When will the New Mutants 98 bubble burst? 1 1

[RockMyAmadeus]

Weren't there more distributors handling ASM 300 than NM 98?

 

Not necessarily, but it doesn't matter.

 

The beauty of the Cap City numbers is that they are a representative slice of numbers for just about the entire Direct Market. The ratio wouldn't be substantially different between Diamond, or the other distributors. If orders for NM #98 was 30% higher than ASM #300 at Cap City, they'd be about that same ratio at Diamond, N.I.C.E., and others, regardless of the actual numbers.

Sure, one would expect that the percentage change in orders from one issue of a title to the next would be approximately the same across the different distributors. However, if total distribution of issues that are years apart is spread out differently because of distributors going out of business or being acquired by others, what then?

 

For example, if the breakdowns were something like

 

ASM 300

Diamond 40%

Capital City 20%

Distributor A 10%

Distributor B 6%

Distributor C 7%

Distributor D 8%

Distributor E 4%

Distributor F 5%

 

NM 98

Diamond 50%

Capital City 30%

Distributor A 7%

Distributor C 7%

Distributor D 6%

 

then ASM 300 would be at 214500 and NM 98 would be at 184000 based on the Capital City orders.

 

Of course, there were more small distributors and those numbers aren't at all accurate, just illustrative of possible changes in North American distribution.

 

Bad math!

 

 

Your math is incorrect, because you don't know most of the numbers involved. You can't extrapolate only based on a single data set, and then guesses as to the percentage of market share for the other distributors. I understand your reasoning, but we don't know what percentage of the Direct market Cap City was at the precise time of the ASM #300 orders, nor the NM #98 orders, other than "very broadly", Cap City represented between 15-30% of the Direct Market at any "one" time.

 

But that is very, very broad, and encompasses years between 1980 and 1996,

 

And we don't know how many smaller distributors existed. By the end of 1990, there were more distributors in the market than in early 1988, not less. Distributors came and went throughout the 80's, and 1988 was a consolidation year. After that, with the entry of card dealers into the market, independent distributors and sub-distributors started popping up again (I worked for one myself) in 1990. The final contraction of distributors wouldn't begin until around late 92/early 93. Also, at the time of ASM #300 (Feb of 1988), Diamond was not yet a "national" distributor, and wouldn't be until that summer...so Cap City percentages at about that time *possibly* would have been higher than Diamond's. (Diamond didn't gain control of 40% of the DM until they bought Bud Plant in California.)

 

The only numbers we know for any specific issue are Cap City's (and those, of course, aren't even exactly precise; they're rounded.) That, combined with the SOO, gives us a clear(er) picture, but it's still fairly broad. However...it would be a mistake to assume that ASM #300 has higher extant numbers than NM #98, based on the numbers we do know, and the changes in the market and collecting habits in the intervening years.

 

[rjpb]

If a show has a viewership of 15 million, but the comic only 150,000 readers ( in various formats), then it stands to follow that 99% of those who watch the show have no interest in the comics. I don't know what the exact numbers are for TWD, but, even if we were to adjust the readership by a magnitude of 10, the above illustrates the huge gap between the broader pop culture interest in comic book properties and fans of the comic books themselves.

 

This in turn can have a grossly disproportional effect on the demand for a given comic beyond the herd demand from existing collectors who decide they have to have something because it's "hot". If just one in a thousand viewers of a TV show or a movie decide they not only are interested in checking out the comic source, but also want the first appearance ( in any condition), the demand for low print run books, especially, can increase dramatically.

 

The bubble pops when the interest in a character has peaked, and not only is there no new outside interest, but all the speculators and "hot" book chasers have left the market. Inevitably the resulting added supply will drive down the prices of a decreasing demand.

 

A book like IH 181 can't really be compared to more recent books. There are nearly as many copies of NM 98 in CGC 9.8 alone as there are Hulk 181's in 9.0 or better, and it's a pretty safe bet the number of raw potential 9.8s for NM 98 is far greater than the potential for Hulk 181s in 9.0 or better. The potential for a glut of copies to drive down the price in the face of decreased demand is much greater with a book like NM 98.

