2012 Annuals

[Digifiend]

Covers have been revealed for the 2012 annuals!


Beano's looks OK. Dandy's was clearly drawn before last year's revamp - but that's no excuse for using the late 70s logo instead of the current one!

[philcom55]

Dandy's was clearly drawn before last year's revamp - but that's no excuse for using the late 70s logo instead of the current one!

More likely they've used a deliberately 'retro' look knowing that most annuals are bought by parents who grew up reading the old Dandy themselves and probably wouldn't even recognize the new Desperate Dan.

- Phil R.

[Lew Stringer]

Dandy's was clearly drawn before last year's revamp - but that's no excuse for using the late 70s logo instead of the current one!

More likely they've used a deliberately 'retro' look knowing that most annuals are bought by parents who grew up reading the old Dandy themselves and probably wouldn't even recognize the new Desperate Dan.

- Phil R.

Exactly my thoughts too. (http://lewstringer.blogspot.com/2011/05 ... nuals.html) The fact that it's labeled "75th Birthday Edition" might have something to do with it as well.

You know, this increasing nit-picking of every little thing that The Dandy and The Beano do is getting bizarre. I'm not just talking about here, (where at least it's balanced out somewhat) but over on the unofficial beanoforum too, and on that snooty not-as-funny-as-it-thinks-it-is Beano Review site.

[steelclaw]

Your right Lew I've noticed a lot of unnecessary criticism for Beano & Dandy.
Why don't people just read it and enjoy it
and write something postive for a change(I know alot of people do that)

The covers are excellent

[Lew Stringer]

Your right Lew I've noticed a lot of unnecessary criticism for Beano & Dandy.
Why don't people just read it and enjoy it
and write something postive for a change(I know alot of people do that)

The covers are excellent

I should add that I'm not against criticism as such, but rather the fussiness of some of it. I'm not even talking about this thread in particular, but rather the general mood-swing towards nit-picking as evidenced by other threads and the aforementioned other sites.

It's almost like the default setting now for fans is to immediately look for faults (and perceived faults) rather than enjoying the comics. And why are Dandy and Beano always the ones singled out?

Anyway, back on topic: those covers. Brilliant, clear design work. Great to see a winter theme on the Beano one (even though it'll be out in July, - save 'em for Christmas, folks!) and that old logo on the Dandy Annual should make sure the book is seen from across the shop by parents suddenly having a retro moment, a nostalgic tear forming in their eye, as they impulse-purchase the book for their comic-deprived child (but secretly for themselves too) before they've had a second thought.

[Digifiend]

Broons was listed but had no image, and there's some possible bad news. It looks like neither the Dennis and Gnasher annual, nor a Beano-Dandy classic one, are listed on Amazon. I hope they're not discontinued.

[swirlythingy]

You know, this increasing complaining about nebulous concepts of "nit-picking" in response to every litttle comment made about things that the Dandy and the Beano have done is getting bizarre. Bonus points for complaining about it in an obscure place on a completely irrelevant thread - that really shows confidence in your assertions.

Where is the line between "nit-picking" and acceptable criticism - or is the latter, as I have often suspected, an oxymoron on this forum?

FWIW, I'm well aware of my personal definition of "nit-picking", and it is defined as the line before which one could not conceivably be mistaken for the Beano Review, which last week gave us the following:

(Sound effects by Numskulls over-used, as ever.
Also how do the little men make their spectacles?)

The biggest complaint I've made recently was the fact that, for the last two issues, only 50% (16 of 32 pages) of the Beano contained new comic strips, and the rest was either filler (dressed up as 'magazine content') or reprints. I think that's a rather major concern. Go ahead and count'em for yourself.

Anyway, back on topic again...

Only three characters (Dan, Korky, Brassneck) on the Dandy cover were around in the 70s, so if it is a decision by marketing to appeal to an older audience, it was evidently one made after Nigel had drawn the picture. Similarly, from the line-up and the pasted-on nature of the "100% funny!" text, this cartoon predates the revamp. (I wonder if it'll carry an advert for Dandy Xtreme? Probably not, since they had time to retrofit it with the new branding.)

