• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

TTA 35 vs TTA 27

Started by Comicfollower101-migration,

295 posts in this topic

catrick339

catrick339

Posted
Posted
I wrote the following in another thread awhile back,

 

I have always wondered about the first appearance of Ant Man, to CGC it's TTA#27 however in the comic he is only known as Henry Pym 'The man in the ant hill".

 

There is the argument that because 8 months later in TTA#35 "Return of the Antman" is on the cover so how can 'return of' be a first appearance which I get, but since there was no reference to 'Ant Man" in TTA#27 how can it be the first appearance of "Ant-Man"? If anything it's Marvels fault for that oversight however in relation to CGC, to be consistent with this flawed logic TTA#27 should then also be "1st appearance of "Giant-Man", "Yellow-Jacket" etc.. but there is no mention on the label of those

 

My logic has been followed with Cable as in Uncanny X-MEN#201 it describes it as "1st appearance of Cable as Baby Nathan" with New Mutants #87 having "1st appearance of Cable"

 

So in my opinion TTA#35 should be "1st appearance of Ant-Man" with TTA#27 only the "1st appearance of Henry Pym" or to follow the Cable logic, "1st appearance of Ant-Man/Giant-Man/Yellow-Jacket as Henry Pym"

The difference is, the only things missing in TTA 27 are the costume and the name, right? We've got the character, we've got the origin, we've got the "super power." What we're missing are the costume and the name. So, that's three elements out of five. Obviously the costume isn't enough to make a clear decision, as no one is arguing that FF3 is the first appearance of the Fantastic Four. So, that leaves us with the name. Personally, I'm thinking the name isn't enough to keep TTA 27 from being the first appearance.

 

I'm sure there are other examples of characters appearing for an issue or two before they get a superhero name, but I'm too lazy to try to remember any.

 

This is the argument that clinches it for me. Fantastic Four appeared in two ten cent cover priced comics as a team, sans costumes. And yet they're obviously the FF.

 

Hank Pym in TTA 27 is the only other Marvel hero that makes the cut for the ten cent cover prices as far as I know, and he appears in costume in his second appearance.

 

TTA 27 for the origin, by a nose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AGGIEZ

AGGIEZ

Posted
Posted
I wrote the following in another thread awhile back,

 

I have always wondered about the first appearance of Ant Man, to CGC it's TTA#27 however in the comic he is only known as Henry Pym 'The man in the ant hill".

 

There is the argument that because 8 months later in TTA#35 "Return of the Antman" is on the cover so how can 'return of' be a first appearance which I get, but since there was no reference to 'Ant Man" in TTA#27 how can it be the first appearance of "Ant-Man"? If anything it's Marvels fault for that oversight however in relation to CGC, to be consistent with this flawed logic TTA#27 should then also be "1st appearance of "Giant-Man", "Yellow-Jacket" etc.. but there is no mention on the label of those

 

My logic has been followed with Cable as in Uncanny X-MEN#201 it describes it as "1st appearance of Cable as Baby Nathan" with New Mutants #87 having "1st appearance of Cable"

 

So in my opinion TTA#35 should be "1st appearance of Ant-Man" with TTA#27 only the "1st appearance of Henry Pym" or to follow the Cable logic, "1st appearance of Ant-Man/Giant-Man/Yellow-Jacket as Henry Pym"

The difference is, the only things missing in TTA 27 are the costume and the name, right? We've got the character, we've got the origin, we've got the "super power." What we're missing are the costume and the name. So, that's three elements out of five. Obviously the costume isn't enough to make a clear decision, as no one is arguing that FF3 is the first appearance of the Fantastic Four. So, that leaves us with the name. Personally, I'm thinking the name isn't enough to keep TTA 27 from being the first appearance.

 

I'm sure there are other examples of characters appearing for an issue or two before they get a superhero name, but I'm too lazy to try to remember any.

 

This is the argument that clinches it for me. Fantastic Four appeared in two ten cent cover priced comics as a team, sans costumes. And yet they're obviously the FF.

 

Hank Pym in TTA 27 is the only other Marvel hero that makes the cut for the ten cent cover prices as far as I know, and he appears in costume in his second appearance.

 

TTA 27 for the origin, by a nose.

 

I don't think you'll get any argument that TTA 27 is the "origin" of Ant-Man...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Killgrave

Killgrave

Posted
Posted
Wow, that's an almost perfect parallel. Well done!

 

I think the thing that makes Antman so much more debatable then Animal man example is that Henry went on to become other 'heroes' whereas Bernhard to my knowledge has only even been Animal man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spidrvacc

spidrvacc

Posted
Posted
I wrote the following in another thread awhile back,

 

I have always wondered about the first appearance of Ant Man, to CGC it's TTA#27 however in the comic he is only known as Henry Pym 'The man in the ant hill".