 

 

 

 

[rjpb]

FWIW - an anecdotal observation on the impact of various superhero characters on the public at large. My 14 year old daughter doesn't read superhero comics, but has watched most of the Marvel movies, and has shown an interest in superhero histories. She knows who Wolverine is, but not Deadpool. The name rang no bells. My 18 year old daughter hasn't had any interest in comics since she read Betty & Veronica books in middle school, and has seen a few comic books movies, but isn't all that interested in them. She knows who marquee characters like Spider-man, The Hulk, Captain America, Iron Man, Batman and Superman are, but she didn't recognize Wolverine, let alone Deadpool as comic characters when I floated their names. She recognized the X-men as a movie franchise, but didn't know who or what they were specifically.

 

Superhero books aren't really my focus, and I never directly introduced them to my kids, so my own preferences shouldn't come into play ( even my younger daughter's movie selections are her own - she's watched more superhero movies than I have).

 

Not that my personal experience is an automatic reflection of the broader public awareness, but I thought it was an interesting counterpoint to the notion that Deadpool is an iconic character.

[Tony S]

If a show has a viewership of 15 million, but the comic only 150,000 readers ( in various formats), then it stands to follow that 99% of those who watch the show have no interest in the comics. I don't know what the exact numbers are for TWD, but, even if we were to adjust the readership by a magnitude of 10, the above illustrates the huge gap between the broader pop culture interest in comic book properties and fans of the comic books themselves.

 

Walking Dead averages a monthly circulation of about 70,000 copies a month. Your point is correct, but the scale is even larger. It's like 99.8% of those watching the show have no interest in the comics.

 

FWIW - an anecdotal observation on the impact of various superhero characters on the public at large. My 14 year old daughter doesn't read superhero comics, but has watched most of the Marvel movies, and has shown an interest in superhero histories. She knows who Wolverine is, but not Deadpool. The name rang no bells. My 18 year old daughter hasn't had any interest in comics since she read Betty & Veronica books in middle school, and has seen a few comic books movies, but isn't all that interested in them. She knows who marquee characters like Spider-man, The Hulk, Captain America, Iron Man, Batman and Superman are, but she didn't recognize Wolverine, let alone Deadpool as comic characters when I floated their names. She recognized the X-men as a movie franchise, but didn't know who or what they were specifically.

 

Superhero books aren't really my focus, and I never directly introduced them to my kids, so my own preferences shouldn't come into play ( even my younger daughter's movie selections are her own - she's watched more superhero movies than I have).

 

Not that my personal experience is an automatic reflection of the broader public awareness, but I thought it was an interesting counterpoint to the notion that Deadpool is an iconic character.

 

I think your observations are interesting and worthy of consideration. But it's also worth noting that Iron Man has long been a fairly popular comic book character - among comic book readers and collectors.Not Spider-Man popular, but a consistent seller for Marvel and perhaps the best overall performing 1968 Marvel first issue. Yet he was virtually unknown in the larger culture until Robert Downey Jr made him a household name in 2008. Now Iron Man can lay claim to the iconic term and the franchise is a tent pole for Marvel/Disney. Heck, RDJ is the actor that single handedly has forced Marvel to pay the other actors better for Avengers 2 and the other superhero sequels. He flatly said he wasn't making any more movies where he got paid astronomically better than the other actors in superhero suits - and Marvel decided they couldn't go forward successfully without Iron Man and RDJ.

 

Will a movie do the same for Deadpool? We won't know until the day. But if Marvel can make a franchise out of the strange collection of 3rd stringers in comics that called themselves the Guardians of the Galaxy, I wouldn't bet the rent money against the success of a Deadpool movie.

[Lazyboy]

Weren't there more distributors handling ASM 300 than NM 98?

 

Not necessarily, but it doesn't matter.

 

The beauty of the Cap City numbers is that they are a representative slice of numbers for just about the entire Direct Market. The ratio wouldn't be substantially different between Diamond, or the other distributors. If orders for NM #98 was 30% higher than ASM #300 at Cap City, they'd be about that same ratio at Diamond, N.I.C.E., and others, regardless of the actual numbers.

Sure, one would expect that the percentage change in orders from one issue of a title to the next would be approximately the same across the different distributors. However, if total distribution of issues that are years apart is spread out differently because of distributors going out of business or being acquired by others, what then?

 

For example, if the breakdowns were something like

 

ASM 300

Diamond 40%

Capital City 20%

Distributor A 10%

Distributor B 6%

Distributor C 7%

Distributor D 8%

Distributor E 4%

Distributor F 5%

 

NM 98

Diamond 50%

Capital City 30%

Distributor A 7%

Distributor C 7%

Distributor D 6%

 

then ASM 300 would be at 214500 and NM 98 would be at 184000 based on the Capital City orders.

