Gatsby77

Nah - I'm just offering a counter-weight to the repeated assertions by a small but vocal minority here that the film sucked - and, more specifically, that Brie Larsen's acting in it was sub-par. Neither is true. More importantly, the film doesn't need defending by me, Silvermane or anyone else Its results - an A Cinemascore ranking by moviegoers and $1.1+ billion box office - speak for themselves.

You can keep trying, but math - and reality - doesn't lie. As Musicmeta pointed out...Captain Marvel doesn't get to $426 million domestic -- outdoing: Wonder Woman Deadpool Star Wars: Episode 9 Spider-Man: Far From Home Joker BvS Captain America: Civil War unless *many* people who saw it then liked it enough to watch it in the theater more than once.

For those unaware, that's just 3 books out of 31 in less than CGC 9.6 - and a full 1/3 of the run in CGC 9.8. Museum pieces all.

You're not wrong. I'm mad proud of my CGC 9.6 copy of Doctor Solar # 3. But I'm prouder of this - Doctor Solar # 3, page 1:

You're right. It's nowhere close to an accurate comparison - because Captain Marvel did 80% more revenue in domestic box office alone than Justice League. But it's not a false equivalence: DC absolutely expected Justice League Part 1 to do $1+ billion worldwide - even after BvS fell short of $900 million. But it's revisionist history - asserted well after the fact - to say Captain Marvel was *expected* to do $1 billion from the jump. It was no more expected pre-release than the idea that folks legit expected Black Panther to do $1+ billion.

No. You could say the same about Justice League Part 1 - that "it was going to make $1 billion no matter what." And yet it didn't come close - because audiences f-----g hated it. Clearly, not so with Captain Marvel.

Nah. Domestically, it hit $426+ million. A full $35+ million more than Spider-Man: Far From Home. No way it does those numbers unless folks liked it enough to see it multiple times. And that argument falls apart when Ant-Man & the Wasp did less than $625 million worldwide - and yet had as much of a tie-in to Endgame as Captain Marvel.

Thank you, sir! Your board sale still haunts me. IIRC, I picked up your # 5 - and later won your # 4 when it went to auction. But I regret missing your # 2 for $1,000 and - I think it was your 9.8 # 26 - that went here ridiculously cheaply.

As far as I know, there isn't one. Highest-graded is the Pacific Coast CGC 9.6, which has belonged to boardie Rosland since at least 2008. I believe he bought the entire Pacific Coast run of the title when it came to market - and steadily upgraded from there. Likewise, there's just a single CGC 9.6 copy of Magnus # 1.

If you can't see why and how Iron Man 3 was far superior to the likes of: Iron Man 2 GOTG 2 Thor 2 etc. - I can't help you. Oh - and did you get this butt-hurt when in Batman Begins Ra's al Ghul turned out to be an Irish dude?

So...did you also dislike The First Blood because by the time we meet him, John Rambo is already a skilled survivalist and assassin? Ditto Dutch in Predator - is he a Gary Sue because he's functionally invincible from the moment we meet him leaving the helicopter smoking a stogie? You're faulting the story for picking up in a non-traditional place - when the hero is already well-versed in her powers - both as a human fighter pilot and intergalactic warrior. Just because it's not the traditional superhero origin story (mere mortal is gifted with extraordinary powers and must come to terms with them to come into their own) doesn't make it any less compelling. Captain Marvel also underscores how bad Green Lantern was - in that Reynolds played Hal Jordan largely for laughs - with literal wide-eyed wonder as he discovered the extent of his powers. Absolutely not - the Hal Jordan I grew up in the comics was an arrogant - and (largely) deservedly so. Imagine how much better the Green Lantern movie would have been if it had been say...Tom Cruise playing Jordan as he played Maverick - or even (per the 12 years ago fan-casting) Nathan Fillion playing him straight as the arrogant, self-assured cocky test pilot he always was.

This analysis only fits if you ignore her entire Vers persona - that, just like we meet the human Danvers well into her decorated career as a fighter (and test fighter) pilot, we also meet her years into her career as a Kree space warrior. So it makes absolute sense that she'd adapt to her new powers quickly - they were a natural extension of her existing space fighting (and hand-to-hand combat) skills.

No - she has few weaknesses because, by the time we meet her, she's already a decorated Air Force fighter pilot - and one of the first women to have reached that rank. She simply exhibits all the skill, cockiness and arrogance inherent in that position - like meeting Wonder Woman in the beginning of 1984, when she's already been functioning in her superhero role for 70+ years. However, we later learn that - to get there, to reach that level of skill and confidence she has when we first meet her, Danvers endured having been put down, knocked down, belittled and told "no" throughout 90% of her journey, from her early childhood, through flight school, and even in her Vers persona during training by Yon-Rogg. And it has taken a large psychic toll, because deep down - she *still* doesn't believe she's worthy - doesn't have the true inner confidence to recognize the full extent of her powers and defeat the inhibitor chip that had been holding her back from realizing her true nature. Only once she does so does she have the ability to: a) defeat Yon-Rogg b) truly become Captain Marvel

I still disagree with the hate Brie Larson got from a lot of folks on here for her performance. Folks complained she was too arrogant, a "Mary Sue" or didn't have enough of a character arc - with growth and change. To the last point - well, then you just weren't paying attention. But to the first two points: She was a U.S. Military pilot - and (along with her partner) one of the first women to hit that rank - the arrogance is deserved. Perfect parallel: Phoenix in Top Gun: Maverick Similarly arrogant, not much of an arc - because she was introduced as one of the "best of the best" and ultimately lived up to it, despite having to ditch her jet at one point due to bird strike. Monica Barbaro played Phoenix in Top Gun: Maverick exactly as Brie Larson played Carol Danvers in Captain Marvel - yet Larson gets hate for her characterization.

