RobAnybody

On 10/28/2023 at 5:33 AM, Bosco685 said:

Goes to show how the media outlets are used to distribute alternate reality, leading to a story being twisted.

I don't think it's being twisted.  The Writers didn't get a per sub addition to their deal.  The Directors didn't get a per sub addition to their deal.  This is something unique the actors requested.

From what I've read, the actors had a deal commensurate with what the Writers got, & what the Directors (very quietly) got, on the table. Like, done deal. But then they tacked on this stupid 0.57 per subscriber (what currency is that even in?) thing, & sabotaged it all. So dumb.

On 10/25/2023 at 6:48 PM, drotto said:

Nothing in any of these contracts will change the fact that 86% of their members make less than $26000 per year.

Part of the reason for that statistic is that every bit part actor is a member. So the couple chatting at the beginning of Law & Order who stumble upon the body are members. The barista who takes Sheldon's order on TBBT & exchanges a few lines of dialogue is a member. The Red Shirt on Star Trek who has a few lines, beams down with the main characters, & promptly gets killed is a member.

That's what skews that statistic - for most actors, acting is at best a part-time job. No one should expect full-time pay for part-time work.

I had heard of One Piece but didn't know the first thing about it. Didn't know it was pirate-themed; couldn't have even told you what "One Piece" was referring to ("is it a show about bathing suits, maybe?").

But I wound up really enjoying it. The characters are all incredibly deep, interesting, & just plain fun! The world-building is also deep & engaging. The fight scenes, while naturally a good deal over the top & exaggerated, are well-choreographed & you can actually see what's going on - no close up, quick cut chaos with very accommodating stunt people like we see in too many other shows today.

Obviously I'm avoiding mentioning any specific spoilers & being very general in my praise, but I recommend it to anyone who enjoys more typical "comic book movies " even if you're not big into Manga.

I have a question on how/why things work like they do: If I assign something to an auction, & that auction is, like, a month from now, why not keep it on my Buy It Now list until that auction starts? It appears (from what I see) that it gets removed from my active listings & is just in limbo for a month. Just curious, what's the reasoning behind that? Wouldn't it be better to keep my Buy It Now listing active until the Auction starts?

On 9/20/2023 at 10:18 AM, Bosco685 said:

I wouldn't put the full blame on the writers if the showrunners/producers controlling direction and results are the final approvers.

I don't disagree, but either the writers have given us terrible writing recently or they're not to blame but are mostly uninvolved in the actual writing. Neither view enhances their value.

On 9/20/2023 at 4:56 AM, Bosco685 said:

But remember. With sub-divisions like Marvel Studios the producers drive the show direction. Not the writers or directors. Movies and shows.

Then still, this shows the actual writers don't really matter. If the producers are running things, why pay the writers more money if they don't really contribute to the stories?

My brother hates Robin with a passion  , so he collects "dead Robin" comic covers, even when it's just reprints.  Like the obvious:

But also:

He has some others already, but... he has a birthday coming up.  Any somewhat more obscure suggestions I could get for him?

On 9/19/2023 at 2:00 PM, drotto said:

Disney + has lost close to $13 billion since it luanched. That is all about writers and content creation.  

Doesn't that kinda make the point that paying these writers *more* is a losing proposition?  They are the ones who wrote the shows that lost them that money.

On 9/18/2023 at 6:55 PM, Nick Furious said:

I'm not sure I understand the issue.  When I click on "Set Price/Auction" there is a drop down box right above "assign to auction" that allows me to chose which week it goes into, starting with the next date that is available to me. 

You understood the question. It was me simply missing something obvious.  Thanks!

Hey @mycomicshop, two questions: 1)is there a better venue to suggest "improvement ideas" or ask "how does this work?" questions than here?  I totally don't mind doing it here, & actually kind of like it, b/c I can get other people's feedback on if my ideas are stupid or would be appreciated  so there's that, but is there a "suggestion box" on your site that I should use, just wondering. Also, 2)...

