delekkerste

Awesome! Please shoot me a PM or post a link here when you're ready.

That sounds very interesting - any chance you would be willing to share it with us? Sounds like a great read. Thanks for the rec - will definitely check it out. (thumbs u

Popularity is relative. You could say that Disney films have been popular since the 1930s as well, but the fact is that there are periods when they have been more popular and less popular. Same with horror films. I have read scholarly research about this very topic - one paper was done for horror films and another one was done for Disney films. They are papers that discuss the popularity of Picasso and the Beatles in different conditions as well. Fascinating stuff. I think there was even a study done on the zombie craze recently.

Just finished reading an investment/trading book called "The Complete TurtleTrader". It's about how, probably inspired by the movie Trading Places, two Chicago traders hired a bunch of people back in the early '80s, mostly without any trading background, in an experiment to see if they could turn them into profitable traders (it succeeded beyond their wildest imaginations). I'm currently reading "Banksy: The Man Behind The Wall" about the celebrated, mysterious street artist, as well as "Marvel Comics: The Untold Story" which, halfway through it, has just been tremendous. A must-read for any Marvel fan; it is meticulously researched and even a longtime fan like me is learning all kinds of new stuff from it. Absolutely fantastic. (thumbs u

I think wrote in this thread ages ago that the popularity of horror and zombie films ebbs and flows with the overall socioeconomic environment. Bad economy + dark mood = greater popularity of horror films. Just look at all the Universal horror properties that were big hits during the 1930s and 1940s. Good economy + sunny mood = greater popularity of Disney animated films and the like. There's a reason why Night of the Living Dead came out amid the tumult of the late '60s, and there's a reason why The Walking Dead TV show has resonated so much in the tough economy of the post-financial crisis world. If The Walking Dead is still popular in 2022, it probably means we will have been in a decade-plus long economic malaise and have bigger problems to worry about than whether TWD #1 black or white edition is worth more money. I hope for all our sakes that TWD is cancelled by 2022.

The finale was so, so good. What a great first season - definitely exceeded my expectations.

Since "conceptual layouts" can be done on the actual board or, as in the Miller/Janson collaboration, on separate sheets of paper (meaning that Miller never put pencil to the actual piece of art that is being purchased), I have to agree with Ferran that I think this should be explicitly stated. Frankly, I bet most people who have been bidding on #185-#190 interiors already know this to be true and/or wouldn't care anyway if that extra bit of clarification was added. So, I think erring on the side of more disclosure would be preferable to less.

I believe that was Picasso wasn't it? I thought so, but I tried to verify it online and google didn't turn up anything. Picasso would never have done that. Dali signed thousands of blank sheets and there are a lot of fake prints and drawings out there. I'm sure the details are available online. As for having assistants do most of the heavy lifting, that could describe any number of Modern/contemporary artists, from Warhol to Kostabi to Hirst and Murakami. I hear what Alex is saying about comic art being a collaborative process, though the art market does still distinguish how much of the master's direct hand is evident, going back to the Old Masters like Rubens who had a large circle of assistants who worked on a lot of his paintings. So it is in comic art as well, and is likely to be going forward. That said, I think the later DD art is still very high quality, very Miller-esque (coming from his layouts, of course) and is still very nostalgic/memorable. So, it's not surprising to me to have seen prices jump to where they are now on some of the later material even without Miller's direct hand.

I agree. DD #181 not touched by Miller? I don't believe it.

Just finished reading "Rogues' Gallery: The Secret History of the Moguls and the Money that Made the Metropolitan Museum" by Michael Gross, an unauthorized tell-all about the history of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC. It was a fantastic read, learning both about the history and politics of the museum, but also all the fascinating characters that have been involved with the museum since its founding. Much of the book was really a history of the who's who of the New York business, political, cultural and social elite since the late 19th century, which I found to be fascinating. Very highly recommended. I also recently finished Timothy Ferriss' "The 4-Hour Workweek". Basically the book tells you how to maximize your productive efficiency at work (whether working for someone else or for yourself) by eliminating a lot of time wasters, and how you can live a more productive and fulfilling life by either (a) following his steps to negotiate a work from home and, ultimately, a work from abroad arrangement with your employer or (b) setting up your own business and how to outsource a ton of functions (fulfillment, customer service, etc.) so that it operates almost on auto-pilot. I doubt most people who read the book will end up doing either, but it did help me to identify some things that waste too much of my time (insert CGC Boards joke here) and to remind me that the rat race isn't always what it's cracked up to be.

...and, on the other hand, I just met someone who is a fan of the TV show and didn't realize it was based on a comic book series until I told him the other day. :doh: There are far more fans of the TV series than there are of the comic, and most of them will never pick up a copy of the book, let alone pay $3K for a copy of issue #1. I don't think you can really extrapolate from a few anecdotal examples; those wives buying the monthly title aren't the ones paying up for ultra HG slabs now, nor will they be paying even more than that 25 years from now.

I think the truth is probably somewhere in-between. TWD will not be popular forever. Prices will not consistently rise forever. I think it will hold up better than "The Crow" and other such comparables, though. Whether $2.8K for a 9.8 #1 or the 5-figure offers I've received for my TWD original cover art are sustainable, though...who knows. I see a case to be made that the upside is already built in at those levels, even if the series/TV show remains popular for several more years. Eventually, its popularity will fade. Not sure if it will quickly become forgotten like Lost or Heroes, but it will surely fade. In fact, one organization I know has done a socionomic study of the popularity of horror films and the zombie craze. It is not a coincidence that the Universal monster characters debuted on film during the hard times of the Great Depression (e.g., Dracula, 1931; Frankenstein, 1931; The Bride of Frankenstein, 1935; The Wolf-Man, 1941) or that George Romero's "Night of the Living Dead" was a hit during the turbulent Vietnam era of the late '60s. TWD would probably have flopped during the go-go years of the '80s, for example, but it's the perfect show for the current hard times of the post-bubble, post-crisis era. At some point, social mood will favor cheery material again and shows like TWD will fall off in popularity. It's inevitable. I'm holding onto my TWD cover art because it's one of the best out there and I love the show and the comic book series. If I owned it purely for financial reasons, I'd probably think very hard about selling it now, though. I mean, is it really going to be a $25K-$30K+ item in the future? Maybe, but I'd be surprised if I could get more than the $15-$20K I could get for it now anytime soon (if ever). Oh, and about The Rule of 25...for every instance it works, there's probably 10 or more instances it doesn't. It is definitely not a statistically reliable phenomenon. Are people really going to be clamoring for TWD memorabilia in 25 years? I doubt it. More likely that it'll be like "Lost". After that series ended, they immediately auctioned off all the props from the show. I doubt much, if any, of that material could be re-sold at a profit today, and it will almost surely not hold its value over 25 years. Here's a list of the most popular toys of 1987: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_were_the_most_popular_toys_in_1987 How many people were clamoring for these last year?

That one looks strangely familiar.

Recently read "Fifty to One" by Charles Ardai, the 50th book in the "Hard Case Crime" series. A fun read that is an homage to the first 50 books in the series; probably only for die hard fans. Also read "How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming" by Mike Brown, the discoverer of what was briefly the tenth planet until its discovery cast doubt on whether the ninth planet (Pluto) was really a planet as opposed to just a large Kuiper Belt object. Fans of astronomy will enjoy this fast-paced, fun read.

A really nice Greg Capullo all-out action X-Force cover featuring the X-Men (with prominent Wolverine and Gambit images) just sold on Heritage for $4,780. Now, I don't know what Greg has been up to lately, but I suspect that anyone contemplating paying $30K+ for a complete issue published recently ought to have their head examined. You can get complete issues of books from the '70s, '80s and '90s that people actually care about, with word balloons and non-decompressed storylines, for less than that. It didn't have the cover, but the complete Daredevil #77 story (featuring Spider-Man to boot) by Colan and Palmer sold for $22.7K just over a year ago on Heritage. I've seen complete stories of Daredevil, Punisher, Tomb of Dracula, etc. all priced well below even that level. Those John Romita Jr. complete stories have been fetching $5-7K for the most part on Heritage. Now, I'm not saying that what I collect rocks and what you collect sucks, but, I'm sorry, anyone who thinks $30K for Greg Capullo doing Batman sounds even within the realm of reasonability needs to get checked for mental illness. And if that's what Greg thinks his own work is worth, he needs to get checked as well.

