Lucky Baru

Not the best copy but it worked for me. [/img]

GPA records results from eBay and pretty much all the large auction houses (except Comiclink) :shrug: Comiclink refused to partner with GPA because they have many new breaking records on sales. My books were sold via Comiclink. One book was sold for over $8K that was nearly 3 times higher than I expected. GPA may be irrelevant. Comiclink may have had great sales that have broken records, but I believe that they refused to partner up with GPA because of their poor record-breaking sales. +1. No one hides their sales data when it smashes old records. Comic Link takes steps to lower the risk of shill bidding taking place in their auctions. I'd rather bid there than other places where that isn't the case.

You know at the end of a contest where a winner is declared? Well, you won. Wow!

You'd think he'd have picked the X in the X-men on that one. Hard to read.

Interesting flag. That's a police friendly bar!

The French Horror film Them is so much better. Tense is the best way I can describe the French movie which came out 2 years before the Strangers.

I vote for this one...

Your 13 year old or older grandchildren haven't been exposed to those words? Going on eleven. Sure he's been exposed to them. We, as caregivers, want to minimize that exposure while he is at this impressionable age. I've noticed some people treat other peoples children like toys in certain social gatherings. Once, during such a gathering, some of the younger folks present (mid twenties) saw our then 3 year old grandson poke one of the young ladies' boobs (not with any intent, just something a toddler does). If we were right there at the moment we would have gently stopped him. But then everyone present burst out in laughter, encouraging him to continue for at least 10-15 minutes before we noticed and put a stop to it, which had to have caused him confusion that a 3 year old would feel. They all thought it was cute and funny, which it was in an "at the moment" sort of way, but they never take into account that THEY'RE not the ones who have to raise the child responsibly. Allowing such a thing to go unchecked could cause some seriously embarrassing and uncomfortable moments when having to explain to teachers or principals or other parents. How many of us know [of] people who rely solely on schools to mold their child's minds during these years, only to moan and groan to the world when said kids exhibit poor social skills during inappropriate settings? "I don't know why he/she does this! They never learned it from me!" Chances are they never learned NOT to either. It begins at home. Always has, and should always will. So, if I get it right you have an issue with the language but don't seem to have an issue exposing your 11 year old to the violence of the movie? Can you help me understand how you separate the two and rank one being worse than the other? I'm guessing in this movies case the profanity outweighed the violence or maybe you don't have an issue with violence in movies. I am NOT judging - just asking for your opinion. I ask as we have a 3 year old and he isn't allowed to see any program that has violence within it. I don't think he'll see the X-Men or any superhero movie until he is 13 or 14. He doesn't need to be exposed to that outside of the Taekwondo class he'll start in a year. That's the way that we view the two and place more weight on the violence side. Not that profanity is acceptable nor would it be in the future. I'm sure all of the above just comes down to different views on parenting. Nobody is right and nobody is wrong. I'll be able to read your response but won't be able to reply. I look forward to reading your reply.

He plays a very good tough guy. Great Dredd and I liked him as Black Hat in Priest. He's 43 and that's old to start doing Bond. He would be doing it for 1 or 2 films. They seem to want a younger guy.

Your 13 year old or older grandchildren haven't been exposed to those words?

Batman Rebirth should be a hot book. Duke is in the Batcave talking to Batman about being a Robin... and Batman tells him he has something else in mind. A new costume is shown to Duke. No name is given to the suit but Duke is shown wearing it towards the end of the book... nice spoiler...hope a cool name goes with it. Edit Image found There is a Lark suit in Detective Comics 27

JW Pepper. :doh: He makes an unwelcome cameo in The Man With the Golden Gun as well. :doh: :doh: Mr. Big's death scene (where they clearly used an inflatable doll) in LALD has got to be one of the more ridiculous ones in the series: Dude, the "we sure are, boy" line given by Bond to JW before the car jump is fantastic.

Maybe but no JW Pepper. A secret agent? For whose side? Makes me laugh every time I view that movie.

