Davenport

With these you'd do better paying CGC not to send it back.

Here's a really good breakdown of those cool '66 'Black Bat' cards: Popular Batman Cards in Pictures Part One - 1966 Black Bat Batman Cards Quoting now (emphasis mine): The 1966 Black Bat cards (like all mainstream sets of 1966) was licensed worldwide to be produced in various countries locally. As a result the set is available in the following variations: 1966 Black Bat Orange Back Topps (USA) 1966 Black Bat Orange Back O-Pee-Chee (Canada) 1966 Black Bat Pink Back Series A&BC (UK) 1966 Black Bat Fan Club Series A&BC (UK) 1966 Black Bat Orange Back Scanlens (Australia) So it looks like yours are that "O-Pee-Chee" Canadian printing. And congrats on a such a fun pick-up. Look to be in excellent shape from your photos.

Seems like yesterday.

Oh hell yeah!!!

It's good to see someone like Truman get attention. One of the all time top-tier comic book Illustrators imho. The man certainly does his homework on 'heavy metal' (firearms, weapons, armor, vehicles, aircraft, etc.) and it shines through. One of fandom's bright spots.

Oh, and the Smallville JSA too.

Surprising she's not recognized. She had plenty of TV exposure in JLUnlimited. Well written character in that animated series, with lots of personality. She provided a charming counterpart to Supergirl. That, and being a prominent JSA cover-character for decades.

I'm not feeling it... Ugh. That cape-treatment combined with the goofy new52 unitard. 'Eradicator' all day long. Just missing the yellow sunglasses.

Oh man I felt my wallet get lighter just seeing this. Mercy, that is spectacular. If they did a Blue variant, wow, what a homage to the DKR cover. That grimace is almost a direct lift.

I thought that role had already been cast. BvS (Michael Cassidy)?

Interesting and probably spot-on. This may sound elitist, but I hope not. I was thinking early on when reading the reviews... maybe being able to park your butt in a seat and open yourself up to a story, novel or film, is a learned skill. Comes with being a strory-junkie. Conditioning, expectations and prejudgment are pleasure-robbers when it comes to enjoying tales to the full extent of what each have to offer. But it ain't easy to 'let go' and trust.

Reading through the Cap and X-Men threads it struck me... Has any other genre of film been critically-magnified like comic book movies? I can't remember westerns ever being like that. Or creature-features, or anything. Always been plenty of room for all of it, excellent to garbage. But with 'Superheroes' it seems either it smashes all records and mass expectations... or they shouldn't even have tried. Personally I'm just glad they're finally getting made. And happy I have a wide expanse for what I can enjoy.

It's in the 'Big Book Of Sane Living' somewhere. Or was it 'Don't Do It For Dummies'? 'Engaging an ideologue is a complete and utter waste of time.'

Well . I've seen MOS and BvS multiple times and missed the 'vapid sexpots' every time.

The foundation of the entire story is something new. A Batman we've never seen before. This Batman has already had a twenty year career in a world without Superman. And the story opens with this Batman well along a downward spiral, becoming 'cruel' (as Alfred puts it). Thinking he's wasted his life. Bitter. Anyway, Batman of this story isn't at the top of his game. Just the opposite. And his motivations are in line with his mindset. He did everything you mention (investigated, figured things out, weighed the possibilities), becoming Luthor's pawn and almost Superman's killer. And there lies the problem with the movie for me. I would like to have seen a Ben Affleck version of Batman in his prime or at least some crime fighting version of Batman before I got this aged bitter version. I will admit that my Batman canon ended in the late '70s Bronze Age, so I may not be acquainted with the copper or modern age tortured wreckless version that was portrayed in the movie. This was a version unseen by anyone (as far as I know). It's an Elseworld-tale of a world with a Batman and no Superman. So what happens to the 'dark' when there's no 'light' for a counter-balance? In this story it gets darker, downright ugly, desperate and twisted. Took twenty years. Not pretty. Then he shows up. Superman. And they write "a puff-piece editorial every time he pulls a cat out of a tree." Don't they realize he could be a world-killer? Batman does. But, by the end, the writers get us to a place most Batman/Superman stories begin. Batman inspired by Superman. Superman raised the bar. A twisting-turning path leading to "World's Finest" familiar terrain. Chapter one. Very clever. Now let's see where it goes. Can't wait. Justice League.

