travel stories! And I even greatly enjoyed several of Dave Rawson's time paradox stories (including the one where three Gyros are working together), which were criticized by others as completely illogical. Which makes this one all the more baffling 

Edit 2 - If GeoX is allowed to criticize a fairly logical (in comparison) Scarpa story as containing "bullWAK", I think I'm excused from calling Gilbert's stories "nonsense" (and boy, there's a lot of it... the apex being the bodiless alien brain which invades Mickey's head and turns him into a genius sociopath and makes Mickey eat lots of ice cream. No kidding!)

[Spectrus]

Bullwak. Looool. The swear filter rules sublime!

[muggyruglugg]

"The Sunken Yacht", aka "Scrooge screws over his nephew: The Comic". It's not a bad comic really, it executes the idea perfectly, but every time I read it I get really mad and dissapointed.

[jopduck1]

Why actually?

[Matilda]

I'm not into highlighting really bad stories as a general rule, but in response to this thread I'd say that there are definitely two distinct categories: stories that are really poorly executed (illogical plot, unfunny dialogue, bad art), and stories that are fairly well executed but that I dislike for reasons of content. I think the original editors were right, for instance, not to publish Barks' "Silent Night." There's cartoonish slapstick, and then there's outright cruelty. I prefer Disney comics to be a torture-free zone.

[schizo]

I do not care for the chapter of "The Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck" that acts as a prequel to "Voodoo Hoodoo". Oddly enough for a Rosa story, it connects poorly to the Barks story and he misinterprets aspects of it or resorts to weird loopholes to connect to it.
Scrooge's appearance was not a disguise for instance, he really did look like Donald back then. Not only is there no mentions of disguises, the original story also states the initial meeting between Scrooge and Bombie took place 70 years ago. Meaning Scrooge would be close to or over 150 years of age if he was an old man back then.
Rosa also tries to add a tragic backstory to the chief of the voodoo tribe, when Barks heavily implied he and his tribe were rotten and mean people and deserving of what Scrooge did to them.

[jopduck1]

I do not like that whole Life and Times or Scrooge McDuck.

[RobbK1]

May 15, 2018 10:30:30 GMT Scroogerello said:

May 14, 2018 17:49:25 GMT jopduck1 said:

All the stories of Rosa. I hate Rosa.

May 15, 2018 4:09:38 GMT jopduck1 said:

I have not read all the stories but I have read half of all stories because I used to like the stories.

I wonder--are you also on the Dutch Disney comic forum? I haven't posted anything there in a LONGGG time, as the forum has been basically dead for years now, but I believe I read your name there somewhere.

As far as I remember, on the Dutch Disney comic forum, the overwhelming majority of posters was critical/negative about Rosa's stories. Of course, it didn't help that Rosa once had an online encounter with a Dutch fan (who, to be fair, was being very, very critical on his stories) on the DCML, and went on this Donald Trump-esque rant about how "the Dutch are the WORST people in the world!" and how all Dutch people are "pointlessly nasty and resentful" and how he couldn't give a rat's WAK about how his stories sold in the Netherlands, since he didn't get royalties anyway. I believe the guy who Rosa was attacking in the message ended up becoming admin of the Dutch
Disney Comics forum (I'm not too sure of that--maybe some of the McDrake members like RobbK or That Duckfan would know), but from that moment on there was a sort of universal hatred of Rosa on that forum, and not without reason, if you ask me. Not just for his stories (which was the initial reason why Rosa apparently received so much Dutch critisism), but for Rosa as a person.

I, too, am not a fan of Don Rosa's stories, partly because of his stiff artwork, and partly because he tries to cram so much into each panel, and tries to throw so much information into stories that's superfluous to the story line, and partly because he tries to lock up The Ducks' history in a definite frozen timeline. 

