BRONZE AGE MARVEL 1ST APPEARANCES

[Jeffro.]

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN

 

83 Schemer '70

101 Morbius '71

113 Hammerhead '72

124 Manwolf '73

129 Punisher '74

136 New Green Goblin

138 Mindworm

(?) 138 Mindwarp '74

139 Grizzly

162 Jigsaw

167 Will O Wisp

172 Rocket Racer '77

194 Black Cat

210 Madame Web '80 Should be taken off Copper set

 

Always thought Will O Wisp was a cool character

[catch21]

Coleen Wing seems minor to me

and Misty Knight is Marvel Team Up 1.....but also seems minor

 

 

1.Woah, Marvel Team UP 1 is a retcon done by Chris Claremont and John Byrne in Marvel Team up #64.

2.Retcons do not count.

3.CGC has labeled Marvel Premiere 21 as her first appearance

Look Here

4.Misty Knight and Colleen Wing had their own comic book. It's was called Daughters of the Dragon. Misty had Fearless Defenders and Heroes for Hire.

[akaSteveRogers]

Coleen Wing seems minor to me

and Misty Knight is Marvel Team Up 1.....but also seems minor

 

 

1.Woah, Marvel Team UP 1 is a retcon done by Chris Claremont and John Byrne in Marvel Team up #64.

2.Retcons do not count.

3.CGC has labeled Marvel Premiere 21 as her first appearance

Look Here

4.Misty Knight and Colleen Wing had their own comic book. It's was called Daughters of the Dragon. Misty had Fearless Defenders and Heroes for Hire.

 

(thumbs u took the words right out of my mouth about Colleen Wing and moreso Misty Knight. They are more important in the overall scheme of the Marvel (street level) Universe than a Will O the Wisp , Varna or Shockwave !

 

Retcons dont count as first apps. It was a nameless, generic black woman/innocent bystander that Spidey saved in MTU #1 than was was later retconned to be Misty. MTU #1 even makes a note on this:

"Spidey saves woman who is later to be revealed as Misty Knight."

 

For all the slack that CGC has received recently for being total incompetant with labeling, this is spot on!

 

Not to take anything away from the work you put into gathering this reference list together.

[Lonzilla]

Strange Tales 179 - Pip The Troll - could be major in a few years when the next GOTG movie hits?

[akaSteveRogers]

 

The same with Iron Man 118

 

1st "brief" appearance James Rhodes

 

 

But I disagree with you on this though. Rhodey was a supporting character (as Tony Stark's pilot) in the title at this point in time and for a while thereafter. I don't think we need brief and full appearance notations for such characters. So just "1st appearance of James Rhodes" is adequate.

[vaillant]

How would you define "minor" characters?

 

From what I always got, Colleen Wing has been quite a staple character in Iron Fist, while, for example Sise-Neg is more of a "conceptual" character (it represents a sort of "God in reverse") in Englehart’s Dr. Strange, and of course it has never been used again, so it is definitely not a "character" in the proper sense.

[vaillant]

TOMB OF DRACULA

1 Frank Drake Dracula

10 Blade '79

 

Is Blade part of the Marvel World?

 

 

either way...thoughts please

 

Sure that Blade has always been part of the Marvel continuty.

 

Tomb of Dracula #16-17 is also the first appearance of Dr. Sun (a traditional Dracula enemy), together with the Sphinx the characters have both been relevant in the Nova series, concluded in the Fantastic Four "Champions of Xandar" storyline.

[vaillant]

MARVEL TEAM UP

 

16 Basilisk '73

48 Wraith

55 (?) The Gardener

61 Ayesha (Her)

65 or 66 chech Arcade

68 check if minor D'Spayre

95 Mockingbird '80

 

You forgot Karma, which first appears in MTU #100 but maybe it’s already Copper?

[wardevil0]

How would you define "minor" characters?

 

From what I always got, Colleen Wing has been quite a staple character in Iron Fist, while, for example Sise-Neg is more of a "conceptual" character (it represents a sort of "God in reverse") in Englehart’s Dr. Strange, and of course it has never been used again, so it is definitely not a "character" in the proper sense.

 

At least, until Sise-Neg is an essential component of the alleged upcoming Dr Strange movie...

[vaillant]

How would you define "minor" characters?

 

From what I always got, Colleen Wing has been quite a staple character in Iron Fist, while, for example Sise-Neg is more of a "conceptual" character (it represents a sort of "God in reverse") in Englehart’s Dr. Strange, and of course it has never been used again, so it is definitely not a "character" in the proper sense.

