Jaydogrules

Let's revisit this conversation in 10 years , when there still won't have been any live action Miles Morales "Spider-Man" movies. -J.

I don't know what document you're looking at, but the one that licensed Spider-Man to Sony was executed looooong before 2011 when Miles Morales was first conceived. It was Stan Lee who insisted on the Peter Parker proviso in the actual licensing agreement, which is precisely why he is always reiterating it publicly and why no one has EVER publicly contradicted him and why no one has EVER even hinted at a Miles Morales live action "Spider-man" movie, and why you only see him in cartoons. -J.

Miles will never be Spider-man in a live action movie. I know people have books to sell but it is never going to happen. The original link I posted was, as mentioned, in direct response to Miles possibly being Spider-Man in live action. It was the more complete interview. And it's also why Miles is being burned off in a cartoon. Sony knows they can't use him in live action. And they won't. So enjoy what you can get. -J.

They are still operating under their original agreement. It hasn't changed because it can't be materially changed without creating a new one. That's how contracts work. Do I even need to take the time to explain how putting an entirely different character called "Spider-Man" in a live action big screen movie would be a material change? All of Marvel's licensing agreements are character and name based as well as concept. They cant just pick and choose whatever they want to satisfy the comic book pump and dumpers and the wishful thinkers. -J.

Actually no it can't. Which is why it hasn't been. That would require an entirely new licensing agreement since Miles Morales did not exist when the original one was done. And do you know why there won't be a new agreement made? Because it would require Marvel agreeing to let Sony keep Peter Parker. Which they don't want to do. Which is why they are relegated to just "sharing" him. -J.

The licensing agreements were done over what 20, 30 years ago. And yes, those same ones are in effect. Don't know what to tell you man. And he "might" appear, have a walk on appearance of whatever as Miles Morales, but he can't be "Spider-Man" in a live action movie, so I hope you like cartoons. -J

It was an Easter egg. Just like I said. There can certainly be a character named "Miles Morales" in a live action movie but he will never be called "Spider-Man" in one. It is literally in the licensing agreement, and reiterated repeatedly by Stan the Man It is what it is. Sorry. -J.

Of course! There was an Easter egg where someone obliquely refers to their "nephew". And ? -J.

Stan Lee in response to the last time pump and dumpers tried to float the hoax that Miles Morales could ever be "Spider-man" in a live action movie : https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/film/2015/jun/23/stan-lee-spider-man-should-stay-white-and-straight -J.

I think you read my post incorrectly. Where did I reference race anywhere in it ? And in either scenario, only Peter Parker can ever be "Spider-man" in a live action movie. It was a caveat Stan Lee himself demanded and he has reiterated publicly on multiple occasions. Unfortunately, they can't change that without tearing up the whole contract, which would cause all of the rights to revert back to Marvel, so don't hold your breath for that either. Sorry, no Miles Morales as "Spider-Man" in any live action movies. -J.

I do think that character is completely undeserving of the hype he gets, especially since it is common knowledge he is contractually barred from ever being a character called "Spider-man" in any live action film. And did you take a look at the current auctions though? How much of the "demand" is real, how much of it is fake, and how much of it is lemmings following a fake "demand"? -J.

"Red hot" with shilling. Have you looked at the current auctions? Ridiculous. -J.

I wouldn't sweat that man, from the time frame and price that you mention, it was most likely one of the reprints. -J.

Yes it's the most rare by far. Only about 225 of them out there. Many with the same spine damage on the back. -J.

Wow. Nice. -J.

They're all awesome. -J.

The Human Torch is a completely different character that simply shares the same hero name , a la the Flash and the Green Lantern in the DC universe. So Yes an earlier character named the "Human Torch" that was actually an android and had nothing to do with the Fantastic Four 20 years later first appeared in Marvel Comics 1. Meanwhile the Submariner did not first appear there at all. And you wonder why Cap 1 ultimately passed it the way Tec 27, Action 1 and many other DC books have passed Tec 1. -J.

The "Human Torch" that was replaced 50 years ago by Johnny Storm, and the Submariner that actually first appeared in Motion Picture Funnies Weekly? -J.

The entire basis for what makes Marvel 1 important is that it started the "Marvel Universe" (even though no one says that or chases Detecitve Comics 1 for that same reason). I understand that it's not Marvel 1's fault that it contains no significant first appearances and that no movie can "help it" like movies/tv have myriad other characters across every Age of comic. But then again, it's also not Cap 1's (or Bats 1 or AS 8, etc) fault that the market prefers chasing major character first appearances above most everything else now either, is it? -J.

Uh, movies/tv gave the entire hobby a huge bump, and almost everything was "cheap" just 10 years ago. Yup. -J.

Your logic truly baffles me. By your line of reasoning, Detective Comics 1 (or even New Comics 1) should be the most valuable and sought after comic books in the world. But they're not. Not even close. Do you know why ? Because the enduring characters that were introduced in Action 1, Tec 27, etc. are what people care about and remember, not trivial pursuit answers that no one outside of the hobby would likely know. -J.

There is certainly more to my point than that , and yes everyone is entitled to their opinion, which obviously includes you. -J.

Hard to see how this is considered a "sketch". -J.

Superman being the first will always make Action 1 a tier 1 book by default, and Tec 27 because...well because it's Batman. As for captain America being less popular than superman in this era ? I don't know about that. And my point about cap 1 being a tier 1 isn't actually tied to popularity or even value. Cap 1 is one of the first Timely creations that's still actually relevant today. He is basically their only GA hero holdover, essentially unchanged since his creation (not counting the junk Nick Spencer has been doing lately). That's very significant to Timely/Marvel collectors, and as the top Timely it deserves a spot in the tier 1, irrespective of the reasons why Action 1 and Tec 27 are there IMO. -J.

Well the one with "white pages" on the label went for significantly less than this one, so what to make of that.... -J.