TTA 35 vs TTA 27

[BarryAllen]

I can only speak for myself but I never felt that way. It was just never that popular a character and before the Internet and forums you really couldn't debate these points. Overstreet said it was 27 so it was 27 and that was as far as it went

 

 

I still don't think he is a popular character.

 

Lesser comic hero key books are increasing in value as more people begin to collect comics and the value of the well major hero key books are becoming stratospheric. These type of books (ST110, FF52, etc) represent the next round of logical investment choices - first appearances being top of the list.

 

TTA 27 or 35 - it is still Hank Pym/Ant Man and he is still at best a supporting member of a hero team and a minor hero himself.

 

 

 

The books are still both good buys (investments or collection pieces), but it isn't because there are thousands of children dressing up in Ant Man costumes for Halloween every year.

[Crimebuster]

But there also wasn't any reason to debate it because, even though Hank Pym has never been an a-list character, there were still probably a hundred Pym fans for every Ant-Man fan. I think that has changed a little thanks to the success (if that word even applies) of the Irredeemable Ant-Man series, but before that, I doubt you could have found ten people in the entire world who were fans of Ant-Man but not Hank Pym.

 

Personally, while I kinda understand some of the arguments about the importance of #35 in terms of kicking off a superhero series, the fact that Pym went on to have a bunch of other identities to the point where he's best known just as Hank Pym makes the first Ant-Man less important. It's just one of his many identities over the years. And one that was unpopular enough that they had to dump it 14 issues later. If not for the popularity of Hank Pym himself, the Ant-Man run would be just a Marvel footnote, the way people treat the Human Torch solo series in Strange Tales.

 

Hank Pym is important. Ant-Man? Is just the first of his costumed identities.

 

 

 

p.s. And please nobody bring up Scott Lang. Nobody living or dead has ever cared about Scott Lang. The only reason anyone is paying any attention to Marvel Premiere #47 is because they think there might be an Ant-Man movie that might feature Scott Lang and if it happens to be good, at that point someone might finally give a flying poo about Scott Lang.

 

And I certainly hope none of the people hyping #35 in this thread are doing it in any way because of speculation about the Ant-Man movie, because seriously.

[Comicfollower101-migration]

EXACTLY, u differentiate between hank Pym and ant man, which is exactly my point, 27 is Pym and 35 is ant man, both are a collectible, and investments, there done

 

 

[AGGIEZ]

I can only speak for myself but I never felt that way. It was just never that popular a character and before the Internet and forums you really couldn't debate these points. Overstreet said it was 27 so it was 27 and that was as far as it went

 

The books are still both good buys (investments or collection pieces), but it isn't because there are thousands of children dressing up in Ant Man costumes for Halloween every year.

 

 

NOT YET...but wait until the Ant-Man movie comes out. I don't recall seeing a bunch of Iron Man costumes on Halloween prior to the first IM movie...now he's all over the place. Now I think it's obvious IM is much more of a key character than AM but I think AM will get alot of interest from the kids once the movie hits the theatres....

[rjpb]

I can only speak for myself but I never felt that way. It was just never that popular a character and before the Internet and forums you really couldn't debate these points. Overstreet said it was 27 so it was 27 and that was as far as it went

 

The books are still both good buys (investments or collection pieces), but it isn't because there are thousands of children dressing up in Ant Man costumes for Halloween every year.

 

 

NOT YET...but wait until the Ant-Man movie comes out. I don't recall seeing a bunch of Iron Man costumes on Halloween prior to the first IM movie...now he's all over the place. Now I think it's obvious IM is much more of a key character than AM but I think AM will get alot of interest from the kids once the movie hits the theatres....

 

That's assuming the movie will be a huge hit. While Marvel movies seem to be almost guaranteed not to completely bomb, it's not like the Ghost Rider films spawned a marketing bonanza in selling backpacks and Halloween costumes. That said, I'm actually more interested to see what's done with this character than I am in most Marvel movies, particularly sequels which seem to drop off in quality dramatically.

[Crimebuster]

EXACTLY, u differentiate between hank Pym and ant man, which is exactly my point, 27 is Pym and 35 is ant man, both are a collectible, and investments, there done

 

 

 

Except - and maybe this part is still escaping you - Hank Pym is Ant-Man. I'm pretty sure this is mentioned somewhere in the story.