 

Of course, there were more small distributors and those numbers aren't at all accurate, just illustrative of possible changes in North American distribution.

 

Bad math!

 

 

Your math is incorrect, because you don't know most of the numbers involved. You can't extrapolate only based on a single data set, and then guesses as to the percentage of market share for the other distributors. I understand your reasoning, but we don't know what percentage of the Direct market Cap City was at the precise time of the ASM #300 orders, nor the NM #98 orders, other than "very broadly", Cap City represented between 15-30% of the Direct Market at any "one" time.

 

But that is very, very broad, and encompasses years between 1980 and 1996,

 

And we don't know how many smaller distributors existed. By the end of 1990, there were more distributors in the market than in early 1988, not less. Distributors came and went throughout the 80's, and 1988 was a consolidation year. After that, with the entry of card dealers into the market, independent distributors and sub-distributors started popping up again (I worked for one myself) in 1990. The final contraction of distributors wouldn't begin until around late 92/early 93. Also, at the time of ASM #300 (Feb of 1988), Diamond was not yet a "national" distributor, and wouldn't be until that summer...so Cap City percentages at about that time *possibly* would have been higher than Diamond's. (Diamond didn't gain control of 40% of the DM until they bought Bud Plant in California.)

 

The only numbers we know for any specific issue are Cap City's (and those, of course, aren't even exactly precise; they're rounded.) That, combined with the SOO, gives us a clear(er) picture, but it's still fairly broad. However...it would be a mistake to assume that ASM #300 has higher extant numbers than NM #98, based on the numbers we do know, and the changes in the market and collecting habits in the intervening years.

 

The math is just fine. But as I said, the numbers the math is based on "aren't at all accurate" except for the Cap City order numbers you provided earlier. But I don't think it is a mistake to assume an increase in market share for Diamond and Cap City between ASM 300 and NM 98.

 

In theory, we should be able to get a roughly accurate picture of total distribution numbers and Cap City's market share for any issue through an analysis of Cap City numbers compared to SOO numbers. It would have to assume that each distributor had the same percentage change in orders from one issue to the next, but otherwise it should be close enough.

 

Maybe there are fewer extant copies of ASM 300 than NM 98. My belief in the contrary is based on something I read or heard years ago.

[rjrjr]

 

I think your observations are interesting and worthy of consideration. But it's also worth noting that Iron Man has long been a fairly popular comic book character - among comic book readers and collectors.Not Spider-Man popular, but a consistent seller for Marvel and perhaps the best overall performing 1968 Marvel first issue. Yet he was virtually unknown in the larger culture until Robert Downey Jr made him a household name in 2008. Now Iron Man can lay claim to the iconic term and the franchise is a tent pole for Marvel/Disney. Heck, RDJ is the actor that single handedly has forced Marvel to pay the other actors better for Avengers 2 and the other superhero sequels. He flatly said he wasn't making any more movies where he got paid astronomically better than the other actors in superhero suits - and Marvel decided they couldn't go forward successfully without Iron Man and RDJ.

 

Will a movie do the same for Deadpool? We won't know until the day. But if Marvel can make a franchise out of the strange collection of 3rd stringers in comics that called themselves the Guardians of the Galaxy, I wouldn't bet the rent money against the success of a Deadpool movie.

 

Iron Man was one of Marvel's better known superheroes before the movies. He starred in several cartoons going back to the 60s, was featured in countless toys, etc. I believe several Marvel heroes survived low publishing numbers because of the merchandise they were featured on.

 

Where did you get the information concerning Robert Downey Junior and Avengers 2? I'd like to read more about that.

 

What will be interesting to see is if Deadpool does succeed as a movie. Will Marvel continue to push the character in publishing? With the changes they made with X-Men overall (de-emphasizing them in favor of Inhumans), I'm not convinced there will be new Deadpool comics in a few years. Marvel is all about the movies and like it or not, they don't have the movie rights to Deadpool or the X-Men. I can see a day where they completely phase them out of their comic line entirely.

