UK Transformers Annuals

[primenova]

From the options listed which one do you like the best? I've listed them on print year then the annual title - to avoid confusion over eg 2012 annual released 2011.

you can post your 2nd fav on a comment or if you have a joint first, then why you voted for one & not the other.

Annual 3 suffers due to the lack of credits in the issue. With have endless questions on did Simon, Ian or James write the Headmaster story?

[primenova]

I've vote annual 5 due to the range of stories in the issue - but not keen on the text story that year.

[Jim]

Annual 4 (which I believe is technically the 1989 annual as they were cover-dated for the following year). Could be a nostalgia thing as I have vivid memories of buying it in Nottingham Makro and poring over it in the back of the car on the way home. I must have learned the Seacon's profiles off by heart in days.

That said, I haven't read 8+, though am assuming not much in the 21st Century annuals is going to compete.

[Andy Turnbull]

The first annual is the best for me.

Andy

[Dave]

The 1987 Annual for me. It really shouldn't be, but I just remember being more excited reading that particular annual than for any of the others - specifically the conclusion to the 'Wanted: Galvatron - Dead or Alive' storyline.

Sept 6, 2012 16:03:02 GMT Jim said:

Annual 4 (which I believe is technically the 1989 annual as they were cover-dated for the following year).

Nope, the Transformers annuals did not have a date on them and had until relatively recently always been referred to by their publication year. Also (as shown in Classics UK Vol. 2) the annual released in 1986 was even advertised as "The 1986 Transformers Annual".
Unfortunately a while back someone said "hey, UK annuals were usually dated with the following year, we should totally start doing that with the TF ones too". To begin with they were easy to ignore, but now this dating method has spread to the TFWiki.

[Grand Moff Muffin]

Sept 6, 2012 16:29:53 GMT Dave said:

Nope, the Transformers annuals did not have a date on them and had until relatively recently always been referred to by their publication year.

I don't think that's correct. I remember that when they were plugged in the weekly comic, if they were referred to by year, it was for the following year. So an annual released in late 1986 (for example) would be described in the advertising feature in the weekly comic as the 1987 Transformers annual. I suppose it was to make it seem cutting-edge/bang-up-to-date-ready-for-next-year rather than a book of the year that was nearly over.

So I'm pretty sure that fans numbering them for the following year is consistent with how Marvel described them - if not on the book itself, then when promoting it.

Martin

[Andy Turnbull]

I have my annuals at hand and I will go to THE INDICIA!!!

First annual - copyright notice of 1985 no mention of a publication year though.
Second annual - copyright notice of 1986 no mention of a publication year though.
Third Annual- The Transformers Annual published 1987
Fourth Annual- The Transformers Annual published 1988
Fifth Annual- The Transformers Annual published 1989
Sixth Annual- The Transformers Annual published 1990
Seventh Annual- The Transformers Annual 1992 published by Marvel.

Andy

[Marc Graham]

The second annual (1986) wins hands down for me.

Why? Well for one - State Games. Beat that!

Knowing nothing can beat that I'll top it off with Victory, gorgeous Senior drawn Dinobots? I'll have that! Megatron chopped in half? Shockwave? Starscream becoming Decepticon leader? All in there, all awesome all the time!

Of course it also had "To a power unknown" which frankly was a bit pants and had some text I could not parse as a child. The quote: "ey op Ken. Hows it going Chuck?" confused me, I thought the person was called Chuck, so the second part made sense and assumed "ey op ken" was some bizzare greeting (like bah-na-weep-gra-nah-weep-nini-bong). Yes, I was an interesting child.

Now shush and go vote 1986!

Marc.

PS. Sadly all annuals post 2000 have generally been pants with either reprinted material or material garnered from the dregs left after someones made off with the bottom of the barrel!

[Andy Turnbull]

And There Shall Come A Leader in the first annual just trumps it for me, only just, it was a tough decision. Those first two annuals were something immense.

I do agree about the post 2000 annuals though, but that is true of almost ALL annuals not just TF ones.

Andy

[Grand Moff Muffin]

Hmmm, I stand at least partially corrected. Page 252 of TF UK Classics Volume 2 reprints the promotional page for the second annual as it appears in the weekly comic, and it refers to it as the 1986 Transformers Annual.

I still have a feeling that some other years they referred to it by the following year, but I don't care enough to pull out all my original issues to find out. As Andy points out, the one released in 1991 called itself the 1992 annual.

Martin

[The Doctor]

The second annual trumps all! Though all the original Marvel ones have their strong points. No stinkers. The last one was the weakest for me as the text story (ATAP) was pants and its strong reputation completely eludes me (great Staz illustrations though, especially the first one). But the recoloured 5-page strips were tops and it had a brilliant cover.

THE OFFICIAL GENERATION 2 ANNUAL! is of course brilliant.

I refuse to acknowledge the existence of the 21st century poo-fests.

-Ralph

[primenova]

I always refer to annual #7 as 1991 annual but do remember it was down as 1992 annual - but it took a while to get that one.

[Jim]

I stand corrected!

[primenova]

The '88 cover was original the cover for #157. But Lee drew a new cover for #157 when it was decided that his first cover would be used for the annual instead. Don't know if the change was made after Lee had sent in first pencils & what the cover for the annual would have been planned to be if this was not altered. [Only found this out from Lee himself at AA.]

[primenova]

Just finished reading the text stories form the 1st annual - only about 3rd time i've read them.