• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Gatsby77

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,487

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Gatsby77

  1. Gatsby77
    Sure. But There already was a Shadowman movie. It was called "Bones" (2001) and it starred Snoop Dogg & Pam Grier. No saxophone, but not far off from how a properly done Shadowman would look/feel. And Zero (Shadowman from the Garth Ennis and Matt Broome Acclaim runs) didn't play sax either...
  2. Gatsby77
    ? Magneto is nothing if not pompous.
  3. Gatsby77
    Sure...but that also may be that no one has yet expressed interest in developing the live-action side. I suspect the live-action rights likely still lie with Dreamworks.
  4. Gatsby77
    So...do the Gold Key characters belong to Dreamworks or Dreamworks Animation? Asking because Dreamworks sold off Dreamworks Animation to NBC Universal (Comcast) in 2016. If the legacy license applies to both does that mean Dreamworks could develop live-action movies but only NBC can do cartoons?
  5. Gatsby77
    Sure. But arguing about which of these Avengers books is more key is still splitting hairs and playing 2nd-3rd fiddle to the true first appearance of the character. Marvel Premiere 47 was essentially valueless before the announcement that Scott Lang would headline the movie -- as in, folks were collecting "Ant-Man appearances" but not "Scott Lang Ant-Man appearances." It just wasn't a thing. Just like the second appearance of Black Adam in Shazam # 28 was essentially valueless before the Dwayne Rock movie rumors started. It doesn't make Shazam # 28 his first appearance. So of course the speculative % increases of the more modern will be higher. But by that logic, if I'm speculating on the newly announced Hellstrom series, you're saying I'm better off stockpiling Marvel Spotlight 12 over Ghost Rider 2? Because...it's cheaper?
  6. Gatsby77
    Another note - if it's Paramount, wonder if they'll try to give Tom Cruise a role. He's their biggest star, and they've backed the Mission Impossible films, Jack Reacher films, Top Gun 2, and Cruise's forthcoming Luna Park. Just saying...he could be an interesting Harada.
  7. Gatsby77
    Yeah - but it doesn't matter. Which saw more of a bump from the first Ant-Man movie (in terms of real dollars): Marvel Premiere 47? or Tales to Astonish 27? Folks always go for the *first* appearance -- not the "first appearance of the third character to don that costume."
  8. Gatsby77
    Written by Tony Bedard. The creator of ... Psi-Lords!
  9. Gatsby77
    Oh - right. Ax first appeared in Harbinger 3, so is presumably owned by Paramount. Huh.
  10. Gatsby77
    Agree. But re. X-O, isn't Ax on-deck to appear in the Bloodshot film by the same actor who played the last Dr. Doom? I guess I've always associated Ax with X-O, since the first Valiants I read were X-O # 5-6, when he steals the X-O (or equivalent) armor and battles Aric. Memory's hazy, as it's been 25+ years. Point is, my assumption has been that part of the forthcoming Bloodshot film's plot would show Ax stealing some X-O-style armor, leading to a final battle between Harbinger-in-machine vs. ex-mob-guy-who-can-control machines.
  11. Gatsby77
    The correct answer to this question is: Black Knight # 1. If anything, the best corollary I see (aside from the aforementioned Avengers 55) is either Detective 474 (second Deadshot, but "first modern") prior to BvS or even Batman 234 (what? 6th appearance of Two-Face but first since 1948?) prior to The Dark Knight. Betting on Kit Harrington to move the needle long-term as the Black Knight is like betting on Jason Momoa's Conan movie back before it was released in 2011. i.e. Dumb.
  12. Gatsby77
    Huh. I'd rather see Paramount make Valiant films than Sony. But Harbinger is among the least interesting set of Valiant characters -- at this point, it will look to the general public like another anonymous b-list X-Men team, a la those shown in Chronicle, or Heroes, or Gifted, etc. Done right, Bloodshot could do for Vin Diesel what John Wick did for Keanu -- although I swear the film writes itself -- it looks exactly like Vin's prior film "A Man Apart" combined with last year's "Upgrade." And I *love* the idea of Rai as the lynchpin of a Paramount shared Valiant universe (after all, my username on the Valiant boards is "Rai-fan") -- but why would VEI own the film rights to Rai and not Dreamworks, given that Rai first appeared in a Magnus comic? If Dreamworks only owns the elements of Magnus that originated in the Gold Key books, does that mean that VEI owns the VH1 elements of Magnus, including the Malev War, Rai, and the Future Force?
