miraclemet

that is the most even, balanced, well written opinion I have read here on the boards...

Anyone like the slight change in the Batman origins that had Thomas Wayne attack the robber, rather just having him protect his family (put himself between the gun and his family)? IMHO that moment told me a lot about the tone that the writers and directors would be going for over the rest of the movie, and it didnt bode well (to me). Anyone find the placement of Gotham right next to Metropolis unbelievable, due to the fact that Batman and Superman had managed not to cross paths up until this point? Seriously? You're a superhero and the only other known super hero in the world is in the town next to yours and you dont get together to barbecue? Logic again fell apart there... Or why the flash come back in time to tell Batman that Lois is the key, but the woman that stops the Superman/Batman fight is Martha (in name)... On the positive I did think that Ben Afflek was probably my favorite portrayal of Bruce Wayne I've seen yet. Bale was a slightly better Batman, but they're close. Im also still a sucker for Amy Adams as Lois Lane... I wrote a looong post that no one responded to in CG cause everyone was to busy posturing rather than have an actual discussion...All in all it was a 3 or 4 out of 10 for me. Plot was to muddled with to many logic flaws, not to mention some characterizations that just didnt land for me (Superman, Lex....) and yes I've seen the movie, twice now (once in theater and once for *ahem* free when I was trying to remember how some things were plotted out)

The only thing I can think of a tiny bit like this was Star Wars editing scenes from the original trilogy and re-releasing them in the 90's. That was when Lucas had them insert things like digital creatures outside the cantina that in the 70's they could accomplish. But that wasn't to make up on any assumed missed revenue target. There was just a demand to be fed with these slight touch-ups. I think the demand was for a high quality version (using some of the newer technology) especially for release to DVD. The "slight touch-ups" range from improvements (better effects, explosions, coloring) and background filling (i.e. Mos Eisley) to actual plot changes (making Han less of a scoundrel by having Gredo shoot first, and the extra Jabba scene, that also shows Boba Fett prematurely). Plus another big factor in that re-release was reinvigorating the audiences in preparation for the prequels. but that's for a different thread...

I'd be interested to see how they market it... can anyone mention other movies that have done this release model?

I agree, and in looking back plenty of blockbuster movies lost their #1 position in the 3rd week, but if you look at the quality of the movies that they lost to... well it doesnt look so good. here are some other blockbusters and who beat them out in week 3 AOU: PitchPerfect2 and Mad MAx Avengers: MIB2 *in week 4 TDK: Tropic Thunder *in week 5 DKR: Bourne Legacy IM3: Star Trek Into Darkness Spiderman: Star Wars II Spidey2: I Robot D'Pool: Zootopia *in week 4 Man of Steel: Monsters U and WWZ *in week 2 Most of these comic book movies were "summer blockbusters" that were bumped by other blockbusters... the "least" impressive bump was Tropic Thunder, but that didnt come until Week 5, which is a pretty impressive run. Point being, there's no way SvB should have given up the #1 slot on such a weak weekend. Maybe it flips when the numbers go final (they are just estimates after all), and maybe BvS sits at #2 for another month and it validates the hopes of those looking for some cultural impact, or at least "stickiness" (cant wait for that to get quoted). Im just saying it's dropping like a rock, most big blockbusters do, but this one even more so than others to date. It's still doing better than Green Lantern (lost #1 after 1 week, fell to 3rd and was behind Cars2 (understandable) but also Bad Teacher *shudder*)

well considering SvB is probably going to lose it's number one spot in the Box offices in it's 3rd weekend it looks like the real supervillian of the movie is...

Isn't everyone else comparing this movie to the other superhero movies? Otherwise, how did they come to the conclusion $1 billion dollars is some sort of magical threshold where this movie will be a success or failure for Warner Bros.? Inflation included, these first 2 DC movies still beat the first 2 Marvel movies, by a lot. So, since Marvel primed the market for superhero movies, Ant Man's paltry $520 million was a disappointment, correct? And GOTG, arguably Marvel's best movie, with only $775 million must have been a disappointment too. And if Civil War does not cross $1 billion, Disney should be disappointed, correct? Or is it possible, our expectations have been skewed for one reason or another? Im confused... Yes people are comparing SvB to other superhero movies... since they all share the same genre. Some people are comparing them as cinematic creations Some people are comparing them based on personal tastes Some people are comparing their revenue. Others are comparing their cost to their revenue. People bandied around the 1 billion threshold for "profit" after WB talked (prior to the movie release) about them using $750m as a target for feeling the movie was successful (believe Bosco posted the links when it was news). Some online pundits inflated that number to $850 after seeing the all out marketing blitz (and all the $$ spent to produce it) and that just pushed others to talk about the 1B mark for success. Antman did $520m on a $130m budget (ignoring marketing and such). Think that constitues a success (see Revats spreasheet on Revenue ratios) Batman v Superman would need to do $1b to match its ratio, which sure it could. WBs said it will be successful at somewhere between $750 and 800m, which sounds reasonable. The billion dollar number was a buzzfeed inflation, but the real number (say $800m) is the studios definition of fiscal success. It could make A trillion dollars (and be a complete financial success) and I personally would not think it was a cinematic success (based on my tastes), but none of that affects how much you might like the movie, which is fine you totally get to like the movie. I totally get to not like it.

talk about mauling data to try to make a point... You are comparing a pair of 2008 Marvel movies vs a 2013 and 2016 release> Ignoring just the inflation point movie theaters now... Push the Thursday preview screens far more than they did in the past Ticket presales are far more prevalent revenue now gets a big boost from IMAX and 3D price bumps global sales relationships are leaps ahead of where they were last decade. Used to be domestic/internation splits were pretty even (ie. 50/50), which is what you saw back in '08 (and part of why Titanics numbers in '97 were so awe inspiring) Marvel was forging a path that DC has benefited from, and that was in spite of not having full control over its cinematic IP. Marvel basically has conditioned audiences to the super hero trope (of course they benefited from the nostalgia of the Superman and Batman movies of 20-30 years prior) and they had the help of successful Spiderman movies by Sony, but again as I said with the earlier points, the movie revenue landscape is pretty different from what it was last decade.

Saturday and Sunday estimates show 55.5% and 56.9% drops (saturday over saturday and sunday over sunday). Better than I thought it would do. MOS did -55.4% and -65.5% DKR did -45% and -51.1% GL did -57.7% and -67% so it's about at MOS levels of decline (some of SvB first sunday numbers were depressed due to Easter, so I expected it to not fall as far typical sunday over sunday numbers).

Working thru it right now... it's pretty blatant, but did everyone see the stiltman easter egg?

The difference between critical and fan ratings has been pointed out a few times... I would think it's typical for movies like this to start out with more fan appeal, and then the number drop as the audiences go from being the hardcore 1st weekend fans to the general movie going public who might be less forgiving of the movie (i.e. dont have the benefit of a long love and history with the characters). Right now it's at 29% critics, 71% fans....I thought it was a higher fan number after last weekend, anyone remember?

Thanks John, I think there is an old thread in Gold somewhere about Sci-Fi... There are a ton of great EC Sci-Fi books for sure... I think I fight the urge because they are a little easier to find than everything else on my list... I dont think my wallet could keep up with the available inventory on the market... luckilly the other sci-fi books are harder to find! Contact 12 is an interesting book for sure, it's an outlier in the Cole style, a little more pop-art-y than his other stuff.

my wallet is glad there werent more Sci-Fi books, the rest of me is sad... The Startling 50 went for a strong price, I thought hard about the Captain Science 5, since it's my favorite in the series, but I decided to pass...

It's an interesting question, why are people reacting so strongly about this movie (and as you said feeling the need to reiterate their opinions over and over). All I can say personally (since I cant and wont talk for anyone else but me) is that the parts of the movie that were great to me made processing the parts of the movie that were not good movie-making to me that much harder. To get some things so right (in my eyes) and yet get other things so wrong (again to me) is more frustrating than a B list Marvel movie being silly and throwaway. Plus I think people are reacting strongly because (in theory) this movie is setting a foundation for the DCverse movies, so there's a lot invested (not talking about money) in this movie. And yeah I agree some people are confusing things they dont like with things that arent good, but others are pointing out things they see as actual poor movie making decisions, or poor story writing decision, or poor acting choices. Again. You might think they were good decisions, and others might think they were bad decisions.One could make the same argument that people who say Superman vs Batman is a good movie are confusing "liking" a movie with a movie actually being cinematic and narratively good. I love "The Rock" (the movie, though Dwayne is cool too), but I recognize that me thinking its a great fun watch does not make it a great movie. Its shallow, over acted and has plot holes you could clime thru and make it to San Francisco thru... I still love the movie, but if it got 33% on rotten tomatoes I'd say "Yep! Its a bad movie, but I loved it"..

what are the politics you are mentioning? Also what are the thoughts that you felt the movie provoked? I felt like it was trying to be thoughtful (vs the glib, popcorn marvel movies) but got so bogged down any attempts to be "deep" got lost in the muddiness and plot holes. kudos for trying, but trying ain't the same as succeeding... Critics are lobbyists. theyll tell you what they "honestly" think based on how much money gets in their pockets. 29% for this movie is nothing but an insult. Deliberate insult... Someone didnt get paid. Well Ill tell ya. Warner got paid. And good for them, they did an excellent job. Theres no way youre gonna go to a Christopher Nolan production and not take something from the cinematic experience. But, it depends on the mood. You may go to a movie and expect to see good guys beating bad guys and some T&A thrown in for good measure, or you can go see a movie with alot of depth and a unique interpretation of what good vs bad really is. Its not always black and white is it now? So WB/DC knew how to play the paying off the critics game for the Batman movies but didnt for the Superman/Batman movie? I think the writers were trying to create some interesting thoughts about good vs evil, how we contextualize it and so on, I just think it didn't achieve what it was striving to do. I did appreciate the effort, and it makes me hopeful for future DC movies. A universe that lives more in the grey area (vs the far simpler Marvel Universe) is veeeery appealing to me, and I think if done successfully would thrill both moviegoes and critics (regardless of getting paid)....