But, my experience with him as a person doesn't affect my view of him as an author and artist.  Nevertheless, that, too, is on the negative side.  I met him once in person, and thought he came off a bit arrogant.  And he was short with several people.  Lots of celebrities have their privacy invaded, and meet some people who treat them rudely, or with disrespect.  But that's no reason to lash back at all other fans and critics.  Most all other celebrity artists just accept that as coming with the territory, and are gracious (more than civil) to everyone they meet.  Don Rosa is The ONLY cartoonist I've ever met with whom I didn't have an excellent rapport.  Most of them are now my friends. 

My biggest problems with Don was his blaming all Dutch people based on his run-ins with Daniel Van Eijmeren, and his arguments and related incivility with Carl Barks.   Daniel does NOT represent ALL Dutch people.  I understand that Don was irritated and was lashing out when he made his blanket statement.  He can't possibly believe that prejudiced statement. But, he is a professional in the public eye, and therefore, needs to watch what he says, so as to not offend large groups of people just to ventilate anger and frustration from encounters with individuals.  Most of the artist I know, who are as famous as he, have learned to control themselves, and comport themselves on a professional level (at least, when in the public eye).

Having known Carl Barks personally, and having met Don Rosa, not knowing the exact details of their argument/differences, I would have to take Carl's side.  He was an extremely congenial, warm, friendly, well-mannered, respectful, kind, generous and friendly person.  He deserved similar respect.  One could tell that he was extremely hurt and irritated by his treatment by Rosa.  Regardless of their differing opinions on whatever subject, Carl Barks was an old man, who deserved respect and civil treatment, and didn't need the mental stress and potential physical effects that might have occurred from that stress from their confrontation.

[Scrooge MacDuck]

May 19, 2018 17:25:28 GMT RobbK1 said:

I, too, am not a fan of Don Rosa's stories, partly because of his stiff artwork, and partly because he tries to cram so much into each panel, and tries to throw so much information into stories that's superfluous to the story line, and partly because he tries to lock up The Ducks' history in a definite frozen timeline. 

But, my experience with him as a person doesn't affect my view of him as an author and artist.  Nevertheless, that, too, is on the negative side.  I met him once in person, and thought he came off a bit arrogant.  And he was short with several people.  Lots of celebrities have their privacy invaded, and meet some people who treat them rudely, or with disrespect.  But that's no reason to lash back at all other fans and critics.  Most all other celebrity artists just accept that as coming with the territory, and are gracious (more than civil) to everyone they meet.  Don Rosa is The ONLY cartoonist I've ever met with whom I didn't have an excellent rapport.  Most of them are now my friends. 

My biggest problems with Don was his blaming all Dutch people based on his run-ins with Daniel Van Eijmeren, and his arguments and related incivility with Carl Barks.   Daniel does NOT represent ALL Dutch people.  I understand that Don was irritated and was lashing out when he made his blanket statement.  He can't possibly believe that prejudiced statement. But, he is a professional in the public eye, and therefore, needs to watch what he says, so as to not offend large groups of people just to ventilate anger and frustration from encounters with individuals.  Most of the artist I know, who are as famous as he, have learned to control themselves, and comport themselves on a professional level (at least, when in the public eye).

Having known Carl Barks personally, and having met Don Rosa, not knowing the exact details of their argument/differences, I would have to take Carl's side.  He was an extremely congenial, warm, friendly, well-mannered, respectful, kind, generous and friendly person.  He deserved similar respect.  One could tell that he was extremely hurt and irritated by his treatment by Rosa.  Regardless of their differing opinions on whatever subject, Carl Barks was an old man, who deserved respect and civil treatment, and didn't need the mental stress and potential physical effects that might have occurred from that stress from their confrontation.

I'm genuinely sad to hear he may be so — callous, being such a big fan of him as an author. But concerning Barks, I thought that "feud" had turned out to have been an overblown misunderstanding involving Barks's agent, or something of the sort? 

[Scroogerello]

May 19, 2018 17:28:41 GMT Scrooge MacDuck said:

May 19, 2018 17:25:28 GMT RobbK1 said:

I, too, am not a fan of Don Rosa's stories, partly because of his stiff artwork, and partly because he tries to cram so much into each panel, and tries to throw so much information into stories that's superfluous to the story line, and partly because he tries to lock up The Ducks' history in a definite frozen timeline. 

But, my experience with him as a person doesn't affect my view of him as an author and artist.  Nevertheless, that, too, is on the negative side.  I met him once in person, and thought he came off a bit arrogant.  And he was short with several people.  Lots of celebrities have their privacy invaded, and meet some people who treat them rudely, or with disrespect.  But that's no reason to lash back at all other fans and critics.  Most all other celebrity artists just accept that as coming with the territory, and are gracious (more than civil) to everyone they meet.  Don Rosa is The ONLY cartoonist I've ever met with whom I didn't have an excellent rapport.  Most of them are now my friends. 

My biggest problems with Don was his blaming all Dutch people based on his run-ins with Daniel Van Eijmeren, and his arguments and related incivility with Carl Barks.   Daniel does NOT represent ALL Dutch people.  I understand that Don was irritated and was lashing out when he made his blanket statement.  He can't possibly believe that prejudiced statement. But, he is a professional in the public eye, and therefore, needs to watch what he says, so as to not offend large groups of people just to ventilate anger and frustration from encounters with individuals.  Most of the artist I know, who are as famous as he, have learned to control themselves, and comport themselves on a professional level (at least, when in the public eye).

Having known Carl Barks personally, and having met Don Rosa, not knowing the exact details of their argument/differences, I would have to take Carl's side.  He was an extremely congenial, warm, friendly, well-mannered, respectful, kind, generous and friendly person.  He deserved similar respect.  One could tell that he was extremely hurt and irritated by his treatment by Rosa.  Regardless of their differing opinions on whatever subject, Carl Barks was an old man, who deserved respect and civil treatment, and didn't need the mental stress and potential physical effects that might have occurred from that stress from their confrontation.

I'm genuinely sad to hear he may be so — callous, being such a big fan of him as an author. But concerning Barks, I thought that "feud" had turned out to have been an overblown misunderstanding involving Barks's agent, or something of the sort? 

Unfortunately not, as far as I know. The story has been discussed over and over about a hundred million times on the Dutch forum, but from what I gathered, Rosa thought his first meeting with Barks wasn't special enough (I suppose he was expecting a red carpet to be rolled out for him or something...), and then went on a rant about how Barks was "greedy" and "jealous of his [Rosa's] success"; he even infamously called Barks an "evil genius" and accused Barks of trying to sabotage his (Rosa's) career. A lot of the messages have been posted here: bb.mcdrake.nl/engdisney/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=28&start=90 , I have to warn you, though  that the discussion there is somewhat agressive on both sides of the argument. I believe discussions like that were the reason why "McDrake international" was such a flop (besides the fact, of course, that it could hardly complete with the old DCF in terms of members). 

[RobbK1]

May 19, 2018 17:28:41 GMT Scrooge MacDuck said:

May 19, 2018 17:25:28 GMT RobbK1 said:

I, too, am not a fan of Don Rosa's stories, partly because of his stiff artwork, and partly because he tries to cram so much into each panel, and tries to throw so much information into stories that's superfluous to the story line, and partly because he tries to lock up The Ducks' history in a definite frozen timeline. 

But, my experience with him as a person doesn't affect my view of him as an author and artist.  Nevertheless, that, too, is on the negative side.  I met him once in person, and thought he came off a bit arrogant.  And he was short with several people.  Lots of celebrities have their privacy invaded, and meet some people who treat them rudely, or with disrespect.  But that's no reason to lash back at all other fans and critics.  Most all other celebrity artists just accept that as coming with the territory, and are gracious (more than civil) to everyone they meet.  Don Rosa is The ONLY cartoonist I've ever met with whom I didn't have an excellent rapport.  Most of them are now my friends. 

My biggest problems with Don was his blaming all Dutch people based on his run-ins with Daniel Van Eijmeren, and his arguments and related incivility with Carl Barks.   Daniel does NOT represent ALL Dutch people.  I understand that Don was irritated and was lashing out when he made his blanket statement.  He can't possibly believe that prejudiced statement. But, he is a professional in the public eye, and therefore, needs to watch what he says, so as to not offend large groups of people just to ventilate anger and frustration from encounters with individuals.  Most of the artist I know, who are as famous as he, have learned to control themselves, and comport themselves on a professional level (at least, when in the public eye).

Having known Carl Barks personally, and having met Don Rosa, not knowing the exact details of their argument/differences, I would have to take Carl's side.  He was an extremely congenial, warm, friendly, well-mannered, respectful, kind, generous and friendly person.  He deserved similar respect.  One could tell that he was extremely hurt and irritated by his treatment by Rosa.  Regardless of their differing opinions on whatever subject, Carl Barks was an old man, who deserved respect and civil treatment, and didn't need the mental stress and potential physical effects that might have occurred from that stress from their confrontation.

I'm genuinely sad to hear he may be so — callous, being such a big fan of him as an author. But concerning Barks, I thought that "feud" had turned out to have been an overblown misunderstanding involving Barks's agent, or something of the sort? 

It was overblown, to a certain extent.  But Rosa DID treat Carl with some level of disrespect or inconsideration, even given that Barks' agent may have been the original cause of the misunderstanding.  Barks was irritated by the whole thing, and part of that irritation must have been Rosa's disrespectful and uncivil, insensitive (possibly arrogant) behaviour.  I'm guessing that finding out later that Grandy was the original cause, didn't likely take away ALL or Barks' irritation.  Based on how Carl behaved after their "making up", I got the feeling that their relationship was not warm and friendly, but that it was outwardly civil, but "uncomfortable" (based on a partial forgiving on both sides, but an underlying tenseness).

[Monkey_Feyerabend]

Authors can be not as great as human beings/social animals as they are as art creators. In a way, they have the right to. If I do not you grant them that right, then I am not according them the very right of being human beings. Which is the less I can accord to people - I always try to keep in mind - that have added to my existence infinite more then the complete nothing that I have added to theirs.    


As regards Rosa: I do not really care, but if I have, well, from the outside my understanding is that he used to be a bit arrogant and close  minded on some issues, but then he softened considerably over the years. Which I appreciate, since I measure people ethically not on the ground of what their current believes and attitudes are (or were), but rather on how those have improved over the years. 


 

[The KKM]

May 19, 2018 8:07:49 GMT schizo said:

I do not care for the chapter of "The Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck" that acts as a prequel to "Voodoo Hoodoo". Oddly enough for a Rosa story, it connects poorly to the Barks story and he misinterprets aspects of it or resorts to weird loopholes to connect to it.
Scrooge's appearance was not a disguise for instance, he really did look like Donald back then. Not only is there no mentions of disguises, the original story also states the initial meeting between Scrooge and Bombie took place 70 years ago. Meaning Scrooge would be close to or over 150 years of age if he was an old man back then.
Rosa also tries to add a tragic backstory to the chief of the voodoo tribe, when Barks heavily implied he and his tribe were rotten and mean people and deserving of what Scrooge did to them.

"Misinterpret" implies it's accidental, but these are very intentional changes. In nearly every other depiction of a young Scrooge, be it by Barks or Rosa, he never looked like Donald, which is why Rosa went with "it was a disguise". And the tragic backstory is an attempt to use the story still, while addressing the racist imperialist nature of what Scrooge did and of Voodoo Hoodoo, where Scrooge's just happily remembering having tricked and stolen from a village of stereotypical cartoon evil savages.

Rosa loves Barks' works and he tried hard to keep to what they established when doing Life and Times, but he's the first to explain that it's just impossible to do it perfectly- early Scrooge stories by Barks, where Barks was still exploring the character, contradict later stuff, and Barks overall wasn't concerned about "continuity", so Rosa had to intentionally ignore and alter a lot of elements to make his story work.