Mr Sneeze

I think if you pressed Scorsese, he would agree that great movies can come from any genre. But I suspect there is a knee jerk reaction among the film elite that views working for big budget movies and more than likely Disney in particular as a creatively stifling affair. There have been some great movies in the genre and again for me the better of them leave the superhero stuff behind.

Well said!

I completely agree with him. But there has always been drek and a lot of it. Great films/cinema have always been fewer and farther between and rarely found in the top box office draws in any age. Nothing wrong with drek though, can't always be listening to Beethoven's ninth symphony (a rare Vonnegut Galapagos reference there).

If you like the book then who cares what anyone else thinks about it. Enjoy!

Indeed!

Thanks for all the kind words from everyone. I feel bad for anyone who wants to put together a set aftermarket regardless of absolute/omnibus/masterwork. If you miss the solicitation then your pretty much out of luck within a year or even quicker on many. I want an Eternals omni but I have to wait because I don't want to pay the inflated price having missed it years back. DC has been much better at having their stuff in print overall but I'm sure there are some that are hard to find.

All of the marvel silver age super hero stuff is in the masterworks though I will continue with some titles as they print them. I wish I would have kept up with Doctor Strange(1-5) and Spider-man(1-13). Once they are out print it becomes very expensive to buy some of them on the secondary market.

Yeah, I hear ya. The costs on some of these books are staggering especially for those of us who live outside the US, and unless your reading on a table top the bigger volumes are a bit much to read in bed or on the couch. Masterworks have been my staple since they started reissuing them, nice size and page count though pricey as well. In a perfect world they would print cheap editions in colour on newsprint - basically colour essentials. Probably kill their hardcover sales though. More and more I lean towards reading back issues on an tablet /e-reader. My library does not have unlimited space so as time passes books have to fight for shelf space.

But it is part of the charm. I think of them (the trilogies) as two books written at different times of an authors life (obviously with different resources), they each tell their part of the overall story arc. Why do they have to tell their part of the story the same way as the other. The trilogies are after all completely different in feel and scope. Nostalgia has little to do with it. The only thing that killed the narrative overall was part 7 masquerading as part 4. Kinda made any continuation in that direction pointless really (I'm not really a hater on Disney but I see little point in calling these parts 7, 8, 9 etc. but I will keep an open mind for what its worth). Having said that there is little point arguing over which is better, there're both good, it all comes down to the individual of course or your whatever your in the mood for that day. I, like many simply want the option to see them as they were.

I'm a huge fan of the prequels, warts and all and was ten in 77 so I have fond memories of the originals. There is always going to be an awkward transition between the two trilogies despite any face lift., so I would argue it's part of the charm.

Marvel has been doing great job with the Conan the Barbarian omnibus/s, getting away from the Dark Horse coloring and packed with lots of extras. The Savage Sword omnibus is a must have as well!

There are definitely some positive changes but many unnecessary ones as well, the result of which is distraction. I for one would at the very least like to have the option of seeing the theatrical releases. The special effects were cutting edge in their day and many people worked hard to bring what was seen at the time to fruition. Many special effects become dated over time but it does not follow that the movies suffer because of it. 2001 is still a masterpiece regardless of modern capabilities - I'm not trying to compare Star Wars to 2001. For the record, the cloud city scenes added much depth to empire and not at the expense of anything previously there - I think. I could do without the rest though - again, for me a distraction. As a fan of movies I would really appreciate seeing them as they were if for nothing else to enjoy the craftsmanship of the day. Again, the option would be nice.

Yeah, I don't recall any meaningless 30-minute side plots in any other Star Wars films. Really subverted my expectations there... I certainly don't want to argue over Johnson's movie with you, I probably dislike it more than you. I was merely trying to point out that Starkiller Base was pretty bad. Why make new movies if they don't want to move forward.

That is very much what I am afraid of. Force Awakens made me appreciate the Lucas driven prequels in a light that I had not realized. I welcome new stories and not just a rehash. Hopefully JJ takes a few cues from Johnson. As much as I disliked Johnson's movie (and it's quite a bit) at least he was going into new areas, if JJ does his same old derivative thing then he's just as bad.

An old interview yet still relevant I think... Kubrick on A Clockwork Orange An interview with Michel Ciment http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/interview.aco.html In particular... How do you explain the kind of fascination that Alex exercises on the audience? I think that it's probably because we can identify with Alex on the unconscious level. The psychiatrists tell us the unconscious has no conscience -- and perhaps in our unconscious we are all potential Alexes. It may be that only as a result of morality, the law and sometimes our own innate character that we do not become like him. Perhaps this makes some people feel uncomfortable and partly explains some of the controversy which has arisen over the film. Perhaps they are unable to accept this view of human nature. But I think you find much the same psychological phenomena at work in Shakespeare's Richard III. You should feel nothing but dislike towards Richard, and yet when the role is well played, with a bit of humour and charm, you find yourself gradually making a similar kind of identification with him. Not because you sympathize with Richard's ambition or his actions, or that you like him or think people should behave like him but, as you watch the play, because he gradually works himself into your unconscious, and recognition occurs in the recesses of the mind. At the same time, I don't believe anyone leaves the theatre thinking Richard III or Alex are the sort of people one admires and would wish to be like. Some people have criticized the possible dangers of such an admiration. But it's not an admiration one feels, and I think that anyone who says so is completely wrong. I think this view tends to come from people who, however well-meaning and intelligent, hold committed positions in favour of broader and stricter censorship. No one is corrupted watching A Clockwork Orange any more than they are by watching Richard III. A Clockwork Orange has received world-wide acclaim as an important work of art. It was chosen by the New York Film Critics as the Best Film of the year, and I received the Best Director award. It won the Italian David Donatello award. The Belgian film critics gave it their award. It won the German Spotlight award. It received four USA Oscar nominations and seven British Academy Award nominations. It won the Hugo award for the Best Science-Fiction movie. It was highly praised by Fellini, Bunuel and Kurosawa. It has also received favourable comment from educational, scientific, political, religious and even law-enforcement groups. I could go on. But the point I want to make is that the film has been accepted as a work of art, and no work of art has ever done social harm, though a great deal of social harm has been done by those who have sought to protect society against works of art which they regarded as dangerous. What was your attitude towards violence and eroticism in your film? The erotic decor in the film suggests a slightly futuristic period for the story. The assumption being that erotic art will eventually become popular art, and just as you now buy African wildlife paintings in Woolworth's, you may one day buy erotica. The violence in the story has to be given sufficient dramatic weight so that the moral dilemma it poses can be seen in the right context. It is absolutely essential that Alex is seen to be guilty of a terrible violence against society, so that when he is eventually transformed by the State into a harmless zombie you can reach a meaningful conclusion about the relative rights and wrongs. If we did not see Alex first as a brutal and merciless thug it would be too easy to agree that the State is involved in a worse evil in depriving him of his freedom to choose between good and evil. It must be clear that it is wrong to turn even unforgivably vicious criminals into vegetables, otherwise the story would fall into the same logical trap as did the old, anti-lynching Hollywood westerns which always nullified their theme by lynching an innocent person. Of course no one will disagree that you shouldn't lynch an innocent person -- but will they agree that it's just as bad to lynch a guilty person, perhaps even someone guilty of a horrible crime? And so it is with conditioning Alex. What is your opinion about the increasing presence of violence on the screen in recent years? There has always been violence in art. There is violence in the Bible, violence in Homer, violence in Shakespeare, and many psychiatrists believe that it serves as a catharsis rather than a model. I think the question of whether there has been an increase in screen violence and, if so, what effect this has had, is to a very great extent a media-defined issue. I know there are well-intentioned people who sincerely believe that films and TV contribute to violence, but almost all of the official studies of this question have concluded that there is no evidence to support this view. At the same time, I think the media tend to exploit the issue because it allows them to display and discuss the so-called harmful things from a lofty position of moral superiority. But the people who commit violent crime are not ordinary people who are transformed into vicious thugs by the wrong diet of films or TV. Rather, it is a fact that violent crime is invariably committed by people with a long record of anti-social behaviour, or by the unexpected blossoming of a psychopath who is described afterward as having been '...such a nice, quiet boy,' but whose entire life, it is later realized, has been leading him inexorably to the terrible moment, and who would have found the final ostensible reason for his action if not in one thing then in another. In both instances immensely complicated social, economic and psychological forces are involved in the individual's criminal behaviour. The simplistic notion that films and TV can transform an otherwise innocent and good person into a criminal has strong overtones of the Salem witch trials. This notion is further encouraged by the criminals and their lawyers who hope for mitigation through this excuse. I am also surprised at the extremely illogical distinction that is so often drawn between harmful violence and the so-called harmless violence of, say, "Tom and Jerry" cartoons or James Bond movies, where often sadistic violence is presented as unadulterated fun. I hasten to say, I don't think that they contribute to violence either. Films and TV are also convenient whipping boys for politicians because they allow them to look away from the social and economic causes of crime, about which they are either unwilling or unable to do anything.

I don't generally have much enthusiasm for origin stories but I really think this could work well as a movie. The Watcher, Galactus, Norin Radd, Zenn La et all, the self sacrifice to save your family and your planet is more than enough to create a compelling character/s and narrative especially given the inherent dichotomy of a character that is - at least initially - willing to feed other worlds to Galactus to save his own. Given the right sensitivity it could be awesome. I would be leery of Marvel actually using Galactus so early on for whatever reasons and to take this to the dark places that it could go, but certainly the potential is there.

One of the best movies ever made!

Last bump for this thread. I will be opening one (a new sales thread) over in the mixed age forum in a bit with some books, trades etc.

