• 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

Killgrave

Killgrave

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.

 

What if there was no mention of Henry Pym until TTA#49 (lets assume for arguments sake it also said 'Return of the Ant-Man' on the cover), would #27 then be considered first Giant-Man appearance?

 

Using your 5 point check list the way you have, we would have 1) the character, 2) the origin, and 3) the "super power." as he did mess around with formulas making #27 then the '1st appearance of Giant-man' and #49 would then be '2nd appearance of Giant-Man, 1st appearance of Giant-Man in costume'. Its difficult to imagine anyone in favour of this so the 5 point formula can't be used to discredit/credit #35 as the 1st antman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BarryAllen

BarryAllen

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.

 

What if there was no mention of Henry Pym until TTA#49 (lets assume for arguments sake it also said 'Return of the Ant-Man' on the cover), would #27 then be considered first Giant-Man appearance?

 

Using your 5 point check list the way you have, we would have 1) the character, 2) the origin, and 3) the "super power." as he did mess around with formulas making #27 then the '1st appearance of Giant-man' and #49 would then be '2nd appearance of Giant-Man, 1st appearance of Giant-Man in costume'. Its difficult to imagine anyone in favour of this so the 5 point formula can't be used to discredit/credit #35 as the 1st antman.

 

(shrug)

 

Where did points 4 and 5 go...?

 

Math, my nemesis! :makepoint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Killgrave

Killgrave

Posted
Posted

 

(shrug)

 

Where did points 4 and 5 go...?

 

Math, my nemesis! :makepoint:

 

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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rjpb

rjpb

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.

 

What if there was no mention of Henry Pym until TTA#49 (lets assume for arguments sake it also said 'Return of the Ant-Man' on the cover), would #27 then be considered first Giant-Man appearance?

 

Using your 5 point check list the way you have, we would have 1) the character, 2) the origin, and 3) the "super power." as he did mess around with formulas making #27 then the '1st appearance of Giant-man' and #49 would then be '2nd appearance of Giant-Man, 1st appearance of Giant-Man in costume'. Its difficult to imagine anyone in favour of this so the 5 point formula can't be used to discredit/credit #35 as the 1st antman.

 

Try grasping at these while you're at it.

 

paper_straws_-_150_red_polka_dot_paper_drinking_straws_christmas_4b98feb0.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Speedy-D

Speedy-D

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.

 

What if there was no mention of Henry Pym until TTA#49 (lets assume for arguments sake it also said 'Return of the Ant-Man' on the cover), would #27 then be considered first Giant-Man appearance?

 

Using your 5 point check list the way you have, we would have 1) the character, 2) the origin, and 3) the "super power." as he did mess around with formulas making #27 then the '1st appearance of Giant-man' and #49 would then be '2nd appearance of Giant-Man, 1st appearance of Giant-Man in costume'. Its difficult to imagine anyone in favour of this so the 5 point formula can't be used to discredit/credit #35 as the 1st antman.

Huh? What's #49?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Speedy-D

Speedy-D

Posted
Posted
Try grasping at these while you're at it.

 

paper_straws_-_150_red_polka_dot_paper_drinking_straws_christmas_4b98feb0.jpg

 

Huh? What's #49?

 

hm Both valuable counter arguments.

lol You just made that number up? I thought maybe it was his third appearance or something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oakman29

oakman29

Posted
Posted
Try grasping at these while you're at it.

 

paper_straws_-_150_red_polka_dot_paper_drinking_straws_christmas_4b98feb0.jpg

 

Huh? What's #49?

 

hm Both valuable counter arguments.

lol You just made that number up? I thought maybe it was his third appearance or something...

Just like most of this thread,pulling stuff out ya es.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JollyComics

JollyComics

Posted
Posted
Try grasping at these while you're at it.

 

paper_straws_-_150_red_polka_dot_paper_drinking_straws_christmas_4b98feb0.jpg

 

Huh? What's #49?

 

hm Both valuable counter arguments.

lol You just made that number up? I thought maybe it was his third appearance or something...

Just like most of this thread,pulling stuff out ya es.

 

:popcorn::juggle: #35 or #27 :popcorn:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AGGIEZ

AGGIEZ

Posted
Posted
Try grasping at these while you're at it.

 

paper_straws_-_150_red_polka_dot_paper_drinking_straws_christmas_4b98feb0.jpg

 

Huh? What's #49?

 

hm Both valuable counter arguments.

lol You just made that number up? I thought maybe it was his third appearance or something...

Just like most of this thread,pulling stuff out ya es.

 

im-right-youre-wrong.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comicfollower101-migration

Comicfollower101-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Both 27 and 35 are major keys, it's just that it more logical sense that 35 be his first app as in 27, the man known as Henry Pym has no relevance wats so ever on the Henry Pym of 35, other than the same name and shrinking formula, there isint much else, 27 portrays him as a "mad scientist" who just wants to perfect the serum, when all of a sudden in 35 he becomes a heroic person ready to take on the communist threat

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing