For Phantom fans, there are only three sources of new stories: syndicated strips, Egmont and Moonstone. I can't imagine why any true fan would want to reduce the opportunities for generating new material.
That's my thoughts exactly.
I personally believe Lee would have liked to see his creation succeed in the US comic book market (even if he, according to himself, didn't like modern US comics very much in general, because of the violence). Bryan, claiming to be Falk-purists, are doing his very best from preventing it, which I guess could have dissapointed Lee.
i think that a consistent publishing schedule is right now more important than having the same creators for each issue. I really don't mind fill-in artists, in fact I prefer more variety.
Us Scandinavians are not used to having one writer for the Phantom comic, after all (maybe except Claes Reimerthi, who is incredibly productive :grin: ).
For Phantom fans, there are only three sources of new stories: syndicated strips, Egmont and Moonstone. I can't imagine why any true fan would want to reduce the opportunities for generating new material. Since each source is for a different audience, I wouldn't expect each offering to be received equally by everyone.
Even the master, Lee Falk, had mixed reviews for different periods of his work.
I enjoy reading all three, but of course, certain stories resonate more than others for my sensibilities. I enjoy modern comics and have several long boxes full of non Phantom comics. I especially love classic Lee Falk. I look forward to the Egmont stories, I read the newspaper stories each day and I'm delighted to see Moonstones fresh approach. They are daring; they're trying new things. Ben Raab may have added his interpretation to certain aspects, but he paid tribute to Lee's work...who else revisted the Wasaka and the Sky Band?
Mike is studying Lee's work intently and I believe long time fans and newcomers will find something to like in what he's doing. I hope everyone will give his work a fair chance, but I know there were people who hated Legacy before anyone even had a chance to read it.
I sincerely hope all three find continued success.
Totaly agree there.
To further clarify that, I would mention that Lee Falk had no interest in following Phantom 2040. However, he was happy that it was happening and mentioned it early on at one of our dinners. He was glad to see another version of his character being offered even if it wasn't his cup of tea. He was happy to promote it even though it bore little resemblance to his rendition of the character.
He was not fond of Defenders of the Earth and bristled when they wanted to give the Phantom wings. Still, he understood, in addition to giving him more royalty checks, these versions brought enjoyment to Phantom fans.
I noticed that Buckaroo Banzai now sells better than The Phantom. Mike, I hope you won't rest before I can again brag about the fact that the Phantom is Moonstone's best selling title.
He was not fond of Defenders of the Earth and bristled when they wanted to give the Phantom wings. Still, he understood, in addition to giving him more royalty checks, these versions brought enjoyment to Phantom fans.
I think him having superpowers ("Strenght of ten tigers") in DOTE, was an insult to the character and his following. I find the series very hard to watch, but obviously, they are aimed at kids around the age of 6-8 or so.
To further clarify that, I would mention that Lee Falk had no interest in following Phantom 2040.
He didn't even watch it? That's strange. I would have understood it if it was DOTE, but 2040 was at least, while flawed, a well made, cleverly written series, even though it takes so many liberties with the character.
He was not fond of Defenders of the Earth and bristled when they wanted to give the Phantom wings. Still, he understood, in addition to giving him more royalty checks, these versions brought enjoyment to Phantom fans.
Naturally, he was, I think, only human!
But, se are the fans, we don't earn our living in doing such, and therefor don't have to axept such "shanges" of the Phantom!
I did see a poster in aonther forum telling that we could not have the same Phantom from different writers! That is strange, because as far as I know we have that from Egmont, several writers, but still the same hero!! 
Lum
All the charracters have to change according to time. phantom have to do it too. Or he will just end up like mandrake. Mandrake, was a great character, and what happened now.
Hi
All the charracters have to change according to time. phantom have to do it too. Or he will just end up like mandrake. Mandrake, was a great character, and what happened now.
I am not sure what you are saying! What time is that? What has been changing since the Phantom was first shown in the papers?
I don't think the violence in a fight between two, or more persons have changed much, if something has it is the way it is shown to us!
Almost all Moonstone stories are filled with close up description of fights, a lot more use of guns and other veabpons, and a more dramatic way of showing the Phantom destroying other persons in a fight, and perhaps even kill!
I am sure, Falk had in mind that the Phantom was very rough when he started the strip, and in the end perhaps he hurted just as many persons, but a lot of this was left to the readers imagination to describe!
So, are you shaying the time has changed in a way that we demand a more detaljed description and less left to our imagination? If so, perhaps you are right, but then I would prefere the Phantom to stop rather than continue being a rated comic!
Lum
Hi, guys
I must say I am puzzled with some of the posts in this thread. I have read Mr. Shedden's piece and find it very balanced.
Yes, there is perhaps an undercurrent of bias against the publisher, but there is also plenty of praise for some of the efforts in this particular issue. On the whole, I found his approach very constructive.
Pippi
Hi, guys
I must say I am puzzled with some of the posts in this thread. I have read Mr. Shedden's piece and find it very balanced.
Yes, there is perhaps an undercurrent of bias against the publisher, but there is also plenty of praise for some of the efforts in this particular issue. On the whole, I found his approach very constructive.
Pippi
It's comments like this coming off his news site announcing the issue is out:
"...so hopefully they'll soon give up on polluting the world with their pathetic excuse for The Phantom."
That's one that really bring out what he thinks of the stories. Here are some quotes from the review itself:
"As you can see from the above introduction, Moonstone seem to have done their best to bury the arrival of this comic..."
"...Judging by past efforts from Moonstone, and what I've read of the first script, the chances are not good."
"Secondly, Moonstone have carried on their unforgiveable tradition of the Phantom using his knife to deliberately wound his opponent; sorry, but this sort of thing is unacceptable in a true Phantom story..."
So yes, from your point of view I can see it as a fair review of a story he appeared to like quite a bit, but his reliance on Diamond distribution numbers for popularity (a known innacuracy here in the American comic world, especially for trades like Legacy since even most comic stores don't order them through Diamond), and his snarky comments about Moonstone are what got the thread going. From that I would not find it a very constructive review, as he doesn't like the issue because it's Moonstone, but Moonstone can't help publishing as itself.
He also disliked the issue for deciding to use Christopher Walker for the first Phantom's name instead of Kit Walker (which they have been consistent with except for Legacy, which was more of a specialty item then a comic book), because in Falk's latest telling of the origin he used Kit Walker. I understand it may be a minor continuity mistake, but considering how Falk was with his own continuity I would have thought Phantom fans would be more forgiveable. Alas, not Guran and what seems a positive review overall comes off insulting. Then again, if he had left the personal dislike of the publisher out of the review I wouldn't have even thought twice about this comment.
Also, I love him attacking them for the Phantom using a knife on someone, even if he wounds them in a way that does virtually no damage. It's funny to me because of personal experience involving knives and fights, and it seems to be a major hangup for fans of the Phantom in other distribution markets that read a lot of the children based Egmont stories.
I had to read the whole review again before answering this.
So yes, from your point of view I can see it as a fair review of a story he appeared to like quite a bit, but his reliance on Diamond distribution numbers for popularity (a known innacuracy here in the American comic world, especially for trades like Legacy since even most comic stores don't order them through Diamond), and his snarky comments about Moonstone are what got the thread going. From that I would not find it a very constructive review, as he doesn't like the issue because it's Moonstone, but Moonstone can't help publishing as itself.
Yes, he lets us know in no uncertain terms at the beginning what he would expect from the publisher, but the last three (large) paragraphs, in which he actually deals with the book, is mainly appreciative.
Does it have to be 10 out of 10 every time? Regardless?
Pip