 

There is the argument that because 8 months later in TTA#35 "Return of the Antman" is on the cover so how can 'return of' be a first appearance which I get, but since there was no reference to 'Ant Man" in TTA#27 how can it be the first appearance of "Ant-Man"? If anything it's Marvels fault for that oversight however in relation to CGC, to be consistent with this flawed logic TTA#27 should then also be "1st appearance of "Giant-Man", "Yellow-Jacket" etc.. but there is no mention on the label of those

 

My logic has been followed with Cable as in Uncanny X-MEN#201 it describes it as "1st appearance of Cable as Baby Nathan" with New Mutants #87 having "1st appearance of Cable"

 

So in my opinion TTA#35 should be "1st appearance of Ant-Man" with TTA#27 only the "1st appearance of Henry Pym" or to follow the Cable logic, "1st appearance of Ant-Man/Giant-Man/Yellow-Jacket as Henry Pym" [/quote

 

Well said and exactly what I have been saying for years. 27 is first Hank Pym and 35 is first app of The superhero AntMan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
spidrvacc

spidrvacc

Posted
Posted
Great thred guys, keep the convo going, btw I heard someone say the market values 27 as the first app, if uv been keeping up with ebay, 35 is SHOOTING up in price while 27 has been the same for the past yr and half

 

That's because 27 has always been expensive and 35 has been getting recent traction and notice when people started to realize its AntMan the superheroes 1st app. Either way you feel this is an awesome thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thehumantorch

thehumantorch

Posted
Posted
here's a link to help people make up their own minds. No doubt that its hank pym and that some elements are there (reducing & enlarging serums) but - he's not a superhero, he's not ant-man... just a "man in the ant hill" and its all just a science experiment gone wrong:

 

 

http://comicbookcurios.blogspot.ca/2011/05/tales-to-astonish-27-january-1962.html

 

I do think 27 has some significance, but to me given that the entire superhero persona is a retcon in 35, I consider 35 more important. Also, 35 is the first hank pym as a superhero, 1st antman, whatever you want to call it.

 

I'm going with #27. The scientist, with the same name as our hero, creates a serum and exhibits the same powers that Antman has. Pretty clear cut for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rjpb

rjpb

Posted
Posted
35 has the actual hero, no way can the Henry Pym of 27 lives in the world of FF1, he is just a scientist with no connection to the marvel superheroes

 

Unlike with some of the pre-hero monster invasion stories, there is nothing that would preclude Pym from living in the same world as the FF, and clearly it was decided he does. Besides at the time TTA 27 was published, The FF was only on it's second issue, so the world of Marvel superheroes had barely been established.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rjpb

rjpb

Posted
Posted
Exactly as I said in the first post Killgrave, he was yellow jacket, wasp, Goliath so by the logic of "1st Pym= ant man than it also means that 27 Is first of those 3 characters"

 

By that logic Captain America #1 would be the first appearance of Nomad. TTA 27 is the origin of just Ant-man, not any further identities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AGGIEZ

AGGIEZ

Posted
Posted
Exactly as I said in the first post Killgrave, he was yellow jacket, wasp, Goliath so by the logic of "1st Pym= ant man than it also means that 27 Is first of those 3 characters"

 

By that logic Captain America #1 would be the first appearance of Nomad. TTA 27 is the origin of just Ant-man, not any further identities.

 

Why? That makes absolutely no sense. You can't cherry-pick. If TTA 27 is the first appearance of a character that doesn't appear until 8 issues later how is it any different for the other characters Pym later becomes? Is there a statute of limitations on how long that logic qualifies?

 

 

I'm not saying that 27 is not valuable I'm just saying 35 is ant man and 27 is Pym, their two separate characters

 

Exactly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted

Yup. Otherwise the 1980s transformers series is a 4 issue limited series just cuz it said so on the covers. Even marvel themselves made fun of that on the cover of #80

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crimebuster

Crimebuster

Posted
Posted
I'm not saying that 27 is not valuable I'm just saying 35 is ant man and 27 is Pym, their two separate characters

 

Except they clearly aren't two separate characters. So what the heck are you even talking about?

 

#35 is the first appearance of the costume and the code name Ant-Man. Both of which belong to Hank Pym, the man in the anthill, whose first appearance and origin are in #27. Hank Pym is Ant-Man. That's in the story. That is the story.

 

The level of semantic chicanery necessary to claim otherwise is boggling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted

No, youre trivializing it down to a costume and a code name; there is more to it than that.

 

27 is a prehero story. 35 is a hero story. Those are facts.

 

27 is the first hank pym as the man in the ant hill.

 

35 is the first Ant Man proper.

 

Now whether one decides for themselves that they like 27 or 35, that's up to them, but the points above are facts.

 

Oh, as for the person that asked if I had a 35, heh, we'll played but no I have neither book. I have some light interest in a 35 but no interest in a 27

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyclops

Cyclops

Posted
Posted

It's #35 for me. The only reason they wrote "Return of the Ant-Man" is because it reads much better than "Return of that guy who was in the ant story - remember that one? - we've made him a super hero now!".

 

He was never referred to as Ant-Man in #27, and I'm sure it was only ever meant to be another typical TTA - like #26 and #28 - until Lee went back and revived him.

 

Having said that, I do respect the fact that people feel that #27 is the first appearance and can understand that logic aswell.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing