12 of 14 people found the following review helpful
Rupert Annual No 78 - A Thin Tome,
This review is from: The Rupert Annual 2014: No. 78 (Annuals 2014) (Hardcover)
Positives (The Old Professor's Praise)
(1)Good representation of Rupert on the front cover.
(3)Four stories(as appeared in 1965 to 1968, 1970 to 1974, 1976 to 1977 and 1979 to 1980).
(4)The seasons are well represented in the range of stories.
(5)Three attractive double frame pictures in the Stuart Trotter story.
(6)The paper banger activity from an old annual links up well with the new Go-Kart tale.
(7)Clear and interesting contents page.
(8)The new story is engaging and attractively drawn.
Negatives (Sir Jasper Cadde's Criticism)
(1)Most of the front and back cover appears rather sketchy.
(2)No back endpaper.
(3)The image on the title page is just part of the front cover.
(4)No puzzle pages.
(5)The four stories all have a very different style of title page which means the book has an incohesive feel.
(6)Bingo's legs seem to have some form of wasting disease on page 46.
(7)The annual feels extremely thin.
(8)No Follow Rupert page.
(9)The rabbit twins on the front cover are obviously hiding their faces in shame.
(10)Page 4 refers to endpapers but there is only one.
(11)To boost the page total to 72 the front and back boards are counted as four pages.
(12)The television in the new story jars a little as it seems rather too modern.
(13)The colouring of the word 'Rupert' on the cover and for three of the four stories is a "Rupert Red" but the
final story is a mint green; so there is no link between all the stories and the cover. Surely they could either
have all been red (or at least the same colour) or, as in fairly recent years, they could ALL have been a diff-
erent colour from the artist's palette?
(14)Due to the different people being involved for the Go-Kart tale there are some strange discrepancies such as
on page 38 it is written that Rupert meets Edward, Bill and Podgy but the frame shows him meeting Edward, Algy
(15)In the next frame Rupert is said to be in a tree with Podgy but it is Algy who is shown!
(16)Later on Bill has replaced Edward!
(17)Although Rupert and his chums all get in Jerome's car, only Rupert and Algy can be seen. Which other pals are
meant to be in the car as well could well have been a task on the missing Rupert puzzle page!
(18)When they get out of the car Algy and Willie have been mysteriously replaced by Podgy and Edward!
(19)On page 48 it is stated that the Imps have removed the wheels of Rupert's go-kart but he is shown wheeling it
home which is rather strange as we are told that Mr Bear reattaches the wheels before Rupert goes to bed!
Perhaps there is still magic in the wheels.
(20)Rupert has always had a tradition of doing the "right thing" and it is said that he wins the race 'fair and
'square' but apparently there is still magic in the wheels which surely gives him an unfair advantage as he
eventually takes to the air like the Vicar of Dibley did in the final episode! Surely a steward's enquiry
should be called? Perhaps the TV coverage could be played back in slow motion to determine the fairness of it
all or Formula One should check their rule book?
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 22 Aug 2013 17:53:38 BDT
Lj Rm Roberts says:
Thanks for finding all the 'bloopers' - you evidently study it much more closely than I do! Yes I did think it odd about the magic in the cart - not the sort of behaviour we would expect of Rupert who would normally win fair and square.
In reply to an earlier post on 29 Aug 2013 13:31:56 BDT
In reply to an earlier post on 29 Aug 2013 13:37:19 BDT
Last edited by the author on 31 Aug 2013 10:30:56 BDT
Book Beaver says:
Hi, T & Lj RR - it is astonishing how poorly the Trotter tale (quite encouraging in many ways) fails to match the text. It is as if the text & artwork were prepared independently & never checked. I remember hearing over the years of the odd apparent error when the text referred to the 'wrong' rabbit or fox as the artwork and text didn't appear to match up but it was never as incompatible as this.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›