 

At least, until Sise-Neg is an essential component of the alleged upcoming Dr Strange movie...

 

I did not mean he (it?) was a "minor" character, just that – even if he starts as a proper characters, an obscure magician of centuries ago – it becomes something more of a concept than a character (even more conceptual than Lord Chaos and Master Order, so to speak). Strange and Mordo travel through the whole history backwards and witness creation. This supposed "demigod" wants to destroy creation but Strange and Mordo convince him otherwise. A "philosophical" story which luckily would not be fit for an action movie like these, so it’s pretty much unlikely we’ll have a speculation bubble…

[Ronnylama]

I thought about that one....thanks

[catch21]

 

The same with Iron Man 118

 

1st "brief" appearance James Rhodes

 

 

But I disagree with you on this though. Rhodey was a supporting character (as Tony Stark's pilot) in the title at this point in time and for a while thereafter. I don't think we need brief and full appearance notations for such characters. So just "1st appearance of James Rhodes" is adequate.

 

I agree on the brief as 1st appearance. I disagree as just a pilot. His next issue Iron Man 121, the issue follows Rhodes on how he rescues Tony Stark.

 

“Part of the problem was that Tony Stark never had a best friend,” Layton explained to MTV News. “He didn’t have anyone who he could confide in and share his point of view. We wanted to create someone who was a counterpart to him who didn’t have superpowers and wasn’t just an employee — somebody that he had a personal relationship with. We felt he needed a human foil there. It was never our intention for him to take over as Iron Man.”

 

 

Source

 

 

 

[akaSteveRogers]

 

The same with Iron Man 118

 

1st "brief" appearance James Rhodes

 

 

But I disagree with you on this though. Rhodey was a supporting character (as Tony Stark's pilot) in the title at this point in time and for a while thereafter. I don't think we need brief and full appearance notations for such characters. So just "1st appearance of James Rhodes" is adequate.

 

I agree on the brief as 1st appearance. I disagree as just a pilot.

 

I didn’t say he was JUST a pilot. Rhodes was his pilot, just like “Pepper” Potts was his secretary, as “Happy” Hogan was his driver. But over the course of time, Rhodey evolved into more of a friend, as Layton said. And you could see it developing during that time. But in #118..he’s in full garb, no shadows, not concealed, his name is revealed, and it’s obvious what’s his role in Stark’s employ. This is the essence of a supporting character. Why would I expect anything more than something brief? No need for full story arc involving Rhodes so we can classify his 1st full appearance. By #121, Ive already seen him twice and know he has a history with Tony.

 

His next issue Iron Man 121, the issue follows Rhodes on how he rescues Tony Stark.

 

He actually next appeared in issue #120 in 2 panels talking to Bethany Cabe where he drops another piece of info that he and Tony “went back to ‘Nam.”

 

Now when Rhodey joins the big leagues in 169-170. You already see the difference:

 

Iron Man #169: Jim Rhodes replaces Tony Stark as Iron Man

Iron Man #170: 1st full Jim Rhodes as Iron Man.

 

[catch21]

 

The same with Iron Man 118

 

1st "brief" appearance James Rhodes

 

 

But I disagree with you on this though. Rhodey was a supporting character (as Tony Stark's pilot) in the title at this point in time and for a while thereafter. I don't think we need brief and full appearance notations for such characters. So just "1st appearance of James Rhodes" is adequate.

 

I agree on the brief as 1st appearance. I disagree as just a pilot.

 

I didn’t say he was JUST a pilot. Rhodes was his pilot, just like “Pepper” Potts was his secretary, as “Happy” Hogan was his driver. But over the course of time, Rhodey evolved into more of a friend, as Layton said. And you could see it developing during that time. But in #118..he’s in full garb, no shadows, not concealed, his name is revealed, and it’s obvious what’s his role in Stark’s employ. This is the essence of a supporting character. Why would I expect anything more than something brief? No need for full story arc involving Rhodes so we can classify his 1st full appearance. By #121, Ive already seen him twice and know he has a history with Tony.

 

His next issue Iron Man 121, the issue follows Rhodes on how he rescues Tony Stark.

 

He actually next appeared in issue #120 in 2 panels talking to Bethany Cabe where he drops another piece of info that he and Tony “went back to ‘Nam.”

 

Now when Rhodey joins the big leagues in 169-170. You already see the difference:

 

Iron Man #169: Jim Rhodes replaces Tony Stark as Iron Man

Iron Man #170: 1st full Jim Rhodes as Iron Man.

 

 

ok I give in.

[Catwomancomics]

THE CAT

 

1 Tigra (?)

 

The Cat is the first appearance of The Cat, not Tigra.