Finished "Bust" and would definitely recommend it. I liked it so much that now I'm reading the sequel to it - "Slide", also by Ken Gruen and Jason Starr. It's another darkly humorous crime novel (a bit Tarantino-esque I'd say as well) featuring the same cast as "Bust", but this time it's even more absurdly over-the-top and much more overtly laugh-out-loud funny than the first go-around. I'm only a couple of chapters away from finishing it and would highly, highly recommend it (though you'll have to read "Bust" first to truly "get it"). I've got the 3rd book in the series ("The Max") all lined up to go after I finish "Slide" today. I'm really enjoying these "Hard Case Crime" novels a lot more than any comics I've read lately; I'd highly recommend them. Finished reading "The Max" - another great, darkly comic read. Very over-the-top and overtly funny like "Slide", as opposed to the more subdued first novel, "Bust". Thought the ending got a bit too Tarantino-esque (and not in a good way), but, I have to say, I thoroughly enjoyed this trilogy and would highly, highly recommend it. Most fun I've had reading fiction (including comic books) in a very long time. (thumbs u

Finished "Bust" and would definitely recommend it. I liked it so much that now I'm reading the sequel to it - "Slide", also by Ken Gruen and Jason Starr. It's another darkly humorous crime novel (a bit Tarantino-esque I'd say as well) featuring the same cast as "Bust", but this time it's even more absurdly over-the-top and much more overtly laugh-out-loud funny than the first go-around. I'm only a couple of chapters away from finishing it and would highly, highly recommend it (though you'll have to read "Bust" first to truly "get it"). I've got the 3rd book in the series ("The Max") all lined up to go after I finish "Slide" today. I'm really enjoying these "Hard Case Crime" novels a lot more than any comics I've read lately; I'd highly recommend them.

What prompted me to post, in addition to what I feel is the deteriorating quality of the writing (I agree, this "Negan" character/storyline was not only retreaded schlock, but has gone for pure, uncreative, gratuitous, even exploitative shock value), is that I saw that there are a lot of unsold pages on Splash Page. I'm not sure if that is due to the price increases that kicked in a few months ago mentioned above, or if the sheer quantity of pages being produced has largely sated demand for the non-early material (or, perhaps a combination of both).

*No Spoilers Here* I finally caught up reading through the latest TPB and went back and read an interview with Kirkman about issue #100. He mentioned in the interview that he now plans on writing TWD past issue #300! Now, that may be his plan now, but surely the series is going to take a dip in popularity at some point; the TV series will likely have long ended by the time issue #300 rolls around. Also, as more and more of the long-time cast of characters is killed off, I can see readers dropping out as well, especially since, to me, anyway, the storylines aren't getting any more original (isn't this "Negan" guy in the latest storyline just another version of "The Governor"?) Anyway, I'm just wondering what art from this series is still going to be hot/popular/in demand in the coming years...if the series does limp to past issue #300, there's going to be enough pages out there for every man, woman and child who's ever heard of TWD, and I'm not sure I can see every Adlard cover still being able to fetch a few grand if there's like close to 300 of them out there. Thoughts?

Finished "Ripper" (a fun read - wouldn't be surprised if they make a film of it as it has a very cinematic feel to it) and have now gone back to another "Hard Case Crime" novel - "Bust" by Ken Gruen and Jason Starr about a man who hires a hitman to bump off his wife, not knowing that the hitman is conniving with his mistress to double-cross him. I'm halfway through it and am enjoying the noir-ish feel tinged with dark humor as well. Definitely a fun read.

