JTLarsen

9 hours ago, 1950's war comics said:

1  Spidey

2   FF 

3   X-men

4   Daredevil

5   Silver Surfer

honorable mentions - Cap, Thor, Hulk

 

Cap is golden age.

3 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

There was little distinction made when those things were "hot." It was simply that it was Neal Adams art. The distinction was made on the books where he did interior art as well as the covers. I don't know anyone who collected Neal Adams art who would have turned down Superman #249. 

People certainly collected ONLY X-Men, or ONLY Adams art, but very few people collected ONLY Neal Adams X-Men.

Up until the CGC age, people who collected by artist almost universally sought out everything that artist did. It's why Power Man #48-50 were broken out. It was because they were drawn by Byrne. That it was a drek title like Power Man wasn't even remotely relevant. 

It took decades for Adams covers on some titles to be broken out. The mystery stuff came after the superhero stuff. Tomahawk, too.

Also, most artists have been Artist + Subject Matter. Neal Adams Batman vs. Neal Adams Superman. Mac Raboy Cap Jr. vs...

14 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

No. 

Longshot wasn't "a hot mini" when it came out, and Campbell was FAR from being a "hot artist" at the time of Gen 13. His art is pretty awful. 

Gen 13 was popular because it was underordered and struck a chord in buyers. 

Longshot, however, was drawn by a guy who went on to become the most popular new artist since John Byrne. The Longshot mini didn't achieve its peak value until the top of the "hot artist" movement in 1990, several years after it was published.

Longshot became, over time, popular. It wasn't an instant smash success, like Gen 13. And Gen 13 wasn't a smash success because of Campbell's art, which was, as mentioned, awful. Fairchild's legs aren't 5 feet long. It was GOOD ENOUGH, but it's not why it became so hot.

Two completely different trajectories.

Longshot was hot instantly.

On 5/26/2018 at 12:50 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

I know, it's a bit of a quibble, but CGC has had it wrong since the beginning, and they're supposed to go with the indicia, which says this:

This is incorrect. 

Not that it matters much, but...it's inaccurate.

I’ve been waiting thirty years for this.

11 hours ago, Tony D said:

I compiled a list many years ago but I have no idea how complete or accurate it is. I don't even remember where I got the information.

 

Archie's Joke Book Magazine

#41 - 1 page 

 

 

This is wrong. Overstreet used to have it, then dropped it. Without, of course, acknowledging the error. Too late for me, as I had already bought it. Anyway, 44 is first Adams pro work.

5 hours ago, Whizzer said:

Hi guys, looking for your input if you don't mind.  I'm a big Hughes fan and have been considering picking up some of his sketch books.  However, i've found in the past that artist's self-published sketch books can vary greatly in content and quality.  Anybody here have any of the Hughes sb's? Are they good value or should I pass?  Thanks in advance. 

I collect them. Can't say whether they're a good value, since that requires knowing the price. I've never paid anything exorbitant. And some of them have fun/cool surprises--most of his cover to Spider-Gwen 1, for instance, shows up in an earlier sketchbook. My advice: Hunt and research before you buy.

12 hours ago, Readcomix said:

If you want it, you should be able to bargain him down a bit and buy it. Don't worry about the grade you ultimately want but may never be able to afford; get in at a safe price that you can get back out of whole (if not a little better in the long run.) unless the LCS is in a major city, odds are he's only got a handful of regulars buying single books for hundreds. My 

This is very good advice.

4 hours ago, valiantman said:

Getting back on track, I'll throw out Warrior #1 (1982, UK Magazine) as undervalued.  First appearance of V for Vendetta, pre-Miracleman version of Miracleman, and pretty tough to find (even tougher in high grade).

Insanely correct. First appearance of a character that broke out of comics and became a widely recognized icon. Not to mention one of the all-time classic Alan Moore graphic novels. PLUS the resurrection of Britain's biggest superhero in the story that MADE Alan Moore...and changed superhero comics forever. AND ended up as a Marvel Comics character which anyone should be anticipating incorporation into the Marvel Universe. So, yeah, insanely correct.

10 hours ago, followtheleader said:

I enjoyed it.  It was cracked out. 

Patrick

It was amazing and brilliant. #Milligan

Young Marvelman 26 (second issue) in VG: $379.51 (price may fluctuate with exchange rates). https://www.ebay.com/itm/Young-Marvelman-26-VG/391942124017?hash=item5b419231f1:g:3q4AAOSwoVNaKuDk

Marvelman 26 (second issue) in Poor: $1248.59 (price may fluctuate with exchange rates). https://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvelman-26-P/372161544376?hash=item56a68e80b8:g:ZhcAAOSwtnpaKtxc

On 12/29/2017 at 8:34 AM, Randall Ries said:

Good points. For my part, I am a little conflicted. While the stories were better and more socially focused, eventually everything slid back to giant typewriters terrorizing the city or other inanity. Bob Haney, Adams and O'Neil showed everyone what comic story telling should be. So, I'm not belittling GL 76 or its contribution to better artwork/story telling. The question was asked in the title of this thread and I put in my 2 cents is all. But the better stories were already happening before Adams and O'Neil took on GL/GA. The grown up writing was on the wall afaic when Adams broke out the Deadman stories in Strange Adventures. Insofar as GL 76 and HOS 92 are concerned, the real start of the Bronze age (and a story that encapsulated both adult story telling and the gothic together) is Detective 395.

I'm very sympathetic to the argument on behalf of Detective 395. In terms of impact AT THE TIME, however, GL 76 was an earthquake that built in power as it rippled out over the years. The market may very well decide that that impact is no longer relevant, but historians of the art form will continue to acknowledge the impact it had at the time. Scratch most of today's most popular creators, and you'll find Adams generally and GL 76 specifically somewhere in there.