In short, it's neither up-to-date nor sufficiently outmoded. Bit of an unfortunate position to be in, really, but I wish they could have decided one way or the other. Judging from the content, although the logo (and comic advert) in 2009 were for Xtreme, it looks as if marketing had faced a similar dilemma. Let's hope the new revamp lasts longer than the last two!

Not much to say about the Beano one, except it looks like Jimmy Hansen's work again, and I do hope it has a different picture on the back this time - last year's spoiled a perfect 11 year run.

As for the retro collection and Dennis and Gnasher... well, let's be frank, it's May 2011, and even the main annuals shouldn't be there yet. With any luck they're not cancelled, but going to be released at a sensible time.

Given that annuals have historically sold a lot better than comics, I wonder if there's the appetite to try launching a new one? Roger the Dodger annual, perhaps? (It would make up for the comic version going into reprints.)

[NP]

The Dandy Annual is intended to be a celebration of all 75 years of The Dandy. The cover was drawn AFTER the revamp. It's meant to be a sort of repository of 'resting' strips as well, as many people who were regular weekly readers still buy the Annual or have it bought for them.

[Lew Stringer]

Thanks for proving my point Swirly. There's nothing like a good long moan full of assumptions about books that haven't been published yet is there?

[STARBOY]

Beat me to it Lew

[Scoobie]

You know, this increasing complaining about nebulous concepts of "nit-picking" in response to every litttle comment made about things that the Dandy and the Beano have done is getting bizarre. Bonus points for complaining about it in an obscure place on a completely irrelevant thread - that really shows confidence in your assertions.

*yawn*

Time to change the record, you're getting boring.

[felneymike]

Where are these assumptions about a book that hasn't been published yet? Everything I can see can be reasonably extrapolated from the cover. The use of a 70's logo does seem a bit odd, mind you. Wasn't it using the 2004-revamp-style logo before?

[Jon]

The Dandy annual cover is really growing on me. As a blend of old and new it actually really works. The old logo fits excellently I feel. I agree with comments about it probably being nostalgia thing, but the annuals these days are so inconsistent with their logos that the kids probably won't be bothered/notice anything out of the ordinary. Just line up the Beano annuals from 2000 onwards, and compare the spine designs to those from, say, 1980-1990 - they definitely kept to a standard in the '80s much more than they do these days!

[swirlythingy]

Where are these assumptions about a book that hasn't been published yet? Everything I can see can be reasonably extrapolated from the cover.

They're in Lew's head. As usual.

The use of a 70's logo does seem a bit odd, mind you. Wasn't it using the 2004-revamp-style logo before?

Not quite; annuals always lag a couple of years behind comics, and with its rapid revamp cycle the Dandy's had it worse than most. Here's a summary of logos:

• 2004: old style
• 2005: old style
• 2006: 2004 style
• 2007: 2004 style
• 2008: 2004 style
• 2009: 2007 style (but with 2004 style content)
• 2010: 2007 style (with 2007 content)
• 2011: 2007 style
• 2012: ?

So, if the pattern holds, I'd expect to see 2010 content in the new one. One thing I did notice, however, was that the Desperate Dan strips in 2011 were mostly drawn by Nigel, but those in 2010 were drawn by Jamie. It looks as if that was the point at which it became "a repository of 'resting' strips", then, which also explains the presence of Cuddles and Dimples, Jak and Todd, etc. on this cover.

Still an odd choice of logo, though, given that all 'resting' strips shown were relatively recent! Just what demographic are they going for here, or is the aim to draw the parents to the logo and then keep the children happy with the content once cash has been forked over?

Or maybe they've finally given up and decreed that no matter how many times the Dandy gets revamped in future, this is the logo that will appear on the annual? Looking at the list above, one has to admit this would be a better solution.

[Lew Stringer]

Where are these assumptions about a book that hasn't been published yet? Everything I can see can be reasonably extrapolated from the cover.

They're in Lew's head. As usual.

Swirly, if your posts here are any indication, your manners must be appalling.

Don't judge a book by its cover. It's already been explained why they've chosen that logo and cover characters.