Edited January 3, 2015 by rjrjr

[Tony S]

 

I think your observations are interesting and worthy of consideration. But it's also worth noting that Iron Man has long been a fairly popular comic book character - among comic book readers and collectors.Not Spider-Man popular, but a consistent seller for Marvel and perhaps the best overall performing 1968 Marvel first issue. Yet he was virtually unknown in the larger culture until Robert Downey Jr made him a household name in 2008. Now Iron Man can lay claim to the iconic term and the franchise is a tent pole for Marvel/Disney. Heck, RDJ is the actor that single handedly has forced Marvel to pay the other actors better for Avengers 2 and the other superhero sequels. He flatly said he wasn't making any more movies where he got paid astronomically better than the other actors in superhero suits - and Marvel decided they couldn't go forward successfully without Iron Man and RDJ.

 

Will a movie do the same for Deadpool? We won't know until the day. But if Marvel can make a franchise out of the strange collection of 3rd stringers in comics that called themselves the Guardians of the Galaxy, I wouldn't bet the rent money against the success of a Deadpool movie.

 

Iron Man was one of Marvel's better known superheroes before the movies. He starred in several cartoons going back to the 60s, was featured in countless toys, etc. I believe several Marvel heroes survived low publishing numbers because of the merchandise they were featured on.

 

Where did you get the information concerning Robert Downey Junior and Avengers 2? I'd like to read more about that.

 

What will be interesting to see is if Deadpool does succeed as a movie. Will Marvel continue to push the character in publishing? With the changes they made with X-Men overall (de-emphasizing them in favor of Inhumans), I'm not convinced there will be new Deadpool comics in a few years. Marvel is all about the movies and like it or not, they don't have the movie rights to Deadpool or the X-Men. I can see a day where they completely phase them out of their comic line entirely.

 

Here's one article. I recall reading several that lead up to getting everyone signed for Avengers 2. As well as the Thor and Capt America sequels.

 

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/466022/20130509/robert-downey-jr-avengers-iron-man-scarlett.htm#.VKdO_CvF9I4

 

http://www.hypable.com/2013/05/07/avengers-2-cast-low-sequel-pay-marvel/

 

And apparently being a Marvel Super Hero (in cinema) isn't all perfect

 

http://www.dailydot.com/fandom/marvel-avengers-contracts-gilded-cage/

 

[Hamlet]

I think something to keep in mind about Ironman is that it translated to movies better than just about any other character, and that RDJ's performance actually made the character better than it was in any of the Ironman comics I've read.

 

When I saw the first Toby Maguire Spiderman, I loved it because I felt it captured the spirit of the Spiderman comics.

 

When I saw the first Ironman movie, I loved it because it re-imagined the character in a much better way than the comics ever did, IMO. It generated interest among comic collectors for a character than was really 3rd tier before the movies.

 

That is going to be a tough thing to duplicate, and buying a NM98 because you're expecting a Deadpool movie to generate even more interest from collectors that are already extremely interested in getting a NM98 is a bad bet, IMO.

 

 

I think your observations are interesting and worthy of consideration. But it's also worth noting that Iron Man has long been a fairly popular comic book character - among comic book readers and collectors.Not Spider-Man popular, but a consistent seller for Marvel and perhaps the best overall performing 1968 Marvel first issue. Yet he was virtually unknown in the larger culture until Robert Downey Jr made him a household name in 2008. Now Iron Man can lay claim to the iconic term and the franchise is a tent pole for Marvel/Disney. Heck, RDJ is the actor that single handedly has forced Marvel to pay the other actors better for Avengers 2 and the other superhero sequels. He flatly said he wasn't making any more movies where he got paid astronomically better than the other actors in superhero suits - and Marvel decided they couldn't go forward successfully without Iron Man and RDJ.

 

Will a movie do the same for Deadpool? We won't know until the day. But if Marvel can make a franchise out of the strange collection of 3rd stringers in comics that called themselves the Guardians of the Galaxy, I wouldn't bet the rent money against the success of a Deadpool movie.

Edited January 3, 2015 by Hamlet

[Lazyboy]

When I saw the first Ironman movie, I loved it because it re-imagined the character in a much better way than the comics ever did, IMO.

Really? How many Iron Man comics have you read, and from which time period?

[rjpb]

I think something to keep in mind about Ironman is that it translated to movies better than just about any other character, and that RDJ's performance actually made the character better than it was in any of the Ironman comics I've read.

 

When I saw the first Toby Maguire Spiderman, I loved it because I felt it captured the spirit of the Spiderman comics.

 

When I saw the first Ironman movie, I loved it because it re-imagined the character in a much better way than the comics ever did, IMO. It generated interest among comic collectors for a character than was really 3rd tier before the movies.