 

I guess this argument is truly pointless. A couple of the points some of you have made almost make some sense, even though I don't agree with the conclusion you're drawing form them, like the pre-hero vs. post-hero thing. But more and more it seems like at least some of the people advocating for #35 are just trying to figure out a way to turn a dime off of the Ant-Man movie by pretending #35 is the character's first appearance. And one thing I know about speculators is that there is no way to reason with them.

 

Hank Pym's first appearance is TTA #27. Scott Lang's first appearance is Marvel Premiere #47. Eric O'Grady's first appearance is Irredeemable Ant-Man #1. Those are the first appearances of the characters.

 

#35 is not the first appearance of a character. It is the first appearance of a costume. No amount of semantic gymnastics can change this fact.

[Comicfollower101-migration]

Yes, Henry Pym is any man, but he's also yellow jacket, giant man, Goliath. Whereas there is an ant man that is not Pym, Scott Lang. Therefore, that is y there is a 1st app for ant man and a 1st app for Pym

[Comicfollower101-migration]

Sry ant man not any man

[Bronty]

A couple of the points some of you have made almost make some sense, like the pre-hero vs. post-hero thing.

 

[Bronty]

 

That's too subtle a distinction to ever gain traction with the world at large, and some of you will probably unsuccessfully attack that logic, but its perfectly sound.

----

That sounds like a Dr Doom speech if i ever heard one.

 

[AGGIEZ]

I can only speak for myself but I never felt that way. It was just never that popular a character and before the Internet and forums you really couldn't debate these points. Overstreet said it was 27 so it was 27 and that was as far as it went

 

The books are still both good buys (investments or collection pieces), but it isn't because there are thousands of children dressing up in Ant Man costumes for Halloween every year.

 

 

NOT YET...but wait until the Ant-Man movie comes out. I don't recall seeing a bunch of Iron Man costumes on Halloween prior to the first IM movie...now he's all over the place. Now I think it's obvious IM is much more of a key character than AM but I think AM will get alot of interest from the kids once the movie hits the theatres....

 

That's assuming the movie will be a huge hit. While Marvel movies seem to be almost guaranteed not to completely bomb, it's not like the Ghost Rider films spawned a marketing bonanza in selling backpacks and Halloween costumes. That said, I'm actually more interested to see what's done with this character than I am in most Marvel movies, particularly sequels which seem to drop off in quality dramatically.

 

 

I believe Ghost Rider was a Sony/Columbia/TriStar film, not Marvel Studios...but I get your point. Maybe that's why they sucked so bad.

[AGGIEZ]

EXACTLY, u differentiate between hank Pym and ant man, which is exactly my point, 27 is Pym and 35 is ant man, both are a collectible, and investments, there done

 

 

 

Except - and maybe this part is still escaping you - Hank Pym is Ant-Man. I'm pretty sure this is mentioned somewhere in the story.

 

I guess this argument is truly pointless. A couple of the points some of you have made almost make some sense, even though I don't agree with the conclusion you're drawing form them, like the pre-hero vs. post-hero thing. But more and more it seems like at least some of the people advocating for #35 are just trying to figure out a way to turn a dime off of the Ant-Man movie by pretending #35 is the character's first appearance. And one thing I know about speculators is that there is no way to reason with them.

 

Hank Pym's first appearance is TTA #27. Scott Lang's first appearance is Marvel Premiere #47. Eric O'Grady's first appearance is Irredeemable Ant-Man #1. Those are the first appearances of the characters.

 

#35 is not the first appearance of a character. It is the first appearance of a costume. No amount of semantic gymnastics can change this fact.

 

 

So what's the first appearance of War Machine, Venom, Carnage, Ms. Marvel, etc.?

 

[Comicfollower101-migration]

The examples AGGIEZ named are other versions of this discussion, if one believes that 27 is the true 1st app of ant man, than that means they believe that ASM 245 is first carnage, not 361 or that the 1st app of Eddie Brock is also the first app of venom, not ASM 300. You can't just choose a different answer for each character

 

[Crimebuster]

EXACTLY, u differentiate between hank Pym and ant man, which is exactly my point, 27 is Pym and 35 is ant man, both are a collectible, and investments, there done

 

 

 

Except - and maybe this part is still escaping you - Hank Pym is Ant-Man. I'm pretty sure this is mentioned somewhere in the story.

 

I guess this argument is truly pointless. A couple of the points some of you have made almost make some sense, even though I don't agree with the conclusion you're drawing form them, like the pre-hero vs. post-hero thing. But more and more it seems like at least some of the people advocating for #35 are just trying to figure out a way to turn a dime off of the Ant-Man movie by pretending #35 is the character's first appearance. And one thing I know about speculators is that there is no way to reason with them.

 

Hank Pym's first appearance is TTA #27. Scott Lang's first appearance is Marvel Premiere #47. Eric O'Grady's first appearance is Irredeemable Ant-Man #1. Those are the first appearances of the characters.

 

#35 is not the first appearance of a character. It is the first appearance of a costume. No amount of semantic gymnastics can change this fact.

 

 

So what's the first appearance of War Machine, Venom, Carnage, Ms. Marvel, etc.?

 

What's the point of your question? I'm pretty sure I have been saying all along that #35 is the first appearance of the Ant-Man costume and name. So if you're trying to point out some kind of inconsistency, I don't think you're going to find it.

 

I don't follow most of those characters that closely, but I think War Machine was originally one of Tony Stark's specialty suits, like his HulkBuster armor. I think the War Machine suit and name first appeared in Iron Man #282? Of course, James Rhodes is the character most closely associated with War Machine. For all intents and purposes, he is War Machine. He first appeared in Iron Man #118. If I were a War Machine fan, which I am not, Iron Man #118 would be the most important issue to me, as it is the first appearance of the character. Iron Man #282 would be second, though maybe third behind Iron Man #169, where Rohdey first wears the iron man suit.

 

Ms. Marvel is a slightly different circumstance, as unlike Hank Pym in TTA #27, she doesn't have any of her powers in her early appearances. Nevertheless, if I were a big Ms. Marvel fan, Marvel Super-Heroes #13 would be the key issue for me, as it is the first appearance of Carol Danvers. Ms. Marvel #1, where she acquires powers and adopts the Ms. Marvel identity, would be second.

 

As for Venom and Carnage, who cares. Let's stick to debating characters that aren't terrible.

 

What bothers me I think about this line of reasoning some of you are using is that it suggests that the characters in the suit are unimportant compared to the suit itself. Personally, I became a fan of specific characters because of the characters themselves - Steve Rogers or Clint Barton or Oliver Queen, not just any old dude who happens to be wearing the Captain America costume (see: John Walker) or the Hawkeye identity (see: Kate Bishop) or has taken up the mantle of Green Arrow (see: Connor Hawke). I just don't see how you can divorce Ant-Man from Hank Pym in this context. You're basically saying, "sure, Hank Pym appeared in #27 and we got his origin and he used his super powers - but he wasn't wearing a funny helmet, so none of that matters. What matters is the laundry."

 

[spidrvacc]

Venom and Carnage are probably the closet examples to Ant Man. There the ones to care about for this discussion, The character who becomes venom appears in ASM 298 and Carnage in 254 . they appear in there costumes later on and that's what is considered there first app. This is pretty much the argument here I think. .

[Comicfollower101-migration]

Exactly, the alter-ego of the character (Eddie Brock, hank Pym, carol Danvers ) app in one issue, that's THEIR 1st app, but the costumed persona of the character ( Venom, Ant man, mrs marvel ) has there own 1st app.

[jjonahjameson1]

Venom and Carnage are probably the closet examples to Ant Man. There the ones to care about for this discussion, The character who becomes venom appears in ASM 298 and Carnage in 254 . they appear in there costumes later on and that's what is considered there first app. This is pretty much the argument here I think. .

 

Perhaps it merits a discussion in the Copper forum?

[Crimebuster]

Actually, I don't think Venom is a good parallel and here's why. Venom isn't Eddie Brock wearing suit. Nor is it the alien parasite just bonding with anybody - otherwise, when the parasite bonded with Peter Parker, he would have become Venom. Which he didn't.

 

The whole story of Venom is how Eddie Brock merged with an alien parasite to become a new entity incorporating aspects of both. It's a new being. As such, ASM #299 (or 300, whatever) is Venom's first appearance, because he is neither Eddie Brock nor the alien parasite, but something definably different from either. Venom isn't a persona, he's an actual unique character in his own right.

