Number 6

Sorry, not sure if this is the right place to ask but... I have some books going up on the next Clink auction and when I checked my account this week I noticed that there's 19 books listed on my account that aren't mine. I sent Clink an email right away but here we are with just a little over 24 hours before the auction starts, and the books are still sitting in my account and no acknowledgement of my email from Clink. Anyone have this happen before? Is this something I don't really need to worry about, or do I need to push a little harder for a response?

Bump because I added these two to my Clink auctions coming up: Detective Comics #403 CGC 9.4 Space: 1999 #1 magazine CGC 9.6

Actually you could probably do that now as the A&E DVD/Blu-ray sets and the Network Blu-ray sets are OOP. While I'm looking forward to seeing what Nolan will do with this, I'm hoping at the very least there will be a new issue of the series on Blu-ray for those interested who missed the previous releases. What I would really like - and this is me dreaming here - is that the series would get remastered and released in 4K. The consensus seems to be that classic TV shows won't get released in 4K as it's 'too expensive' to scan all the episodes of a given series in 4K. Given that this series is less than 2 dozen episodes, I'm hoping that this might prove to be the exception. And since it's a pretty cult show, if it sells well maybe it might be the impetus for other shows like Star Trek TOS to finally get a 4K release.

This is something I liked as well. In the book has weird creep factor to it. But it's one of those things that if you try and replicate that on film, your choices are kind of limited as to how to pull that off. Having a child actor with an adult over-dubbing the lines comes off as a bit silly instead of creepy. The way they handled this in the film I think keeps that weird creep factor as to me

That was just the tiger blood talking.

Sounds like you need to add another picture with Cantina201 in a bozo wig.

And you really don't need to. Godfather, Planet of the Apes, Lord of the Rings, Jaws....all of those movies have changes or dropped things from the novels they're based on, in some cases considerably. Novels that were best-sellers in their own right. Those films are considered to be very good to excellent, classic adaptations of their source material. I'd be surprised if anyone considered any of those films a "train-wreck" adaptation simply because it's different from the book. Look, you didn't enjoy it, I respect that, and I'm not going to try and argue you into loving it. But I do want to address this because I see this "arrrggg! It's not exactly like the book!" criticism popping up on different sites. Personally, I don't think the goal of a film adaptation of novel is to have a scene-for-scene, line-for-line representation of the book. Obviously, there needs to be fidelity to the source material, otherwise why do the adaptation in first place, just do something original. On the other hand, the film has to be its own thing and be able to stand on its own, otherwise it just becomes a book report. If someone wants the exact experience of reading the book, then they can just read the book. The challenge that Villeneuve had with this is not only does his adaptation have to be something distinct from the novel, it also has to differentiate itself from the two previous adaptations, both of which cover the same basic plot. And as you pointed out, the mini-series follows the novel very closely, so if Villeneuve were to replicate that level of fidelity, then it would just come off as the Villeneuve-version of the mini-series. Surely you can understand why he would have no interest in doing that. And for me personally (and I'm sorry, I know I'm going to ruffle some feathers when I say this) the mini-series being "book-accurate" is the only virtue it has, and in my opinion is an example of how an adaptation can strictly adhere to the source material and still manage to make the story seem dull and uninteresting. I've watched both mini-series once and have no desire to ever watch them again. Again, if I want something 'exactly like the book' I'll just re-read the book. I have read the novels several times, it's one of my favorites, and I certainly want an adaptation that is respectful of the source material (and IMHO I think Villeneuve's version is) but at the same time I don't think the novel should be treated as so sacrosanct that nothing and be altered in an adaptation to film. I can't even imagine what it would be like to have film versions of Jaws and Planet of the Apes that were exactly like the books instead of the versions we have. It's NOT about "fixing" or "improving" the source material. I think you're attributing ill-intent and taking offense where there really doesn't need to be. Books are one medium for telling a story, films are another medium. There are things that work well and can be done in one medium that don't work as well or can't be done in another. That's the challenge of adapting a novel, especially a well-loved one: how to capture what makes the novel special while simultaneously making something that will be special as a film, a film that will have merit on its own. And that's what makes Dune a challenging adaptation is because part of what people love about it is all the intricate details of the world-building and all of the plans-withing-plans story. That's something that can done well in a book. But instead of having a bunch characters spout tons of expository dialog and rushing from scene to scene to cover all the sub- and sub-sub-plots, Villeneuve chose to tell the story more visually, and that's something that, when done well, is something that the medium of film can excel at. And I think this adaptation does. If someone wants exactly what's in the book, the best thing to do is read the book. If you're appreciation of the book makes you demand a literal adaptation, then the HBO mini-series already exist. But if you really want to experience cinema (and I apologize, as I know Scorsese has made that a trigger-word around here) then I highly recommend seeing this in a theater, preferably a premium theater. Personally, I think the love of the source material is evident, the major themes are well represented, and I appreciate how it enabled me to experience aspects of the novel that I would never get from just reading the book. It's not perfect, but I'd give it 4.5/5 or 9/10, for me the best movie since Godzilla Minus One and one of the best new movies I've seen in a long time This film certainly isn't interchangeable with the novel.... but I don't think that should really be the goal to begin with.

I didn't think it was showing in 3-D, but regardless: this definitely NEEDS to be seen in either IMAX or Dolby Digital. I would be shocked if you regretted the decision to spend the money to see this in a premium theatre. I saw it twice this weekend and have a ticket for next Sunday. I had only planned on seeing it once this Friday and go again next weekend but waken (WTH I didn't type "waken", my spelling isn't THAT bad) up Saturday and had to see it again.

Seriously though, any chance on a new printing of the guide? I don't think I'll jump in whole-hog on pulp collecting, especially with CGC now involved in grading them, and most of my disposable income is going towards book collecting. But it would be nice to have a few pulps by my favorite authors, and I definitely need to get educated before I start spending any serious money on pulps.

My exact instructions to my family: "I want to be buried with my booty in my hands"

I'm not an expert, but that label looks fake to my eyes.

I think if you're going to get a response you may need to be more specific about what you're asking about. "Books" is a pretty broad term. CGC already grades some comic trade paperbacks, which some would consider to be books. Are you talking about thin books with library binding like a Dr. Seuss book? Or are you talking about hardcover books with dust jackets? Sounds like from the admin's response that posting a picture of what you're specifically asking about may be helpful.

Just a head-up, these are my CGC books going up in the 3/15 ComicLink auction: Batman #199 Detective Comics #395, 397, 414 Star Trek #6, 8, 9 Swamp Thing #10 World’s Finest #203 Thanks for looking.

Silly. Don't you know that the role of CGC President is to simply sit in a highchair with a plastic scepter and Burger King crown saying "I'm the President!" in your best Ralph Wiggum voice?

I understand that the vast majority of the 3rd gen slabs are probably fine (though that's assuming that these 2 scammers are the only ones exploiting these slabs, which may be an assumption too far) the problem with this situation is perception. If and when a new case is released, are potential buyers really going to do all the leg work to figure out whether my slab is one of the 2,000....or is it going to be easier to just assume "3rd gen slab = could be a problem = pass". Am I going to have to do a bunch of detective work to create a "SlabFaxx" report every time I want to sell a slab to prove it's not a problem (and since I rarely submit my own books, how much can I really prove anyway). And yeah, everyone moved on after the Ewert scandal....but the fact that the community is so willing to look away on this stuff because there's all that CGC $$$$$ to be made....is that really a good thing? Again, just venting here....

The issue I have with the "new case" solution (and I'm not directing this at you personally, just using you statement as a jumping off point to vent my frustration) is that: what about the thousands of comics in the compromised 3rd gen cases? If you're holding any of those...which a lot of us are...your options are to either reward CGC for their gross negligence but paying them their reholder fee to have all those books put into (what we hope is) a new, tamper-proof holder (and hope that CGC doesn't manage to screw that up by being asleep at the wheel again)....otherwise you're stuck with your books (for which you already paid CGC their fee for encapsulation or paid the CGC tax when you bought it) now automatically view as suspect and compromised just by virtue of the case they happen to be in, and would probably have to sell at a discount if at all. No matter what CGC does, it's hard for me to feel good about anything CGC going forward, and unfortunately the CGC cabal has their tentacles so thoroughly entrenched in this hobby there's no going back.

Not necessarily directed at you as I don't know if you would know the answer, but do the MOC Mego Buck Rogers, Black Hole and Dukes of Hazzard figures have this kind of issue? I'm not actively collecting them, but I do an occasional search for them just to get a nostalgic buzz. I've never seen any with a busted o-ring on the card even though they have nearly the same type of construction and are just about as old. I'm sure they will have the problem at some point.

I picked this up last year. My understanding is that it’s the first hardcover release of this title but it was published several decades after the paperback original was released. As such, it wasn’t super expensive for a “first” hardcover.

I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion when you see a reholdered book on the look-up that it was done expressly for the purpose of getting an exploitable 3rd gen slab. I have a a couple of 2nd gen slabs where the inner well is starting to turn yellow. I also have one that has a lot of that white powdery-looking whatever it is streaks between the inner well and the case. I can see someone wanting to reholder 2nd gen slabs like that. Also, if a 2nd gen slab has been bought/sold a number of times over the years it’s spent a higher amount of time being handled by a shipping service and is more likely to have picked up some damage along the way and the new owner wants to get it in an undamaged slab. If everyone starts reflexively viewing reholdered slabs as automatically “tainted” it could certainly have a depressing effect on the market.

Well, if the Detecive below is really a 9.4 then I guess the one above could be a 9.8…if they’re grading on a curve. You know it’s bad when Clink premtively posts a back cover scan as if somehow the back cover’s appearance will justify the grade.

If they start grading paperback prose novels I'll repeatedly submit pb copies of Atlas Shrugged, maybe doing page counts on those suckers will make them see the error of their ways.