• 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.

TheLiamSturgess

Member
  • Posts

    8,435
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TheLiamSturgess

  1. I think somebody would be down a few marbles if any other decision was made.
  2. It's exclusivity from the main Fox X-Universe is disappointing to me in some aspects, but intriguing in others. That must have been a conversation they had early on, and if the decision was made to keep it independent, it must have been for a good reason.
  3. I like this so much I'm reposting my own post. YES! I was all in on Gadot and very excited for a big screen Wonder Woman. My favorite part of the potential of BVS. I've seen Gadot in person when I lived in Sardegna. She's not a big person but she is tall (for a girl, she's eye-to-eye with me, I'm short). In area and scene full of attractive people/women she was SHINING. Preach.
  4. Speaking for myself, I would not pay a premium for newsstand. However, if given the choice I would take the newsstand over the regular. Personally, I think the regular looks cooler with the Spidey face
  5. This is strange, because as far as I know, "UK variants" didn't exist for this series in the same way they did in the late Bronze and early Copper Ages. Just this one, which was in its own series:
  6. Is that this one here? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Red-Ryder-1-September-1940-VG-Scarce-/151207023955?hash=item2334a41553:g:4UkAAOxyOlhSso2T If you have pics, you should make a new thread and post them
  7. He's got links to that in his master list. Marvel has the production rights, Universal has the distribution rights. Same deal with him as with Hulk. Meaning he could show up in an Avengers movie. Fantastic I doubt it. Disney hasn't done a Hulk since they bought Marvel probably because they don't like the idea of splitting profits with Universal. Putting Namor in an Avengers movie might mean Universal gets a piece of the Avengers pie that Disney doesn't want to give them. agree, the HULK is MAJOR and everyone knows him, but there's very little benefit to adding subby and splitting the profits when very few extra people will watch from the addition of subby It was my understanding that they only split profits from Subby-specific movies. Isn't that how Hulk works? :shrug:
  8. He's got links to that in his master list. Marvel has the production rights, Universal has the distribution rights. Same deal with him as with Hulk. Meaning he could show up in an Avengers movie. Fantastic
  9. Paul Rudd isn't well known? Must be a Canada thing Here in the whale's *spoon* we all know him. Same over here :shrug: Though I think it's the younger (under 40) crowd that know him best over here.
  10. I hate to say it, simply putting the word "Spoiler" in a slightly bigger font at the top of the post is ineffective. I don't mind spoilers but I can imagine there will be some who will read the first full line of your post by accident and be frustrated. Perhaps consider using the spoiler tags
  11. After reading that mishmash of rumors, hopes, and creative interpretations, it would still make no sense to bring Warlock into the IW movie. They'd be trading all the work they've done to build Thanos, plus Vision, and what, replace all that with some convoluted Warlock story that sounds a bit silly to actually say out loud? Maybe it's because I'm not a Warlock fan, but I just can't see them bringing Warlock in at this point. I think that the cocoon in GOTG means as much as the Howard the Duck cameo did. Right, because Warlock has no connection to a cocoon at all. I'm sure it was just a giant alien butterfly the collector was collecting. According to James Gunn, that was simply an Easter Egg. There's every chance that he's meant to become more of a player, but they could just as easily leave the situation be and only a few diehards would notice.
  12. I'd agree with that timeline. There's no way Fox ever pulls it off at this point.
  13. It's incredible how revolutionary that statement sounds, when it's really so simple.
  14. So eisenberg is not the "real" Lex. That's what I thought. -J. Really too early to tell, but it certainly seems like they're alluding to the fact that there's something bigger going on.
  15. I strongly doubt they'd allow any publicity if that were the case, and I doubt they're even thinking about that this far in advance But we can only hope!
  16. That could be cool - I hate to say I'm still cynical and am holding out for one of these X-Movies to be the first to bomb and finally open the door for Fox to call time and have the rights go back to Marvel.
  17. Well, the Inhumans are a subspecies of human, and have their powers naturally inside them only needing activation. Does that count? :shrug:
  18. Sounds like Marvel's superpowered version of Arrow. I'm in