RCheli

I sell mostly Silver and Bronze Age books. Nothing super high dollar, but if you're looking for runs of decent books from the 60s, 70s, and early 80s for $3 or $5, I'm your man. I have a few graded books, but that's not my forte.

Tomorrow! Come on, people! Show up and spend money! I need to get my cat's thyroid removed! That ain't cheap!

This Sharp Comics? https://www.facebook.com/SharpComics/ I don't know if there are others.

Stu is one of many people here who had migrated from over on the eBay comic chat boards. He's a funny guy who can rub some people the wrong way. I think he got banned here for saying something overly obnoxious and has continued to return under different IDs, getting banned when he was found out. I haven't spoken to him in a long time, but he always seemed on the up and up to me. (Other than being a Boston sports fan.)

That's a nice metal display rack you got there.

Taste is an individual thing. I suggest just going into a comic shop and start looking at the comics and see which artist is appealing to you. There are a lot of artists working today -- whether it's Marvel, DC, Image, Dark Horse, or the many smaller publishers that are putting out great comics -- that I like, and plenty more that I don't like in the least. I love Mignola, but I know that there are a lot of people that do not. I'm not a fan of Neal Adams, but I know that he has a huge fanbase.

Someone needs to pull a complete list of appearances of Galactus in shorts.

Guy Gardner and John Stewart as the new Green Lantern... Jim Rhodes as Iron Man... Ben Reilly as Spider-Man... That dude who replaced Captain America in the late 80s... Don Blake no longer Thor... This stuff isn't new. Is it because it's women that are replacing the characters that's bothering you?

You don't like Brian Bolland? He draws exclusively on the computer now and is fantastic.

I can't pass up those Amazing Adventures for $50 each. I don't even collect them, but they're really cool and a great price! I'll take them!

And my original argument stands, which was: At really no other time has readership/fandom of comics stuck with the medium for so long. If you read comics as a 12-year-old in 1950, there was a really big chance you weren't reading them in 1960. This stayed true really up until the 90s. Comic collecting was for a small core something that they kept with, but for the majority, it was a passing fancy. Since the 90s, that number has reversed itself. Now the majority of people who are still in fandom have been in it for more than 20 years, and a periodical/episodic medium like comics wasn't really meant for that. They were meant to have its readership change every so often. Not many readers in 1985 were lamenting that Reed Richards was different than he was in 1965. Today, we are complaining about that. (And that is often why comics not from the Big 2, whose characters/titles don't have decades of baggage, are more appealing.) We all tend to enjoy the comics the most from the period when we started reading them. That is really far away for most of us. But if you go to a convention, there are a lot of people who love modern comics. If you go to a store, there are a lot of people who love modern comics. If you come to the CGC boards, there aren't that many people who love modern comics.

I agree, and non-hero books from the beginning of comics were often the best stuff being published. But there are good super-hero comics, too.

Low readership does not equal quality, and the fact that you're using that as evidence means that this is an argument I've already won. Television shows have lost ridiculous numbers of viewers over the past several decades, but there are still great (and awful shows) being broadcast. The same goes for album sales. Look, it's difficult to argue with you because of your narrow focus. But these boards -- as great as they are -- are not the place to go if you're looking to find fans of modern comics. It's like going to a Bernie Sanders rally looking for people who want to keep pot illegal. That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people out there who think that way. I have read every iteration of Mr. Miracle -- from Kirby to Englehart/Rogers to JM DeMatties to many others -- and the most recent series was the best (IMO). The current Hawkman series is terrific, and I've enjoyed that more than anything else I've read of the character. And I suspect that each of those titles have sold fewer than at any previous time. There are tons of great comics coming out now, and I would put the best of what's being published today against the best of any era (although the way comics are published today doesn't really resemble the way they were in the past; though the way they were published in the 70s doesn't much resemble how they were published in the 40s).

Sorry, I overestimated your simplemindedness. It seems that you think that the majority of people find them despicable, and that is also not true. This is just yet another example -- as was the previous one where you complained about the bad Batgirl art -- where you make some ridiculous pronouncement about something without anything to back it up. Obviously you have a problem with modern comics.

It doesn't seem to be true because it isn't true. He doesn't like modern books and others here don't like them, so in his mind that means everyone hates them.

Today's comics readers tend to have been collectors for a significant period of time, in many case decades. The readers of old did not stick around so long, so they didn't often have the chance to get disillusioned and complain when characters and stories started to go in different directions. That being said, the younger comics readers aren't as grumpy as the old and they are more willing to accept and enjoy new styles, new themes, and new storytelling. I ran a few cons about 12 years ago, and at one I had Scottie Young as a guest. His appeal was split neatly between love and hate right at around 30 years of age. I'm sure you can guess which was which. I still buy and enjoy a lot of new comics, and I'm 46. I dislike certain titles in much the same way I did when I was 16 or 26 or 36.

I still enjoy Caniff, but I liked Robbins' overall work better (story and art). I like Roy Crane better than Caniff too. And I agree with your take on his Marvel work. I think between a new size, a new style, and a different way of telling a story, he didn't cut it. But that doesn't mean his overall work isn't great.

Look, you have been consistently wrong over countless... Oh, wait. Wrong person. Never mind. Edit: And it's not. I'm not sure why you think that trying to hire a more diverse group of creatives to better find different ways of producing work would be racist.

Is it? It's racist to look to hire people that aren't white men? It would be racist to NOT hire white men or to hire someone less qualified than a white man, but to not take into consideration where someone may come from and thus offer up something different is bad business.

Look, just stop. Really. You're arguing with yourself and you just look worse and worse (which I didn't think possible). I do not work at Marvel or DC, but I do work in a creative field and it is imperative that one hires people with different points of view, because God knows we have plenty of that coming from white men (of which I am one). If you feel you need to start splitting hairs on the level of her awards or how many books she's sold, you're missing the point.

If the story is good (and I have to admit I haven't read Thor in a while) what's the difference? In everything, the story is what matters. Jim Rhodes as Iron Man worked, no? Azrael as Batman didn't.

I the other Thor gone? Is Peter Parker no longer Spiderman? So what's the big deal?

This is nothing new. Black Panther was created specially to be a, get this, black hero. Same with countless other minority characters which were created to help readers find someone just like them in the comics. So if that means a Muslim girl, so be it. Or a Hispanic or LGBTQ or whatever.

Look, you're a troll because your post count signifies you have some sort of knowledge about comics, and yet you have proven time and again that you are truly misinformed about nearly everything. You seem to want to show an awareness of how the industry works -- whether it's new comics, creating comics, selling comics -- but in the many years of reading your posts, I can't for the life of my find any of that. Instead, you tend to criticize and nit-pick and bloviate with the depth of a three-year-old. In this thread, you criticize artists and writers currently working in the business, making a living off their work, based on badly executed page or panel or sales figures, and that's just not how it works. Great comics get cancelled. Great creators do bad work. Artists and writers aren't just handed writing assignments without showing that they have talent and can do it (and they are especially not given work merely because of their sex, gender, race, etc.). Why was that Batgirl page published as is? Was it the fault of the penciller? An editor? An inker? Was Frank Robbins' bad pose because he had 2 hours to complete a page when a writer or letterer didn't get their assignment done on time? Who knows. But it's a weak argument -- and trolling -- when you do this sort of thing. So you need to stop.

Jesus. You really are a troll of the highest order.