...my suggestion is: I'd like a way to know what date my comic would go up for auction if/when I click on "Submit To Auction" before I click it.  As in, I get that I can withdraw the item after I've clicked it, & I can see what other similar issues are going to come up for auction that might influence that date. But, I don't know what you consider "similar". So, for example, if I see in your list when I click on My Book CGC 9.4 that I have on consignment & am considering putting it in an auction, what I see is:

The following items are already scheduled for auction:

My Book CGC 9.8 Starts [next week]

My Book CGC 9.0 Starts [next week]

My Book CGC SS 9.4 [starts in two weeks]

My Book VF [starts in two weeks]

My Book CGC 9.2  [starts in three weeks]

Is there a way for me to know, if I do assign My 9.4 Book to Auction, which week it would show up before actually assigning it? Like, would it go into the [next week] auction since there's not already a 9.4 in there?  Would it go into the "starts in two weeks" b/c mine is not SS?  Would it have to wait until four weeks, when all the existing have got their turn?  Not a pressing, super important question. Just curious. And if there's a FAQ for stuff like this, my bad, just point me there please.

Interesting - does that mean you think it's a scam?

Looks like there's a 9.8 auction going on ebay, ending Sunday morning EST.  Any bets where it ends up?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/355027785025

How strange... no Mera in that?

On 9/1/2023 at 1:06 PM, MAR1979 said:

I caution any looking to purchase Valiant Key slabs at current levels. FMVs will drop deeper and deeper. They are not books for the future, they are merely relics of a very tiny year or 2 of quality in the early 90s.

I concur, as someone who loved pre-Unity Valiant storytelling. It's never gonna be "collectible" again. There are not a lot of us that even remember those... what? 2-3 years tops? I wouldn't discourage anyone who just simply wants them in their personal collection, but I agree that "Valiant Keys" is not gonna be a thing, in the near or long-term future.  Unfortunately.

George Clooney was an "extra" on The Facts of Life way back when.  Do you think he would have said "naaah... I'll pass on this minor role. I'm gonna be George Clooney in like 20 years"?

EDIT: fwiw: that was more directed @fantastic_four, rather than @Eclipse

$47 million is what the WGA says it would cost. I don't believe that number any more than I would if the studios said it would cost $8.7 trillion.

How would you even calculate the "cost" of something like "no using AI" anyway?

On 9/2/2023 at 5:52 AM, Bosco685 said:

So your point give the audiences only what they assume again misses that point.

Then I guess it's a good thing that was never my point. My point was: don't intentionally give audiences what they don't want by presenting different or very obscure versions of characters they already know. We've seen how that works out.

The first time we saw Hulk it wasn't Red Hulk. The first time we saw Steve Rogers it wasn't as Nomad. Sony didn't start us off with Cosmic Spider-Man. Just because an obscure variant of a character exists in a comic somewhere doesn't mean "hey, let's start with that".

On 9/1/2023 at 6:12 PM, The humble Watcher lurking said:

2025. I am into the scene. One of my shows I connected to which is great will be canceled. A lot of these Marvel Disney plus shows which I am  not involved with won't make it to the finish line. I don't know if anyone noticed this but in the year 2024  DC only has one movie on schedule Joker 2. 

I have NO connections to The Scene, but that would also be my bet. The Studios have 0 reason to cave. They can offer more $, but "more writers in the room" Why? "No AI" Why? "Most other (non-pay-related) demands" Why? They can just wait them out.

Has anyone here seen the South Park episode where Canada went on strike (as an analogy to the last writer's strike)? I don't see a whole lot of difference here, except maybe that the writers have even less leverage 'cause, well, a whole lot of the public doesn't actually care if they come back, maybe even wishes they don't. I hope they enjoy their new Bennigan's coupons. Maybe they can get Applebee's this time?