  13. Gatsby77
    There is, of course, The Mist. Not exactly a feel-good film, but even King admitted the ending was superior to his own.
  14. Gatsby77
    Given the blockbuster performance of the first one -- and the *much* more famous cast of this one, this under-performed. Opening 25% lower than the first one is bad given the far higher awareness (and brand equity it has); that it couldn't even match Justice League numbers is embarassing.
  15. Gatsby77
    This doesn't seem so out-of-bounds. He was in Green Lantern. And he voiced Korg (his rock monster buddy) in Ragnarok, Endgame, etc. He's a fairly obvious choice if he's simply voicing a character that's otherwise animated/CGI'd. Or is it surprising given his continued Disney work with Thor?
  16. Gatsby77
  17. Gatsby77
    So...I started collecting with Wolverine and Batman the fall of 1989. First Wolverine issue off the shelf was # 18, and it was the first series I collected back to # 1. My original copy of # 1 (that cost ~$9) is signed now signed and personalized to me by inker Al Williamson (although this was long before CGC existed). So...it's not mint. I was in college around 1997 when I started buying copies of Wolverine '88 # 1 for $11-$15 shipped (whereas they'd cost $20-$25 from comic book stores just a few years earlier). They're now long gone, but I think I accumulated 8 copies of that book my freshman year alone. First "big" book was an "8.0" copy of Ghost Rider (1950) # 1 around 2003 during a ShowcaseNewEngland sale of about 30-40 copies at once -- warehouse find, but hard to grade because most looked solid NM from the front but had mad foxing on the back cover. I paid $208 shipped for my "8.0." in ~2003. Basically broke even, as I eventually got it CGC'd (a mere 5.5...sigh) and sold it for $285 in 2014.
  18. Gatsby77
    Given that it's Rated R, I don't expect it to pull in superhero blockbuster numbers. Given that it reportedly cost less than $60 million to make, it also doesn't need to.
  19. Gatsby77
    From what I understand Hasbro is buying it less for the IP than for the studio's content production capabilities. This enables Hasbro to transform from a toy manufacturer that merely licenses its IP to other studios for TV shows and movies into a full-fledged TV / movie production company itself. For instance, Hasbro tried to acquire Lionsgate last year. Consider that we've seen the following films based on Hasbro properties: Transformers GI Joe My Little Pony Ouija With Entertainment One, they can develop & distribute TV shows, cartoons and films based on these properties in-house. This is especially important given that their licenses for both Star Wars and Marvel toys are up for renewal next year.
  20. Gatsby77
    Patiently waiting for @Jaydogrules to weigh in...
  21. Gatsby77
    This. Upon reflection I'm entirely good with Sony keeping Spidey. For one, they need him a lot more than Disney does. For another, the math on this is simple -- even if Sony puts out a few horrid Spider-Man film that do 30-40% less than say...Homecoming, keeping 100% of the profits still puts them far ahead of virtually any deal Disney would be willing to make. And if Sony somehow drives the property into the ground (highly unlikely) then they'll be much more ready to deal with Disney and a Spidey return in another 8-10 years.
  22. Gatsby77
    ? I'm pretty sure that Sony owns the rights to Iron-Spider, since the suit first appeared in an ASM comic, so it's Sony -- not Disney -- that benefits from him featuring that suit in films like Endgame. And I disagree that they were *ever* trying to set Peter up to be the new Tony Stark in the MCU. I've read that argument by several posters here and all I can think is they've got their comic collector blinders on. There's *zero* chance that the Tom Holland Spider-Man character leads an Avengers team vs. Captain Marvel, Black Panther, or even Thor. Just because Tony mentored Peter doesn't mean he was literally grooming him to take over his mantle.
  23. Gatsby77
    God I hope that don't screw it up like they did The Killing Joke. I mean, I'm all for them going outside the technical bounds of the story, but only if it gives Jason Todd more color -- say, including Batman 408-416. What I *don't* want is extension into his Red Hood revival.
  24. Gatsby77
    "Miles Morales" is currently trending on Twitter, as the immediate presumption is Sony will move forward with a live-action version of him rather than Peter Parker.
  25. Gatsby77
    Exactly.