 

I don't know anything about Carnage other than that he's an even dumber Venom knockoff, but Venom and Hank Pym are not parallel situations in my mind. And I believe the actual stories back that up.

[AGGIEZ]

EXACTLY, u differentiate between hank Pym and ant man, which is exactly my point, 27 is Pym and 35 is ant man, both are a collectible, and investments, there done

 

 

 

Except - and maybe this part is still escaping you - Hank Pym is Ant-Man. I'm pretty sure this is mentioned somewhere in the story.

 

I guess this argument is truly pointless. A couple of the points some of you have made almost make some sense, even though I don't agree with the conclusion you're drawing form them, like the pre-hero vs. post-hero thing. But more and more it seems like at least some of the people advocating for #35 are just trying to figure out a way to turn a dime off of the Ant-Man movie by pretending #35 is the character's first appearance. And one thing I know about speculators is that there is no way to reason with them.

 

Hank Pym's first appearance is TTA #27. Scott Lang's first appearance is Marvel Premiere #47. Eric O'Grady's first appearance is Irredeemable Ant-Man #1. Those are the first appearances of the characters.

 

#35 is not the first appearance of a character. It is the first appearance of a costume. No amount of semantic gymnastics can change this fact.

 

 

So what's the first appearance of War Machine, Venom, Carnage, Ms. Marvel, etc.?

 

What's the point of your question? I'm pretty sure I have been saying all along that #35 is the first appearance of the Ant-Man costume and name. So if you're trying to point out some kind of inconsistency, I don't think you're going to find it.

 

I don't follow most of those characters that closely, but I think War Machine was originally one of Tony Stark's specialty suits, like his HulkBuster armor. I think the War Machine suit and name first appeared in Iron Man #282? Of course, James Rhodes is the character most closely associated with War Machine. For all intents and purposes, he is War Machine. He first appeared in Iron Man #118. If I were a War Machine fan, which I am not, Iron Man #118 would be the most important issue to me, as it is the first appearance of the character. Iron Man #282 would be second, though maybe third behind Iron Man #169, where Rohdey first wears the iron man suit.

 

Ms. Marvel is a slightly different circumstance, as unlike Hank Pym in TTA #27, she doesn't have any of her powers in her early appearances. Nevertheless, if I were a big Ms. Marvel fan, Marvel Super-Heroes #13 would be the key issue for me, as it is the first appearance of Carol Danvers. Ms. Marvel #1, where she acquires powers and adopts the Ms. Marvel identity, would be second.

 

As for Venom and Carnage, who cares. Let's stick to debating characters that aren't terrible.

 

What bothers me I think about this line of reasoning some of you are using is that it suggests that the characters in the suit are unimportant compared to the suit itself. Personally, I became a fan of specific characters because of the characters themselves - Steve Rogers or Clint Barton or Oliver Queen, not just any old dude who happens to be wearing the Captain America costume (see: John Walker) or the Hawkeye identity (see: Kate Bishop) or has taken up the mantle of Green Arrow (see: Connor Hawke). I just don't see how you can divorce Ant-Man from Hank Pym in this context. You're basically saying, "sure, Hank Pym appeared in #27 and we got his origin and he used his super powers - but he wasn't wearing a funny helmet, so none of that matters. What matters is the laundry."

 

 

 

People don't chase the 1st appearance of Steve Rogers or the 1st appearance of Tony Stark, they go after the 1st appearance of Captain America and Iron Man. Yes, the laundry matters, the suite matters, the superpowers matter, the super-hero matters...the mad scientist matters at lot less to most. I think that is the fundamental difference for some of us arguing about these funny books. Some would rather have the 1st appearance of Carol Danvers, some would rather have the 1st appearance of Ms. Marvel.

 

I personally believe that TTA #35 is the 1st appearance of Ant-Man, thus that's the book I covet more.

[BB-Gun]

I think TTA will always be the more important of the two. Pym's first appearance is worth collecting but he became a superhero as an afterthought.

 

Stan to Jack or Jack to Stan: "Oh yeah, you remember the guy in the ant hill. What if we make him a superhero...and then we can make the Hulk a Superhero and bring back Submariner too."