Gatsby77

I loved me some Mia Sara Harley back in the day (i.e., Birds of Prey). So deliciously evil. The show would probably do far better today in this post-Heroes, Agents of Shield, Arrow, and The Flash world.

Reynolds was not the failure in Green Lantern. It was the -script -- Hal Jordan is cocky and confident, not a comedian -- the -script had Reynolds play Jordan a la Van Wilder or Guy Gardner. And then there was the of turning Galactus into a cloud and the ridiculous special effects on Hector Hammond. 100% -script issues. By comparison, I've loved what I've seen of Reynolds as Deadpool (both in Wolverine: Origins -- "Okay...People are dead!"-- and the test footage & viral marketing campaign for the solo movie so far). And to be fair -- what the writers did to Deadpool at the end of Wolverine was far worse, to me, than what they did to Mandarin in Iron Man 3.

I'm still going with Thor I / Captain America 1 numbers for Ant Man. Guardians of the Galaxy this ain't. Captain America didn't even hit $400 mill. worldwide. Granted, the international box office has vastly expanded since then, as has the coordination (studios used to roll out internationally weeks after the domestic release. Now they're released abroad concurrently or even prior to the U.S.) And by this rubric -- (i.e., Thor 1 numbers of $180 domestic / $450 international) Ant Man will be considered a failure.

I think Ant Man will tank. Like, $180 million domestic & maybe $450 worldwide. That may not sound like "tanking" but for a heavily-promoted tentpole Marvel movie, it's really weak. It'd be one thing if it cost only $90 million to make, but my guess is it's more like $160 -- far too much for a C-list character. So...still profitable, but it's inability to blow the doors off and live up to expectations will cause it to have a dampening effect on future comic book movies.

I don't know that I've ever been as let down by a comic as I was by Infinity War # 1. After the majesty that Infinity Gauntlet, it was just...ugh. Then again, a) I wasn't young enough to live contemporaneously through Secret Wars vs. Secret Wars 2; and b) Seriously -- even Dark Knight Strikes Again had its charms

Looks a lot like Lois & Clark! I'm on board.

Yeah -- I'm not sure about it just because it's a trade. I'd bet on issue 1 instead. Past comp? God Loves, Man Kills didn't exactly skyrocket in the lead-up to X-2 or X-3.

Umm...there will be an X-Force movie sooner than you think.

I don't think too many people speculating on this book paid anything over cover for it. Yet.

Beta Ray Bill stuck around for awhile, and was far more ridiculous than a female Thor. I know only this: My ex-girlfriend avidly collects just two series: (Lady) Thor Rat Queens

And now we have a succession plan for the movies...could this be the "unannounced" sequel Disney Marvel had on the books?

Hah! I love it.

Umm...yeah. Marvel's already confirmed they're going with Peter, not Miles, or even Ben Reilly. Keep pumping it up, however. Hope springs eternal...

OMG ... I _need_ that Silk Howard the Duck Thriller variant.

Agreed. "Key" isn't the right word. "Milestone" might be... there were a number of retailers (and loud people in general) who said Valiant won't last 6 months. Issue #25 in a row, on time, every month, was a milestone that many naysayers should have had foot for dinner. Hmm... 1) There was precedent with VH1, where nearly every issue 25 was celebrated as an "event" 2) I was a naysayer but am record on doubting VEI could get either a) six titles to issue 25 (so far there have been three, and two of them ended on # 25 & re-launched); or b) three titles to issue 50. We'll see...

Spawn 1 sold millions of copies. Still goes for more than Darth Vader 3.

Um...yes. Both %-wise and in expectations. Studios both expect and need their tentpole films to be profitable to help balance the losses of other smaller films throughout the year. Hence why Superman Returns was considered a "failure" despite grossing $391 million worldwide vs. its $270 million production budget.

I don't get it. Where's the tophat and tails??

I was excited for this movie, particularly based on the latest trailer. Until yesterday. Multiple sources are now reporting that Trank was fired from his Star Wars movie because of his "erractic" and unreliable behavior on FF -- lack of leadership, inability to answer questions from the crew, coming to the set late and high on cocaine. So now they're noting that editing duties were essentially taken away from him in post-production _and_ reshoots were required in "late April," (i.e., within the last two weeks). There's really no way to spin that all positively.

I don't mind holding Batman comics, especially this arc. It will always sell and appreciate IMHO. Agreed. This is one of those "once a decade" runs that really matter in the long run. People won't forget these and they will likely always be in demand. So far Snyder has three of the "once a decade" arcs in the first 40 issues IMHO - Court/Night of Owls; Death of the Family; and this one. And don't forget Snyder's "Black Mirror" storyline in Detective Comics before that. Knocked it out of the park on his first at bat.

Yup. Because we all know Batman & the Joker will both stay dead. Although I don't think this will have quite the 10-day trajectory that Captain America 25 did. Folks who did 24-hour & 3-day auction were able to sell for $60 apiece. Folks that did 7- to 10-day auctions ended up selling for just $12-$15 per. It was amazing to watch -- a Superman 75 for the post-internet age.

So you're in the Eternal Warrior #5 crowd then, for Bloodshot? Solar #11 for EW? Pretty sure EW's on the cover of Solar 10.

If we're going with Wizard as a definitive source (I'm not saying that I do, but let's run with it for now), their top 10 books suggests that there was some inconsistency in what people were valuing more back in the day. Scans in the spoilers (because they're huge) are from issues 15, 16, 17, 2 from 18, and 2 from 19. This seems consistent to me. Wizard always called EW # 4 the first appearance of Bloodshot, & hyped Rai 0 more for its significance to the broader Valiant universe as well as the intro of the "new Rai" who would headline Rai & the Future Force. It does say once that the book "introduces Bloodshot" but that month still notes EW 4 as his "1st appearance."

Also, I don't have the issue number, but Wizard actually directly addressed this in an article back in the day -- ie, why EW 4 was considered the 1st Bloodshot by the market despite being a cameo vs. most other instances where more value's put on the 1st full appearance.

It seems that there are enough people shelling out money for both of these issues right now that there might be a situation where there's no clear winner in the long run. Keep in mind that they're both considered classic covers by Valiant fans. I find this recent EW4 vs Rai 0 to be hilarious. This debate was settled back in 1993. Last page cameo = EW4 1st full appearance and cover, and most important book in valiant history = rai 0 Hasn't changed in 22years, what would make it change now? I respectively disagree with this. Historically (primarily due to Wizard's advocacy) EW # 4 was always considered the first Bloodshot, even though was a cameo. Rai 0 was always more expensive because it was the more important _Valiant_ book, but EW 4 the more important Bloodshot book. Same as with Solar 10 as the first EW, even though that's a cameo, with his first full coming in 11. Because of that, for decades I've held EW 4 up as a counter-example to Hulk 180-181, where the market decided that the 1st cameo was more important than the 1st full in terms of the character. Either way, far far more collectors have Rai 0 than EW 4, if only because it was such a key *Valiant* book, regardless of the Bloodshot appearance.