 

That is going to be a tough thing to duplicate, and buying a NM98 because you're expecting a Deadpool movie to generate even more interest from collectors that are already extremely interested in getting a NM98 is a bad bet, IMO.

 

 

My sentiments concerning the first IM and Spidey movies exactly. I haven't seen GoTG yet, but it seems to be another film that far exceeds any expectation based on the source material. I can't say it's impossible that a Deadpool movie could do the same, but there's an equal chance it could also be another Ghost Rider or Daredevil.

[Hamlet]

I've read some ToS, IM1, some BA issues here and there, and a bunch of 80s ones.

 

The Tony Stark character was never particularly interesting in the comics. He was just some rich guy with pretty much no personality, IMO. RDJ changed that in a big way.

 

The other advantage is that the technology looks much cooler in the movies than it ever looked in the comics, IMO.

 

 

When I saw the first Ironman movie, I loved it because it re-imagined the character in a much better way than the comics ever did, IMO.

Really? How many Iron Man comics have you read, and from which time period?

Edited January 3, 2015 by Hamlet

[Tony S]

I've read some ToS, IM1, some BA issues here and there, and a bunch of 80s ones.

 

The Tony Stark character was never particularly interesting in the comics. He was just some rich guy with pretty much no personality, IMO. RDJ changed that in a big way.

 

The other advantage is that the technology looks much cooler in the movies than it ever looked in the comics, IMO.

 

 

When I saw the first Ironman movie, I loved it because it re-imagined the character in a much better way than the comics ever did, IMO.

Really? How many Iron Man comics have you read, and from which time period?

 

I read IM faithfully from about 1965 until maybe 10 years ago when I basically quit reading new comics. I didn't find Tony Stark quiet as boring as you say, but otherwise completely agree that RDJ has totally made Tony Stark into the complex, egocentric, quirky inventor interesting character that he is in the movies and should have been in the comics. It's like the man was born to play this part.

 

Other writers made Stark and IM a bit more interesting in the late 70's and 80's (the alcohol story line, some Avenger arcs), but especially from creation to mid 70's, IM followed Stan Lee's one note vision of "the super hero with super problems".

 

The other big factor (besides RDJ) that makes IM such a great movie property - made him a good comic book hero as well - is how believable Iron Man is. DARPA has been working on exoskelton suits for a decade. They even have some pretty good ones too. Soldiers would be able to carry hundreds of pounds, march farther and faster. The problem is power supply. The suits work great as long as plugged into the wall. Batteries weigh to much and don't last long enough. If DARPA could solve the power issue, they'd weaponize and put in the field these suits tomorrow.

 

Stark of course "solves" the power supply issue.

 

So no mutant spiders. No freaky yellow sun. No sorta of a God or infused with enough lethal radiation to kill a city. Just your rich inventor genius and a suit of armor. The sort of hero we could all be and is even reasonable to believe in.

 

Back to the original topic. I never said Deadpool would be a big as IM in the movies. I just noted that IM wasn't a household name before the movies. Guardians of the Galaxy wan't much of a name in the comics before the movies. Just saying I wouldn't bet against Marvel and Disney on any upcoming movie.

[rjpb]

Back when I was a young Marvel Zombie in the early 70s I thought Iron Man was THE most boring of the Marvel superheroes and it was the first super hero title I dropped after my brief "buy everything Marvel does" period. Years later when I picked up a short run of ToS in order to reread the Kirby Cap stuff, I still couldn't finish the IM stories, even though I like Gene Colan's art. So maybe my opinion isn't the most objective, but it's pretty hard to argue that IM was at best any more than a B list character before the movies, not obscure by any means, but largely unknown outside the world of comic fandom. It appears Deadpool is certainly more popular now than Iron Man was before the movies, but there is no direct correlation between popularity in the world of comic fandom and success on the movie screen. At this point I wouldn't bet one way or the other on a Deadpool movie being a massive success, any more than I would the Ant-Man movie.

[BarryAllen]

Back when I was a young Marvel Zombie in the early 70s I thought Iron Man was THE most boring of the Marvel superheroes and it was the first super hero title I dropped after my brief "buy everything Marvel does" period. Years later when I picked up a short run of ToS in order to reread the Kirby Cap stuff, I still couldn't finish the IM stories, even though I like Gene Colan's art. So maybe my opinion isn't the most objective, but it's pretty hard to argue that IM was at best any more than a B list character before the movies, not obscure by any means, but largely unknown outside the world of comic fandom. It appears Deadpool is certainly more popular now than Iron Man was before the movies, but there is no direct correlation between popularity in the world of comic fandom and success on the movie screen. At this point I wouldn't bet one way or the other on a Deadpool movie being a massive success, any more than I would the Ant-Man movie.