I view this question similarly to how I view buying a new TV: "Always go slightly bigger". Basically, if you are buying a new TV, always go at least 1 size bigger.  If you are looking at a 70" TV, just get a 75". You'll never regret it, but you *might* regret not getting the bigger one & kinda wish you did, 'cause you are gonna have it for a long time & you are stuck with your original choice. You never want to regret that original choice,

Same with buying graded comics. When you are collecting (not flipping, not looking to sell), you will never regret buying the higher grade. Especially if they increase in price & you kinda even half pay attention to that that, even if you have no intention in selling it (because, if you're here, you probably do that).

A personal example: Batman Adventures 12 (1st Harley Quinn). Many years ago, I didn't want to pay $400-500 for a 9.8, so I bought a 9.6 for roughly $150 by bidding on several auctions on ebay until I won one. I'm never gonna sell this comic. But I do enjoy tracking the price of it occasionally (recent ebay auctions: 9.6 @$851; 9.8 @2,469).

It would've been more "fun" tracking the 9.8 if I'd bought it way back then, not to mention just seeing the 9.8 instead of the 9.6 in my collection. So, my advice is: No Ragrets (I mean assuming price isn't a financial issue). Buy the higher grade, every time. You will never regret it. You WILL occasionally regret NOT doing so.

On 8/31/2023 at 4:16 AM, Bosco685 said:

But what this assumption misses (they should do it like the MCU)...

Never said this.  I just said Marvel managed to make Captain America of all people an interesting character that people liked. So it shows that it's not impossible to make "Boy Scout" characters (which DC has in abundance) connect with audiences.

On 8/31/2023 at 4:16 AM, Bosco685 said:

Now we have "not my Barry Allen" and "not my Supergirl" to contend with.

Yes, DC cannot afford any own goals. They were already so behind the 8-ball that they should have probably played it safe & avoided throwing into triple coverage. Just run it up the middle & sink the free throws. Yikes - I think I have exceeded my allowed sports metaphors for multiple years in this single paragraph.

But my point is: we see where giving people "not my X" got them.

On 8/30/2023 at 8:33 PM, Zonker said:

That's traditionally the knock on the DC characters-- each one is a paragon of virtue, ultra-professional at all times, always following Robert's Rules of Order, etc.

That's a great point, & probably why Aquaman was so successful.  The DCEU characters are all basically "good gods", meaning they don't really have any flaws & are always just "the nicest person in the room" but also with god-like powers.  It's kinda... boring to watch, but also why Batman stands out, 'cause he's not at all like that.  And why the Jason Momoa version of Aquaman also stands out (plus, not to be shallow, but women love Jason Momoa).  They tried to make Flash the Spider-Man of the DCEU, but that's not really his personality (the CW Flash show was a more accurate portrayal IMO).  Marvel managed to make Captain America, the ultimate Boy Scout, interesting & fun.  Which was honestly quite an accomplishment, but not something Warner ever managed with their characters.

Valiant during the Jim Shooter era was just amazing storytelling.  I have almost all the runs from back then (ungraded, just in boxes).  They kinda fell off a cliff after Unity though, which was unfortunate.

I recently watched this on (HBO) MAX.  It was pretty bad. Keaton Batman was the highlight. The CGI was pretty awful, the plot was almost non-sensical, IMO. It butchered the Flashpoint storyline, which would have been great, if they'd just adapted that. The multiple-Ezra's trying to out-annoy me didn't help.

But, what really irritates me is: I'm a huge Supergirl fan. Was so hoping for an accurate Supergirl, even in the dead DCEU. But this characterization missed on: the look, the costume, the name (it's "Care-Uh", not "Khar-ah" - I don't know when modern interpretations suddenly can't even pronounce her NAME right), but more importantly, the personality: she's a fish-out-of-water, came to Earth as a teenager, loves using her powers, hates having to use a secret identity but grudgingly accepts it 'cause Clark teaches her why, & is super-cheerful & optimistic. This film's version is just Supergirl-in-name-only. They just slapped the name on an entirely different character. Which, sure, it's an alternate universe (where she takes the Superman role from Flashpoint). But what really just sucks, IMO is that this movie essentially means I won't get a genuine big screen, proper Supergirl any time soon. *sigh*