I don't know about the rest of his repertoire, but "Ice Ice Baby" is fantastic...I sometimes find myself rhyming random lines from that song for absolutely no reason at all. It's like poetry, man.

Next I suppose you're going to tell me that "Don't Stop Believin'" was forgotten before it appeared in "The Sopranos" series finale because it only made #73 on that list you linked. Like I said, you can't look at Billboard charts and Wikipedia alone to prove your point - "Under Pressure" was a rock radio staple from 1981 onwards, and would have easily made a 1981 countdown list based on airplay and listener requests at a rock radio station that did not include the likes of Olivia Newton-John and Andy Gibb in their rotation. Many rock radio staples did not necessarily chart well (or even at all) when they were released, but were/are still immensely popular - I don't think "Stairway to Heaven" was even released as a single and I don't think any of the many memorable songs on "The Wall" aside from "Another Brick in the Wall" charted well, if at all, just to throw out a couple examples off the top of my head (though I'm sure there are dozens, if not hundreds, of other examples you could point to). If you heard "Under Pressure" at any point between 1981 and 1986, you certainly didn't forget it by the time Vanilla Ice rolled around in 1989-90, especially not in the pre-information overload era of the 1980s. When "Ice Ice Baby" came out, I certainly wasn't scratching my head wondering where that sample came from and neither was anybody else I know. In any case, the world is a better place for having "Ice Ice Baby" in it. Yeah, legally Vanilla Ice owed Queen royalties. So what? Did that make the song any less awesome? Everyone (except you and Dan, it seems ) knew where that riff was sampled from when the song came out - and we didn't care, because we weren't arguing a legal proceeding. Similarly, you can look at Lichtenstein as a lawyer or as a lover of art. I know which one I'd rather be. Though, I suspect you wouldn't be a fan of Lichtenstein's work even if those who illustrated the source material had been thoroughly credited and compensated, no?

And you, my friend, should be a lawyer the way you have now reframed the argument to something completely beside its original intent.

I don't think it's theft or lazy. It's Pop Art. If he made his own images entirely, it would have been something different. He took the banal objects and images of mass commercial culture and transformed them into his vision of art. The decision to make many aspects the same to the source material was a deliberate part of the process. He was the originator of Pop Art - he did the first Pop painting, not Warhol. And, remember, he did this while Abstract Expressionism was all the rage - he was a true pioneer. And, you really do have to see these in person. Comparing the source panels to the art in same-sized JPEG images on a website like Barsalou does is an absolutely absurd exercise. I'm sure that the overwhelming majority of people who saw the retrospective were extremely impressed by it and don't have any of the hang-ups expressed here. When you see it, you know you're looking at greatness. The original comic book? It is what it is, but what it is not is great in any way, shape or form. You really need to see his very excellent sculptures as well.

Chris, you're the one turning an analogy into legality. The fact is, riffing off of "Under Pressure", a top-40 smash hit in the U.S. and #1/top-10 hit in almost every country outside of the U.S., by two of the greatest rock acts of all-time, maybe analogous legally to what Lichtenstein did, but common sense says...not really. My local radio station had an annual survey of the top 500 rock songs of all-time that they played every 4th of July weekend. "Under Pressure" was always on that list when I was living in San Diego from 1985-1989 (i.e., pre-Vanilla Ice). There are many other classic, beloved, well-remembered rock songs out there that didn't crack the Billboard top 10 or 20. Having grown up in the '80s, "Under Pressure" was always one of my favorite songs; I remember taping it on cassette from the radio when it came out (I may even still have that tape somewhere at my parents' house) and the local rock station in Colorado was counting down the best songs of the year at year-end. Just because Queen stopped playing it live after FIVE YEARS doesn't mean that people forgot about it, any more than people have forgotten "New Year's Day" or "Bad" or "In God's Country" or "All I Want Is You" just because U2 is playing other songs at their shows nowadays. Music fans don't tend to forget great songs by great bands. Wikipedia-based arguments can only get you so far.