 

This needs to be changed in the UPDATED list.

 

 

[Silverdream]

Coleen Wing seems minor to me

and Misty Knight is Marvel Team Up 1.....but also seems minor

 

 

1.Woah, Marvel Team UP 1 is a retcon done by Chris Claremont and John Byrne in Marvel Team up #64.

2.Retcons do not count.

3.CGC has labeled Marvel Premiere 21 as her first appearance

Look Here

4.Misty Knight and Colleen Wing had their own comic book. It's was called Daughters of the Dragon. Misty had Fearless Defenders and Heroes for Hire.

 

(thumbs u took the words right out of my mouth about Colleen Wing and moreso Misty Knight. They are more important in the overall scheme of the Marvel (street level) Universe than a Will O the Wisp , Varna or Shockwave !

 

Retcons dont count as first apps. It was a nameless, generic black woman/innocent bystander that Spidey saved in MTU #1 than was was later retconned to be Misty. MTU #1 even makes a note on this:

"Spidey saves woman who is later to be revealed as Misty Knight."

 

For all the slack that CGC has received recently for being total incompetant with labeling, this is spot on!

 

Not to take anything away from the work you put into gathering this reference list together.

 

There was a decent thread about Misty Knight and I believe a person requested them to mark it as her first appearance and THEN they did the research, which was already done in the thread. It doesn't take away from the hundreds of mislabeled first appearances still being labeled wrong.

[akaSteveRogers]

So CGC didnt originally label Marvel Premiere #21 as Misty Knight's 1st appearance. They didnt label it wrong. They just didnt put it on the label. Big difference. They were made aware..they checked it out. They labeled it going forward.

 

Please elaborate on the "hundreds of mislabeled first appearances." Which means 1st appearances that are not first appearances.

 

If you are talking about brief appearances vs full appearances that's a never-ending debate and an entirely different conversation.

 

 

[Silverdream]

So CGC didnt originally label Marvel Premiere #21 as Misty Knight's 1st appearance. They didnt label it wrong. They just didnt put it on the label. Big difference. They were made aware..they checked it out. They labeled it going forward.

 

Please elaborate on the "hundreds of mislabeled first appearances." Which means 1st appearances that are not first appearances.

 

If you are talking about brief appearances vs full appearances that's a never-ending debate and an entirely different conversation.

 

 

I'm not sure when I said they labeled MP 21 wrong Not labeling books until they can reach a solid consensus is how id like them to do it. Honestly, I cannot give them a ton of credit. They didn't label any book as Misty knights first app. because nobody cared, not because they were not sure which book to list it on. There are thousands of first appearances not listed on CGC labels simply because they are nobody characters. Street level characters and so on. Not listed in OS, Nor on CGC labels

 

 

 

 

[vaillant]

This thread is closed: he started the updated one here:

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7971269#Post7971269

 

(thumbs u

[akaSteveRogers]

I'm not sure when I said they labeled MP 21 wrong

 

When you began your response talking about the "Misty Knight thread" then in the same breath mentioned "the hundreds of mislabeled first appearances" my assumption was that you were making a correlation between the two. Thats what I didn't get.

 

 

Not labeling books until they can reach a solid consensus is how id like them to do it. Honestly, I cannot give them a ton of credit. They didn't label any book as Misty knights first app. because nobody cared, not because they were not sure which book to list it on. There are thousands of first appearances not listed on CGC labels simply because they are nobody characters. Street level characters and so on. Not listed in OS, Nor on CGC labels.

 

I know you don't give them much credit. And there probably isn't anything I or anyone else could say to convince you otherwise. I'm not waving CGC poms-poms but I think maybe it's a bit exaggerated on how bad of a job they do on posting 1st appearances on labels.

 

They are by no means perfect. But when you grade over a million books, if you got 100 books incorrectly labeled, that is still miniscule in terms of %'s. The worse that happens is that you let them know, tell them why they are wrong...and they fix it. Ive never known CGC to be stubborn if they got a 1st app wrong.

 

Especially with the overnight resurgence of basically B-, C-, even D-list characters being brought into the limelight now with a mere mention of possible movie or tv appearances.

 

Have I caught a mistake on a 1st app? Sure. Are there hundreds of just 1st appearances labeled incorrectly? That might be overstating things a bit. Just my . Please note that I don't consider catergorizations of 1st appearances (ie. brief vs. full vs 1st) as being labeled incorrectly.

 

I wouldn't expect you to waste your time in looking for that many but when you make a statement like that...they shouldn't be hard to find.