On 12/22/2017 at 6:56 PM, Randall Ries said:

The whole Moore run was an excellent read. GL 76 made its point with "adult" story telling. And that's about it. As has been mentioned, it has been copied and become the industry norm. HOS 92 is timeless. I hope when a movie comes out, they (DC) don't ruin it like virtually every movie they have made.

Which is it? It made its point and that's about it? Or it became the industry norm? Because becoming the industry norm is the definition of being timeless. The fact that HOS 92 may stand up as a better story--or one that doesn't feel as dated--doesn't change the fact that GL 76 changed comics. You don't have to be an old person to know that. But you do have to read your history. Read comics journalism/interviews/etc. from the mid-'70s on, and its impact will become clear.

2 hours ago, Ryan. said:

Seems like the Alan Moore run on Swamp Thing, and the downstream effects it had on comic storytelling, are being undersold in this discussion. That run was hugely influential.

Yes. Swamp Thing 20 and 21 are hugely underappreciated by the market.

It's not super-clear, but the market and "expert" consensus seems to have settled on Our Army at War 83 as being the first appearance of the character Sgt. Rock in the form, appearance, and specifics for which he came to be known.

Now, someone ask me about the Teen Titans.

HOS 92 is the first appearance of Swamp Thing. Clearly. Major, major key. GL 76 changed comics forever. HOS 92 might be hotter at the moment and even outpacing GL 76 in price, but in terms of significance and importance and key-ness, only revisionist history would deny the title to GL 76. It was THE single touchstone for a generation of DC comic readers and creators across the industry.

1 hour ago, chrisco37 said:

The HOS stories did segue into Swamp Thing (Wrightson).   In the early 80's a new series came out, Saga of the Swamp Thing.   Character was the "same" as the HOS/Wrightson character.  Alan Moore came on in issue 20 and wrapped that stuff up.  Issue 21, "The Anatomy Lesson" is where he ret-conned the character and incorporated the earth elemental stuff into it.  

No. Swamp Thing 1 essentially rebooted it. There were differences. It's been a long time, so I don't remember all of it. I think ST 1 was contemporary, while HOS 92 might've been set in the past. Different bad guys with different motives, too, IIRC. Though I could be wrong.

1 minute ago, pmpknface said:

I bought the recent HC edition that came out maybe 1-2 years ago and re-read it for the um-teenth time.     Not sure if that's the gallery edition you refer to.

I don't think so. I was referring to the one shot from the original art, sometimes called Artists editions. I think that's IDW's brand for them. This, I think, was published by Graffiti, which I believe calls them Gallery editions.

7 hours ago, Reader said:

I have no idea how well-received Ronin was in the 80’s, I was a teen then and not concerned with such things.  Actually I don’t think I’ve changed much in that regard.  I do know I didn’t finish the short run and even though I dropped the book, something about it stuck with me.  A decade passed before I revisited and it was a completely different experience.  I believe Ronin was just ahead of its time to really be appreciated in the 80’s. Now I read my Absolute edition every year along with DK and 300.  

Agree that it was underappreciated in its time, but it wasn't UNappreciated. There was a fair amount of grumbling about the art style, if I recall correctly. But there was also a fair amount of people who recognized it as an important work, one that gave Miller and DC to continue pushing the boundaries of both storytelling and production values.

13 hours ago, sfcityduck said:

Ronin sold well.  We all bought it.  Many folks I know, however, never finished reading it.

My recollection is that DK, in contrast, had lower pre-orders than Ronin.  Because of fear it would suck like Ronin did.  One reason that DK had so many printings.  I am not alone in this recollection.  Read up thread. 

Your opinions on its quality are as valid as anyone's.  But they are not shared by many.

Not interested in your recollection. Unless you can back it up with evidence. As for how many people share my opinion on its quality, should I ask those who bought the Absolute edition or the Gallery edition?

8 hours ago, sfcityduck said:

The facts stated in my comments are supported by the experience of having lived through Ronin and Dark Knight (witness testimony), and the opinions are supported by my taste.

I also lived through both. So my witness testimony cancels yours. I also have the press kit DC sent out promoting Ronin as one of its first TPBs. Due to, y'know, failure.

22 hours ago, sfcityduck said:

Because Ronin sucked so bad, there almost was no Dark Knight Returns.  First issue of Ronin much more plentiful than DK 1 because DK 1 was an iffy proposition after Ronin.  Our expectations were high for Ronin because of DD, and really low for DK because of Ronin.  

Notice the complete lack of substantiation here? Yeah. That.

On 10/17/2017 at 7:42 PM, Key Collector Comics said:

Hahaaaa.  Honestly that has to be the best compliment I’ve gotten: in so few words and sticking with the theme.  Thanks! Hope you continue to enjoy it. 

I haven’t even tried it out yet! BUT I WILL!

And they say there are no heroes any more.

13 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

No, you are ruling out other ends, not other means. You argued with darkstar's use of the phrase "just for the sake of", saying that if he said "good PR" was also a goal, then they aren't "just" doing it for the sake of diversity...except "good PR" was the means to that end of proving how "diverse" they are, not the goal. One can  "just" have a single goal, while employing multiple means to achieving that goal.

In this case, you are just arguing semantics, arguing just to argue. You're picking nits that need not be picked. You ignore darkstar's point to argue a triviality of the language. Not that I'm against such trivialities, God forbid, provided the larger point doesn't get lost, but that's what happened here. I mean, it's a textbook definition of missing the forest for the trees. You're arguing what the definition of "is" is.

This terrible quote system makes it mucccccch harder to follow the context of discussions.

Again, wanting to prove you are diverse means you are not doing it just for the sake of being diverse. Not semantic; they had reasons for it.