Bumping this thread, as I'd love the chance to upgrade my Doctor Solar set to a solid CGC 9.4+. See here in "WTB." I'm looking for 7 books, all in CGC 9.4 or better. Will settle for CGC 9.2 as noted: # 2 # 5 # 7 # 11 (9.2 or better) # 22 # 27 (9.2 or better) # 31 (9.2 or better) Paying market or better.

? So you didn't like it because she got away? Again - they *had* to let her go, lest she simply kill them all.

Solid points, but your characterization of Wanda here (with which I largely agree) shows that she was well-drawn -- "humanized," "compelling and realistic," as it were, rather than a "buffoon." If you're going switch tacks from asking for a villain that is - rather than not simply two-dimensional and cartoonish but rather one that is truly scary and pure evil, that's a different kettle of fish. As far as comic books stories go, my answer for a recent example is easy: Kilgrave/Purple Man in Jessica Jones. The writers did him dirty in Season 2, but Season 1's portrayal of him, his powers, and his single-minded desire to destroy Jessica Jones made him truly frightening. And it started with the final scene of the very first episode - with the elevator murders. That was chilling to watch - especially after we'd been led into a false sense of security/catharsis just minutes before.

But it made perfect sense with her arc. In this scene, Monica Rambeau, the CIA, military, etc. are all perfectly aware that Wanda can simply snap at any time, killing them all. She's still insane and incredibly powerful - therefore eminently dangerous - they literally have no choice but to let her go. Also - this isn't the last scene -- the actual final scene is of her, alone in the house by the lake, studying the Darkhold, actively preparing to level up her already formidable powers - which at the time we already knew was a direct lead-in Doctor Strange 2.

Nah - a few counterpoints re. recent well-drawn villains: 1) Thanos - he had a point re. over-population - an understandable worldview - mixed with the appropriate contempt for the Avengers et. al. who he assumed (largely rightfully) were beneath him. A perfect example of this was the arrogance - and failure - of both Starlord and Thor to kill him when they had they had their respective chances - and failed to do so (er...at least Starlord's temper tantrum prevented Thanos's death). 2) Killmonger - another villain who had a point - yes - perhaps too simplistic in his playing Malcolm X to Black Panther's Martin Luther King, but he took an appropriately anti-isolationism stance for Wakanda that ultimately won out by film's end - even if not in the way Killmonger envisioned. There was nuance and complexity there - not cartoonish buffoonism. 3) Wanda - and her through-line from Infinity War through Dr. Strange 2. First, she comes close to besting Thanos in Endgame - which was even more underscored by Thanos's opening comment to her: "I don't even know who you are." Then, WandaVision was masterful - and that the ultimate villain was Wanda herself - driven mad by grief. I long said - before the show even started, that what I wanted from it was simple. To show that 1) Wanda was one of the most powerful characters in the MCU (check) and 2) that she was bat-mess f-----ng crazy (check). The series provided that in spades. And that characterization is canonical - see the House of M storyline in the comics. Which logically brings us to Dr. Strange 2 - showing Wanda at the height of her villainy, powers, and ultimately, just...broken-ness (goes back to her being absolutely insane). I don't think any of these villains were "dumbed down" for Disney audiences - nor do I think Disney is going in that direction overall. For me, a key litmus test will be the new Daredevil series - the Netflix show left a tough act to follow, but Born Again was a classic - and brutal storyline, one of the best in Daredevil's 50+ year history. Kingpin was portrayed by the Netflix series with far more depth, subtlety and empathy than I ever expected - even by the end of season 1, we understand how he came to be the man he now is, even if we can't condone it. He wasn't "dumbed down" for the audience in any way.

So...this is now on Disney+ - just two months to the day after its theatrical release? Wow... I'm old enough to remember when you had to wait 6-9 months after a film had left theaters for a VHS release.

Chasing Amy is an incredibly good movie - and basically made Affleck a star. But Mallrats was a part of my childhood. It may not have been *good* but it had some stand-out scenes, including the the sailboat, "Brenda?," Stan Lee, and the first time I recall seeing Ben Affleck in an adult role (although my 6th grade science class watched the whole PBS miniseries "Voyage of the Mimi," featuring him at like 12 years old).

The screening here in DC is Saturday, Sep. 10. $37, but - as the above poster notes, the main draw is the post-screening Q+A with Smith afterwards.

This. Hard to argue he's not a main character when he got the 2nd-most screen-time in TFA and the 3rd-most screen-time in the second and third films. And got more screen-time in every film than Kylo Ren. Given that, the *only* legitimate gripes he can have are either: 1) Poe got one more minute of screen-time than him in The Rise of Skywalker (boo hoo!); or 2) His story was largely relegated to side quests in the second & third movies. Yes - the weird planet side quest in The Last Jedi wasn't a main part of the plot - but honestly the only thing I was truly disappointed in re. his story was how quickly the Finn/Captain Phasma battle was completed (she got <2 minutes of screen time in that film).

? I always assumed Poe was set up to be the Han Solo of the trilogy - and that seemed validated when he was reprimanded for insubordination by Adm. Holdo in TLJ. Granted - there's no perfect parallel between the 7-9 and 10-12, because the latter trilogy had more "main" characters. You go from: Luke/Leia/Han to Rey/Kylo/Poe/Finn/Rose.

If one of the stated reasons for Affleck's replacing Keaton in Aquaman 2 is because, continuity-wise, Keaton's Batman first appears in The Flash... This means the earliest they're planning to release The Flash is now 2024.