Come on, that movie has JW Pepper in it. The boat chase and the scene around the 2:18 mark make that movie :

Naw Bank has it now, it's listed for 8 million currently. You should jump on it. What a deal!

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/04/12/palm-springs-home-that-appeared-in-james-bond-film-goes-on-sale/ 10.5 Million

Like Peter Cushing from those bad vampire movies with Christopher Lee. The receding hair line is harsh in that drawing. Looks like Peter Cushing with Christopher Lee's hair from those outstanding cinematic masterpieces, you mean? Not sure if that was meant as a joke but I laughed when I read that. That's some funny imagery right there. Count Dooku and Count Dracula in one life time!

Like Peter Cushing from those bad vampire movies with Christopher Lee. The receding hair line is harsh in that drawing.

I thought Fleming wanted David Niven for the role -- one of the original film producers is on record as saying Fleming even wrote Casino Royale with Niven in mind. They were both at the top of Fleming's list in the beginning, though the snobbish Fleming eventually warmed up to Connery's portrayal so much that he made the literary Bond half-Scottish. In Casino Royale (the first novel), Bond is described as looking like Hoagy Carmichael with a scar on his cheek. He's also variously described in the books as being cold and ruthless, with a cruel smile - when I think of that, I envision something close to how they portrayed Bond in the '60s comic strip (regardless of what Fleming himself might have thought). Among the cinematic 007s, I think Timothy Dalton came closest in both looks and portrayal - no surprise, since he studied the novels and purposely modeled his Bond on what he read. There are several moments in The Living Daylights where he is stone cold ruthless, cruel and world weary as if leaping out of one of Fleming's books. I'd like to see that again. Like Craig, I think Hiddleston is a fine actor, but wrong for the part. I'm sure the producers are drooling over the prospect of a younger, sexier Bond, but I get this feeling that they and the general movie-going public would be happy to see anyone who's good-looking, fit, has a British accent and can sell tickets play the role, whereas I really would like to see them find someone who fits the nuances of the part. James Bond should be James Bond, not just some generic British secret agent (which is really what Craig's Bond was). Hiddleston is the correct age for Bond. He's 35 which in the Fleming books Bond is in his mid 30's. to early 40's. The 00 section has a mandatory retirement age of 45. (I am not saying I think he should be Bond. I don't think I'd go and see a Bond movie he was in). The first Craig movie was great as it was a reset that showed how Bond makes his bones in the 00 section and it showed that he made mistakes. He wasn't the refined scalpel we got with Connery, Moore, or Lazenby. On a side note, Bond's success in the books seems to play off skill and luck. Good fortune seems to side with Bond when he's in a sticky situation.

Fleming wanted Cary Grant for the role and Hiddleston is the most like Grant in the current crowd. Maybe he'll work out.

I'm sorry. Until any of those movies surpass Frozen, you should back away from any further analysis. At least Cap3 finally passed up Toy Story 3. I was worried there for a little while (not accounting for inflation). As long as Disney and Marvel keep destroying whatever Warner puts out I'm all for it. Of course, it might have been a different story if Warner Brothers hadn't have forced the President of the studio that green lighted The Dark Knight trilogy only to have him show up across the street and become the CEO of Disney. How a studio could mess up a movie that has the two most iconic comic characters in it I haven't a clue. They did it. Seriously, the Jungle Book is going to out gross a Batman Superman movie. 5 months ago if anyone had told you that would happen you'd have laughed at the thought. It will be a reality shortly.

Captain America Civil War Box Office through 5/25/16 = Worldwide: $1,071,699,099 BvS Box Office through 5/25/16 = Worldwide: $871,049,975 The Jungle Book Box Office through 5/25/16 = Worldwide: $862,301,886 The Jungle Book was released 3 weeks after BvS. In the next 2 weeks Jungle Book will pass BvS in box office revenue. Who would have thought that was possible?

The 1:50 Steve Epting Variant of CAPTAIN AMERICA STEVE ROGERS #1 seems to be moving.

The Jungle Book is going to catch BvS and pass it at the box office. It isn't that far behind at the moment.