Comics UK

A bit harsh really. It wasn't rubbish. In fact, it was very good.

The only problem was, the rest were better. Tom Paterson's was always going to be a favourite of mine, the crazy style, the appearances of people, it all added up to an amazing strip.

David Sutherland's was good but not as good as Tom's. It lacked a certain something, it just wasn't really his style. His style suited the Bash Street Kids much better.

Nigel Parkinson's is another favourite of mine and I honestly think he should become a regular of the story. His style suits the comic and his classic style feels right in a strip about history.

Laura Howell also did a great ghosting job and I hope to see more of her stuff.

SO WHAT WAS WRONG WITH HUNT'S FRED'S BED?

I just don't think his style suited Fred's Bed, Ratz and Little Plum were more his art style I think, but his Fred's Bed looked odd. I loved the Doctor Who one and the one page story where he goes back to change the coordinates of his house. The Annual story drawn by him was also good fun. He was a good artist but the others were just better.

ALSO ABOUT THIS OLLAF THE MADLANDER/FRED'S BED hoo-haa. I think both strips were brilliant, reprints or not. I'd of liked to of seen them both in the Beano. Ollaf was great and Sid Burgon's artwork was one of a kind. Bob Nixon's "Ollaf" was also very good. I honestly preferred Adrian the Barbarian as the name. Ollaf the Madlander was quite weird.

i dont see why changing adrian the barbarians's name to Olaff the Madlander was considered necessary. Do they think kids today dont know what barbarian means?

WizzKid97 wrote:A bit harsh really. It wasn't rubbish. In fact, it was very good.

The only problem was, the rest were better. Tom Paterson's was always going to be a favourite of mine, the crazy style, the appearances of people, it all added up to an amazing strip.

David Sutherland's was good but not as good as Tom's. It lacked a certain something, it just wasn't really his style. His style suited the Bash Street Kids much better.

Nigel Parkinson's is another favourite of mine and I honestly think he should become a regular of the story. His style suits the comic and his classic style feels right in a strip about history.

Laura Howell also did a great ghosting job and I hope to see more of her stuff.

SO WHAT WAS WRONG WITH HUNT'S FRED'S BED?

I just don't think his style suited Fred's Bed, Ratz and Little Plum were more his art style I think, but his Fred's Bed looked odd. I loved the Doctor Who one and the one page story where he goes back to change the coordinates of his house. The Annual story drawn by him was also good fun. He was a good artist but the others were just better.

ALSO ABOUT THIS OLLAF THE MADLANDER/FRED'S BED hoo-haa. I think both strips were brilliant, reprints or not. I'd of liked to of seen them both in the Beano. Ollaf was great and Sid Burgon's artwork was one of a kind. Bob Nixon's "Ollaf" was also very good. I honestly preferred Adrian the Barbarian as the name. Ollaf the Madlander was quite weird.

David Sutherland's was much better.

Tin Can Tommy wrote:i dont see why changing adrian the barbarians's name to Olaff the Madlander was considered necessary. Do they think kids today dont know what barbarian means?

I do believe it was simply because they thought kids may not understand why everything was magical and how inanimate objects could suddenly move about. Hopefully that explains your question Tin Can.

I think it was more to make it less obvious that the strip was a reprint. However, in Adrian's case I can't see why it was necessary - I doubt that many parents would remember who he was, as by the time he made his Beezer debut the comic was in terminal decline (in terms of readership, not content). Kids wouldn't have been likely to have seen him before as the Beezer annuals had ended by the time he reappeared in the Beano, and his strip was probably too recent for it to be a regular feature in Classics from the Comics.

I must admit that when I saw Fred's Bed in the Beano for the first time, I thought it was all-new, which shows how well it has aged. I also believed the David Parkins Three Bears reprints in 2006 were new, although on the other side his Billy Whizz stories looked very dated when they were reprinted, partly due to the decision to reprint the strips before the tracksuit was introduced, which I found odd.

Yeah, Johnny, who would have thought David Parkins Fred's Bed strips were reprints?

I don't think Adrian the Barbarian EVER appeared in Classics. They didn't use 90s material often.

comicsgalore wrote:Yeah, Johnny, who would have thought David Parkins Fred's Bed strips were reprints?

In my own defence, I was aged 12 at the time, and wasn't reading these forums at that point. I started reading the old forums around 2005 or so, but then when the new forum was set up I lost interest (due to the lack of activity), which I didn't really regain until late 2007. I became a more frequent visitor in summer 2008 when the Beano top 100 was running, and I continued to be a lurker until I joined in May 2009. Ironically this was a week or so after the first issue where Hunt Emerson's Fred's Bed appeared.

Also, David Parkins is very much still alive, so it's not like reprints of, say, Robert Nixon's work where it was obviously reused because he's dead. In the case of the handful of Tom Paterson strips, he was actually a regular contributor to the comic at the time (there were some issues in 2007 where Tom drew nearly half the comic!). I thought the Riot Squad was new as well at the time, as Ken was and still is an active Beano artist. On the other hand, it was obvious to me that Ivy the Terrible and Billy Whizz were being reprinted - in Ivy's case because of the artist, with Billy it was due to his outfit.

I wasnt being sarcastic johnny, i thought fred's bed was brand new when i started reading it.