 

Makes good sense. Any non-A-list character is a box-office risk and Deadpool, Ant-Man, Black Panther, Doctor Strange, Captain Marvel and any of the DC heroes yet to be released (Marvel certainly does a better job than DC with the exception of Nolan's Batman these days) all fit that risk.

 

If you don't agree, look at the recent TMNT movie (well known heroes, beloved by millions across multiple generations - domestically it was: :shrug:.

Edited January 4, 2015 by rfoiii

[BarryAllen]

Isn't Fox going to make the Deadpool movie?

 

Plus or minus?

 

[Hamlet]

It's not that I would bet against a Deadpool movie being successful.

 

I would bet against a successful Deadpool movie driving the value of NM98 any higher than it already is in the long-term.

 

I think a very successful movie is required to even maintain these current prices.

 

Back to the original topic. I never said Deadpool would be a big as IM in the movies. I just noted that IM wasn't a household name before the movies. Guardians of the Galaxy wan't much of a name in the comics before the movies. Just saying I wouldn't bet against Marvel and Disney on any upcoming movie.

[FineCollector]

A word on Iron Man: the supporting cast was always fun, but Tony Stark was a pompous jerk who can't admit his mistakes. No one else argued with Cap and pulled that "I'm a founding Avenger" garbage more than Iron Man. Look at Iron Man 22, death of Janice Cord. She's a bystander, and Iron Man continually foils Titanium Man and Crimson Dynamo's attempts to push her out of the way. She finally dies because of his bumbling, and he blames them for it. I never understood the appeal. He's still a pompous jerk in the movies, but at least his heart is in the right place... and he sounds like Spider-Man, that helps too!

 

Back on point, Iron Man is an A-list hero. My sister grew up in the 70's, and was not exposed to comics beyond the Wonder Woman tv show, and still knew who Iron Man was.

[Hamlet]

I know who Pauly Shore is, but that doesn't make him A-list.

 

 

Back on point, Iron Man is an A-list hero. My sister grew up in the 70's, and was not exposed to comics beyond the Wonder Woman tv show, and still knew who Iron Man was.

[SquareChaos]

The other big factor (besides RDJ) that makes IM such a great movie property - made him a good comic book hero as well - is how believable Iron Man is. DARPA has been working on exoskelton suits for a decade. They even have some pretty good ones too. Soldiers would be able to carry hundreds of pounds, march farther and faster. The problem is power supply. The suits work great as long as plugged into the wall. Batteries weigh to much and don't last long enough. If DARPA could solve the power issue, they'd weaponize and put in the field these suits tomorrow.

 

 

The thing about Iron Man that always distracts me a little bit while reading the stories or watching the movies is trying to come up with a plausible explanation for his flight capabilities.

 

Often, it looks like a chemical rocket burn - but that's impossible if we are still attempting to stay in the 'plausible' realm. But, even giving them that, I still don't understand how he obtains 'lift', and even assuming he never does and can just have constant thrust all day long, and assuming he uses some sort of force field to make his form more aerodynamic so he can perform all of this nimble movement... the issues just keep piling up down that road.

 

If you consider Iron Man nothing but a big electromagnet due to the basically free energy / flux capacitor in his chest (lets not go there, whole other can of worms), then you can start thinking about it a different way. However, even then, he would still probably need constant correction and thrust so you may still run into the chemical fuel problems again... Unless he has a turbine, but I don't know where the air would come from, especially when he's in space! And speaking of space, if he is doing some sort of levitation trick using the earth's magnetic via his own electromagnetic field... well, there is far less magnetic field (in general) away from the iron-cored Earth. Anyway... this obviously gets ridiculous fast

 

More to the point... I'm sort if in the B-level hero camp prior to RDJ bringing the character the life - now I'm intrigued by the character on the screen, but that hasn't translated to being intrigued by the character in the comics. So... I guess it's just RDJ.

[slym2none]

RDJ turned Tony Stark into RDJ. Just like he does with all of his roles.

 

I don't like it.

 

 

 

-slym