What If? lot has sold via PM

Nice lot of What If? 33 books in all including the 10. $500 Shipped US/Canada SOLD via PM WHAT IF? 1 - NM- WHAT IF? 2 - NM- WHAT IF? 3 - NM- WHAT IF? 4 - deslabbed 9.6 WHAT IF? 6 - NM- WHAT IF? 7 - NM- WHAT IF? 8 - NM- WHAT IF? 9 - NM- WHAT IF? 10 - NM- WHAT IF? 11 - VF WHAT IF? 12 - VF WHAT IF? 15 - NM- WHAT IF? 16 - NM- WHAT IF? 18 - NM- WHAT IF? 20 - NM- WHAT IF? 21 - VF WHAT IF? 23 - NM- WHAT IF? 24 - NM- WHAT IF? 25 - NM- WHAT IF? 26 - VF WHAT IF? 27 - VF WHAT IF? 28 - NM- WHAT IF? 30 - NM- WHAT IF? 31 - NM- WHAT IF? 32 - F/VF WHAT IF? 33 - NM- WHAT IF? 35 - NM- WHAT IF? 36 - NM- WHAT IF? 37 - NM- WHAT IF? 38 - VF WHAT IF? 39 - NM- WHAT IF? 40 - NM- WHAT IF? 42 - NM-

Thank you very much David!

Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD lot of 8 books, $60 shipped US/Canada. Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 7 - F, looks much nicer but there is rust on the top staple Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 8 - VG Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 9 - F+ Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 11 - F+ small stain front cover Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 13 - F- Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 14 - VG lower staple pop Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 15 - VG/F Nick Fury Agent of SHIELD 17 - F

Nice lot of Doctor Strange includes Vol 1, 169 - 183, Marvel Premiere, 3 - 14 and Doctor Strange Vol 2, 1-6. Grades and scans below but first a few words about the 169. There is amateur color touch all along the spine as seen in the following pictures. I can't imagine it being easily removed with out severely damaging the book. I have been quite fond of this book and am hoping someone else will like it its current state as well. I have kept the valuation of the 169 at $100 in coming up with a price for this lot. $575 Shipped US/Canada SOLD to Harry Lime DOCTOR STRANGE 169 - NM- RESTORED, amateur color touch top left corner and along spine. Very small chip BC outer edge. See description for further information. DOCTOR STRANGE 170 - F DOCTOR STRANGE 171 - VF/NM, light dust shadow back cover. DOCTOR STRANGE 172 - VF+ DOCTOR STRANGE 173 - VF/NM DOCTOR STRANGE 174 - F+, non color breaking crease across bottom left corner DOCTOR STRANGE 175 - VF, very light moisture line back cover DOCTOR STRANGE 176 - VF+ DOCTOR STRANGE 177 - F/VF DOCTOR STRANGE 178 - VF+ DOCTOR STRANGE 179 - VF+ DOCTOR STRANGE 180 - VF+ DOCTOR STRANGE 181 - F/VF DOCTOR STRANGE 182 - VF/NM DOCTOR STRANGE 183 - VF/NM MARVEL PREMIERE 3 - F/VF, printers crease MARVEL PREMIERE 4 - F/VF MARVEL PREMIERE 5 - VF+, printers crease MARVEL PREMIERE 6 - VF+ MARVEL PREMIERE 7 - VF MARVEL PREMIERE 8 - VF/NM MARVEL PREMIERE 9 - VF/NM MARVEL PREMIERE 10 - VF- MARVEL PREMIERE 11 - NM- MARVEL PREMIERE 12 - F/VF, non color breaking crease bottom right corner MARVEL PREMIERE 13 - VF/NM MARVEL PREMIERE 14 - VF DOCTOR STRANGE 1 - VF+ DOCTOR STRANGE 2 - F/VF DOCTOR STRANGE 3 - F/VF DOCTOR STRANGE 4 - F, first two inner wraps loose at top staple DOCTOR STRANGE 5 - F+ DOCTOR STRANGE 6 - NM-

Lot of Kull 1-15, 20 and 29 and 2 lower grade copies of Creatures on the Loose 10 as well as Marvel Feature 1, 3, 4 and Red Sonja 1-4, 7, 8. Grades and scans below. $150 Shipped US/Canada CREATURES ON THE LOOSE 10 - VG/F, cover almost detached from top staple, centerfold detached. CREATURES ON THE LOOSE 10 - F, Chipping front cover outer edge just below blue circle. KULL 1 - F/VF KULL 2 - VF/NM MONSTERS ON THE PROWL 16 - VF/NM KULL 3 - F/VF KULL 4 - F/VF KULL 5 - VF+, printers crease. KULL 6 - VF, printers crease. KULL 7 - VF/NM KULL 8 - VF/NM KULL 9 - VF KULL 10 - VF KULL 11 - VF- KULL 12 - VF/NM KULL 13 - VF/NM KULL 14 - VF KULL 15 - VF KULL 20 - F/VF, non color breaking ding top right corner. KULL 29 - VF MARVEL FEATURE 1 - NM- MARVEL FEATURE 3 - VG, water damage back cover. MARVEL FEATURE 4 - F/VF RED SONJA 1 - VF, small ding bottom left corner. RED SONJA 2 - F/VF RED SONJA 3 - F/VF RED SONJA 4 - F/VF RED SONJA 7 - F/VF RED SONJA 8 - F/VF