what are the politics you are mentioning? Also what are the thoughts that you felt the movie provoked? I felt like it was trying to be thoughtful (vs the glib, popcorn marvel movies) but got so bogged down any attempts to be "deep" got lost in the muddiness and plot holes. kudos for trying, but trying ain't the same as succeeding...

With last night CLink auction behind us I have one new addition to the collection. LB Cole has created some of the most dynamic and striking covers of the GA, and he did some great ones that were Sci-Fi themed. I've missed out on a few (including the |#106 Crippen one offered here on the boards a few years ago). I cant think of another time in the last 5-6 years that a mid-grade Cole sci-fi cover has come to market, so when I saw the #108 with its outer space cover listed in CLink I knew that it would be my number one target for the auction. Cole's understanding of outer space (full sealed suits, helmets) is far ahead of some of his contemporaries . Two big color breaking creases on the cover are the main condition issue, but beyond that the book looks great and I cant wait to get it in hand... but just cause I've got one Cole cover now, it doesnt mean I dont want more! His work on Flight #11 is one of my all time favorites...

Hi all - need some help here. This book looks like an Okajima based on the writing on the back. However, it is my understanding that the writing is almost always on the front. Thoughts on whether this is an Okajima? here's the back of another '46 book but I'll check my master list (that has the non-camp books as well) to see if it's on the known list. 46 was a bit of a transition year (so the markings might not be as consistant), but by 47 the books seems to come from the same place with the same distributor markings anyway here's another '46 back.

you and me both brother, even sat and thought "do I want to get the staples replaced with age-correct staples that arent rusted and have a "conserverd" book?

This is just a little post to express the feeling you have when you see a book in the market that is just what you are looking for. Mid-lower grade, iconic cover, everything you could ask for, even in the asking price... and then you look closely at the staples rust I just cant do it. It's like buying a house with mold. Except worse, because cleaning the mold adds value to the house, but if you clean the staples, hello conserved label. Its so frustrating when you collect something that rarely comes to market, and to get a chance but have it be just not quite what you want... then you spend your days hemming and hawing back and forth trying to decide if its better to have the book even if it's not quite in the shape you want, or if you wait more... ah the joys of collecting.

I'd be interested to hear if the "hole" is due to not being able to find the book or just needing the funds to buy the book. It's easy to fill the AF15 hole, but not if you dont have the money It's hard to fill some GA holes regardless of how much money you have! I have a good long list of GA Sci-Fi I'm still looking for, but catagoricly I would say the hole in my collection is: Any Sci-Fi LB Cole cover what's holding me back? Finding one for auction or for sale at a reasonable price. There are a few sitting out there with huge BIN prices for way to beat copies... so I keep watching.

Some college is better than no college, not sure why he'd tell you to take it off. I agree some college is better than none (shows a level of desire for further education. Maybe he thinks that showing that you "quit" college that it might cast you in a poor light (as someone who quits/gives up). I can see his perspective, especially since your resume as a whole doesnt show a lot of long term commitment... so why add to that narrative? (here's a though, were you in any clubs/activities for a long time? It might be good to include them somehow if possible on your resume to show that you CAN commit to something long term) keep the enthusiasm!

Wonder what Foolkiller's 10.0 would go for today.... ( think it would still go for $16k, since the 9.9 market has remianed flat since the 10 was sold, though with the movie attention the odds of reeling in a Hollywood or Asian Whale willing to pay $20k certainly would be up...)

Deadpool hasn't always been even somewhat popular. He went for many, many years (1993-2008) without much notice at all. 9.8s sold many, many times in the mid 00's in the $40-$60 range. just throwing some actual data in to go with statements # of times NM98 sold for $40-60 vs total number of sales that year 2007: 0 out of 24 times (this is the point that it started heading up...) 2006: 11 out of 34 times 2005: 1 out of 33 times 2004: 1 out of 19 times So that total is 13 out of 110 sales in the time frame, so 11.8% of sales. Not sure if thats many many or just many, or a few, or sometimes.... but it's actual data. In 2006-2007 you saw Marvel start to push DPool as a character, he because the funny guy to Calbe's "straight man" in Cable & Deadpool, which later gave way to Deadpool and _(a rotating all star)__ all of which recaptured that old Kelly voice.

The only requirement is that both parties are boardies. so if he's a boardie and it's been past 30 days he can nominate him for the PL (once he does all of the standard PM notification and such) since the other guy hasn't completed his end of the transaction.