The foundation of the entire story is something new. A Batman we've never seen before. This Batman has already had a twenty year career in a world without Superman. And the story opens with this Batman well along a downward spiral, becoming 'cruel' (as Alfred puts it). Thinking he's wasted his life. Bitter. Anyway, Batman of this story isn't at the top of his game. Just the opposite. And his motivations are in line with his mindset. He did everything you mention (investigated, figured things out, weighed the possibilities), becoming Luthor's pawn and almost Superman's killer.

You'll probably see it on another viewing. Saw it and I still don't buy that...whether he was played or not, he was there when Metropolis came down, which was the start of his 'crusade'. The fact that the perp was 'human' should not matter much...if at all. So Batman should've killed Superman, using Luthor's krytonite? imho those who conclude Batman's (manipulated) attitude towards Superman is justified, yeah, the movie's going to suck. Not much way around that. But those who accept Alfred's take, 'been wrong for some time' and 'he's not our enemy', are experiencing the same movie differently. imho.

You'll probably see it on another viewing.

We all know the misogyny claims are BS. Right? In MOS Lois says right at the start "So, if we're done measuring , can you have your people show me what you've found." And in BvS she tells the terrorist: "I'm not a lady, I'm a journalist." It's just ludicrous.

Wouldn't it be interesting if you could 'see' how much baggage some filmgoers lug in.

Watched it a 3rd time and had a completely different take on the ending. The 1st two viewings I left thinking... This last viewing I got really excited thinking...

My take was...

Just curious: Is there something some people don't like about Zack Snyder before hand? Much of the teeth-gnashing seems centered on "Snyder" this, that or t'other. Is there some social-meme about the man out there or something? Cool to dislike anything he does in certain circles? I really don't know, so I'm asking. That vibe is certainly here in this thread. Or I'm imagining it's there. Something about "Snyder" anyone can fill me in on? To make sense of the level of (obsessive) disdain?

He knows from Luthor's party where he over-hears (super hearing) Bruce Wayne in communication with Alfred. And I think (could be wrong) that Superman calls his mom "Martha" because of his secret identity, or at least as a layer of anonymity for his mom. "Martha" is who she is in life, and she's a kidnap victim of Luthor. Lois is the one who spills the beans, connecting the dot for Bruce to what he's asking of him: PLEASE, please go save her. You know, this is kinda spoon-feeding it. But I'll lay it out anyway. It was a surprise in the theater (for me anyway). The build up and going it we thought we would be cheering for Batman during the fight. He's a human and so are we. Kick his alien butt... But during the actual fight Bruce is the alien, completely detached from his humanity. He's lost it at that point. Superman is us, asking for understanding, begging for aid, needing a friend, someone to step up on our behalf. It was a nice twist from the previews. Fellini and Bergman must be spinning in their graves as their legacy of film relevance is reduced to a discussion Zack's deeper meanings in BvS. You might be confusing a comic book movie chatboard with an elitist filmschool soiree. Some posters have even seen the movie.

I'll agree that the pleading made Superman seem completely human, and heck I'd buy the act of pleading being able to startle Batman back to his senses more than the unearned "martha" I thought about how Superman might be trying to keep his anonymity, but at that moment can he be expected to be so sensible? I would think he would be reacting from an emotional base, which would be to beg for his mom's life, not marta's life. again, i think it could totally work if there was some better act 1 work (by the writers) to lead to the payoff in act 3. You know, I'm not going to disagree with you. Personally I think it was a 'general audience' over-play. They took the time to drive it home, provide some grave-stone-with-name flashbacks, bring the audience completely up to speed. Was it overkill? Maybe. Could they have smoothed it out? Maybe. Overall it worked well enough (imho). Edit: Tossing this in before heading out... The Martha thing was NOT a deus ex machina. That would be if Krypto flew in just in time to take the tip of the spear. The Martha thing wasn't just present throughout the movie, it's been sitting there in the Grand Box of Story Elements for decades. The writers deserve full credit for utilizing it in such a pivotal fashion. What more can you ask of a writer? Right?