Axelrod

It was very derivative, with a plot that was very similar to a number of other films (Some say Dances with Wolves, some say that Ferngully movie, some say Disney's Pocahontas). Despite that, it was a lot of fun, and enjoyable. Derivative isn't always bad. At this point most stories have been told, a bunch of times. So it's kind of just, how well was it done this time? And was there anything special about it, which in Avatar's case was mostly the visual effects. Like, Top Gun Maverick was derivative of itself. Basically the same movie all over again, with a side of Star Wars thrown in. But it was a lot of fun regardless.

I've come to realize these early reaction hype twitters are absolutely worthless as metrics of how good a film will be. Still going to see this movie and have every hope I will enjoy it, but the Twitter reactions do nothing for me.

It's so sad I read there was supposed to be a follow-up, which Perez was supposed to draw, but inter-company squabbling killed it.

Young me thought this was the most amazing thing to ever happen in comics. Marvel and DC? The two most popular teams? Simonson? Still sad this isn't some kind of super valuable book today. I guess they printed a lot....

Well, I don't actually know what was Jackson's decision and what wasn't. I was more responding to the original poster's suggestion that the reason for the success of the original LOR trilogy was the producers getting out of Jackson's way and letting him do what he wanted. And it seemed like the Hobbit films were a case study in excess run wild, which could have used someone reigning someone in. They made a billion dollars each though, so, who's to really say they were wrong to do it that way, regardless of what we might think of them now.

Counterpoint: The Hobbit films.... On topic: Avatar. Looks like it will at least look good!

Well, I got my orders. Probably can't send anything out before this weekend though. Hype!

While I can understand the votes for UF #4 and even Hulk #181, those books at least have something going for them, and "value" is as much a function of demand as supply, so the fact there are thousands doesn't matter as much. But modern variants? Books with literally nothing going for them other than a "different" cover and an artificially manufactured scarcity to pump value? I am stunned at some of the prices going for some of these. The acetate-gate thing was just the tip of the iceberg. I feel like literally zero of these books are going to be worth anything 20 years from now. How many "variants" from the 90s are worth anything today? All those X-Men #1 covers?

I just won an auction I totally was not expecting to win for my target. I thought it seemed like a great deal, but now, because I always second guess, I don't know if I got a good deal or if I'm actually a fool. Ah well, my target can decide!

Last year, you will have no reason to remember I decided I could not bear to part with any actual book in my childhood comic collection - even the ratty ones. Or more accurately, I couldn't bear to part with anything that would have made a decent prize. So I kind of went with the cop out option of Gift Certificate. (I do not mean to insult anyone else offering a Gift Certificate). The big question for me then this year was, is this going to be the year I part with something I actually like? Ladies and Gentlemen, is it not. Instead, I'm bumping the amount of money I'm putting up! This year: $150.00 cold hard cash. (An Amazon Certificate, Paypal transfer, or basically however you want it) I'm thinking of naming this prize, Axelrod's Materialistic Weasel Award. And then I'm thinking I can keep doing this and bumping the payout every year until it gets picked first (or I go broke). We'll see how that pans out. But for now: It's the Raffle!

I mean, it's only a loss if the first sale is real. That's the entire point of the speculation. Basically a fake sale to juice the price and then an immediate re-list. If you don't think that happens in this industry I think you are just being naïve. But sure, could also be a complete insufficiently_thoughtful_person who bought a book for $114,000 when he could have bought one for $70,000, and then somehow got MyComicShop to expedite shipping directly to ComicLink, who immediately put it in their next auction (with no previewing or advertising of the book?), and where it needs to be a record-breaking sale to just break even on this investment. That could also be it?

I like your breakdown of these films. Agree with a lot of it.

See, I don't even know what you are talking about now. "Choosing abject failures?" Do you mean these are failed comic book characters? Both of them are from way after my time, so I have nothing to say about their storylines. But comic book characters aren't successful or failures in a vacuum. It's just about who is writing/drawing them at the time. You've had miserable/forgotten characters redeemed later by great artists/writers. And great characters given crappy stories by others. And then seems like everyone gets re-booted every few years these days anyway. But, like, that scene you mention with America Chavez's parents? That was not "useless." That's back-story. Origin story. You know this. If that had been a man and a woman no one would have said boo about it. And it seems ridiculous to me to assert that the Dr. Strange movie was motived by any kind of agenda (other than trying to shoe-horn in the Illuminati for fan service purposes). I think that tiny, brief, very inoffensive scene was the only GLBTQ representation in the whole film, yes? It's almost like you're suggesting the entire movie was warped around that point, which is silly. Though I acknowledge some people still got up in arms about it. Anyway, like I said. Don't want to get too political here.

Maybe we're not talking about the same thing. You are saying these were poorly executed/written female characters? Or the stories in which these characters were utilized were poorly written? I'm not even going to argue against that. But whether that's correct or not, what would it have to do with whether or not Marvel is being ruined by their "woke" agenda? Unless (and this seems to be the underlying assumption of a lot of the criticism I hear) the theory is that Marvel is "forcing" themselves to use female/minority/GLBTQ characters, and by "shoe-horning" these characters into their stories, the plotting and/or writing is suffering. And that's the assumption I would argue is fundamentally flawed and incorrect. Bad writing may be bad writing, but it's not being caused by any kind of agenda. Plenty of other badly written failures can testify to this (though these two movies, at least, weren't even failures. I guess the suggestion is that they should/would have been even more successful?)

I think the larger problem you may face is that CGC (as far as I understand it) won't re-holder a book for free after about two weeks. They put it on you to closely examine your slabs when you get them back and report any issues immediately. If you don't and later notice a defect or damage, you're kind of out of luck.

One example? I'm not being snide. I hear this a lot, but it doesn't make any sense to me.

I don't want to get political so I'm just going to say this and leave. The problems with Marvel films - such as they are - are NOT, I repeat NOT because the writers/directors/producers are trying to be more diverse and/or inclusive with their casting decisions. That is wrong in all the ways.

More comic adjacent than actual comic. But I did order it out of the back of the Comic Buyer's Guide, way back in the day! This was the "limited" edition lithograph. Sorry about the glare, but still looks boss after all these years.

It's definitely a re-set/re-boot attempt with the retiring of most of the "original" Avengers. Seems like this Phase has primarily been about introducing a bunch of new characters, presumably in the hope that some of them would really catch on. They are going to start bringing them together. Phase 5 doesn't look to be introducing very many new characters at all. The Thunderbolts movie is pulling from like 4 different series, and then, Kang, Skrulls Invasion, culminating in some kind of Secret Wars mash-up? But unfortunately they've really lost a lot of the momentum they had. I would say the quality of the stories has been slightly down from previous Phases, but frankly not all that much. I think they're suffering more from comic book movie over-exposure and audience exhaustion.

I very consistently over-graded every book! Take 1/2 off every grade and it's a 3. As it is, I think it's like 8 points.

Two bullseyes and still my worst round! I think it's six though, which isn't quite as much of a disaster as I was fearing. Worst miss was the JIM I had at 2.5 with all those stains and pieces missing....

Definitely not me! I got the of Doom! this time. (sorry if we're not supposed to be saying that...)

I think R3 is where I fell off the mountain and missed hitting the planet last contest!

4 points! One Bullseye on the Exciting Comics. Missed by one grade on all the others. Take it.