








Jan 4th 2012 By: Andy Khouri









Peanuts is not Spider-Man. We don't need a fresh creative team. Schulz worked on the strip till almost the very moment he died. It was his life's work, you don't GET to just do your version of it and sell it as if it's the same thing. I don't even care how good it is, I'm ethically opposed to this existing. I don't remember people doing more Picasso stuff after he died. How about these very talented guys do a comic about kids, for kids that they invented?
January 05 2012 at 11:07 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI think a monthly Peanuts would be welcomed to comic shops. Even without the 4-panel structure, kids could use a decompressed story with simplicity as an alternative to, say, everything else that's being offered to them.
January 05 2012 at 9:48 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI think a monthly Peanuts would be welcomed to comic shops. Even without the 4-panel structure, kids could use a decompressed story with simplicity as an alternative to, say, everything else that's being offered to them.
January 05 2012 at 9:48 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyIt took five pages to do what Schulz would've done in five panels.
January 04 2012 at 11:11 PM Report abuse Permalink +3 rate up rate down ReplyFour panels. Mr. Schulz tended to work in four-panel strips. Without four panels, 3eanuts (http://3eanuts.com/) wouldn't exist nor make sense.
If you want to be fair, it would have taken about 24 - 48 panels, depending on the length of a story Mr. Schulz wanted to tell that week, and this could have easily been a week-long series.
I dig it.
I'm glad this exists.
With Archie doing the "Look at me! Look at me! We have a gay character and we married off Archie and awe had a gay wedding and..." it's nice that there's just good 'ol Peanuts.
Kind of like looking back and seeing Calvin & Hobbes haven't changed.
What's wrong with having a gay character?
January 05 2012 at 2:04 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyWhat's wrong with Kevin Keller? There's a lot more his character then just his sexuality.
January 05 2012 at 2:57 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyWhile I probably shouldn't speak for him, I don't think Burr is saying there's anything wrong with a gay character, and by all accounts it does seem like they're handling it all very well, but it's also pretty hard to deny that adding a gay character was part of a larger "let's generate some buzz about Archie comics by doing some very un-Archie things" strategy. And when there's substance behind it (as seems to be the case here), there's really nothing wrong with that either but it can get tiresome after awhile.
January 05 2012 at 9:06 AM Report abuse Permalink +1 rate up rate down@grovberg: While Kevin's existence is certainly a direct result of the passing of the elder Goldwater and the company's new era under the younger Goldwaters, Archie's been quietly pushing more diversity for quite some time. (I hear they even dug into Moose and explained that he's not just a dumb jock, he's dyslexic.)
On the subject of Peanuts, Franklin's inclusion was plenty controversial at the time. It's easy to forget that the mere depiction of an integrated classroom at that time was a political statement (even if Sparky denied it).
This comic looks lovely.
January 04 2012 at 5:56 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyFor those of you in LA tonight, Shane and fellow creator Matt Whitlock will be signing this issue at Meltdown Comics on Sunset Blvd. at 7 pm!
January 04 2012 at 5:47 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyWho's the target audience for this?
January 04 2012 at 5:42 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyMe!
Seriously, this seemed like a terrible idea at first, but the story's exactly right.
Maybe kids? Remember when kids used to read comics? Good times.
January 05 2012 at 8:57 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyDo kids give a crap about Peanuts?
January 05 2012 at 10:37 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down
A countdown of the must-read books of the year.
16 Comments