|
redbackground posted:She was named after her! I was really hoping (  ) the answer was going to be "due to time travel shenanigans, Hope adopted and raised herself a thousand years from now". Also I love that two of Scott's three kids are from alternate/parallel timelines.
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
It's missing Ruby Summers! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 11:08
|
|
|
That chart made perfect sense to me until I started reading the errata.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
SirDan3k posted:No they are just sick and loving tired of it and extra pissed that Bendis changed the rules because by the old ones the original 5 could actually die or even change as it stands now they are blatantly immortal and immutable in that annoying "wink, wink all comic-book character are" way. They can still die. When you've already changed the rules you can make them whatever you want. "Young Cyclops died but our Cyclops is still alive! How is that possible?" "*Science bullshit*"
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
Does Sue Storm still turn invisible/is she ever referred to anymore as Invisible Woman, or has her powerset pretty firmly shifted to force fields?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
The F4 have public identities and are a family, so they usually just use their first names when referring to each other since they have nothing to hide. Sue can still turn invisible, it's just that force fields are a bit more useful in combat situations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
Yeah she still turns invisible. She was having trouble controlling it during Fraction's run, leading to parts of her skin (but nothing below the skin) turning invisible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 14:39
|
|
Aphrodite posted:They can still die. When you've already changed the rules you can make them whatever you want. How thrilling. It's like the narrative version of kids on the playground who keep changing the rules so they don't lose.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
It's like a comic book.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
Endless Mike posted:The F4 have public identities and are a family, so they usually just use their first names when referring to each other since they have nothing to hide. Sue can still turn invisible, it's just that force fields are a bit more useful in combat situations. I think Ben is the only one who still mostly refers to himself by superhero name.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
irlZaphod posted:Yeah she still turns invisible. She was having trouble controlling it during Fraction's run, leading to parts of her skin (but nothing below the skin) turning invisible. So, exactly like the Venture Brothers parody then? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:So, exactly like the Venture Brothers parody then? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:How thrilling. It's like the narrative version of kids on the playground who keep changing the rules so they don't lose. Unlike before, where....oh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
redbackground posted:Pretty much!
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:How thrilling. It's like the narrative version of kids on the playground who keep changing the rules so they don't lose. Ah, yes, the Calvinball method. But what's the other option? )Pointlessly?) Rebooting the entire production line every couple of years? And even then, the explanation is usually an unsatisfying "That thing in the past didn't happen, unless of course it did happen, in which case, you bet it happened... At least until next time."
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:Ah, yes, the Calvinball method.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:Ah, yes, the Calvinball method. Even though crazy impossible stuff can happen in comic books, you have to maintain some baseline level of what's "too impossible", or else the stories don't feel grounded or meaningful. Yes, this means some stories you really want to tell shouldn't be told, at least not in the mainstream universe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:They can still die. When you've already changed the rules you can make them whatever you want. Yeah but Bendis keeps implying that if they die the time stream breaks so if he breaks that rule he's broken the handshake agreement between fiction writers and fiction reader. "I'll set some rules and mostly stick to them. And we'll pretend that you couldn't break the rule whenever you want."
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
I forget, why can't they go back? It breaks the timestream, or it just makes the future kinda worse than it would be otherwise?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
They don't actually know other than that they tried and can't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
Was the supposed super genius creepy spiderman clone doing he cheap silence of the lambs routine in ultimate avengers ever explained?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
If you mean Ultimate Kaine that was part of USM and more or less ended there. They're teasing an Ultimate Scarlet Spider though so who knows
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Opopanax posted:If you mean Ultimate Kaine that was part of USM and more or less ended there. They're teasing an Ultimate Scarlet Spider though so who knows No, there was another clone that showed up in Ultimates.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
Was that part of Millar's return or Humphries'? I have no memory of that
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Opopanax posted:Was that part of Millar's return or Humphries'? I have no memory of that Millar's I read up to the end of the arc where Biden was a satanic biker and they just had a spiderman chilling in a cage who could supposedly talk you into suicide in 15 minutes and was wondering if he was ever explained.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Is there any reports out there showing how much comicbook readership has dropped over the years. I don't mean over the last 5 years odd but more in the last 20 odd years. I am curious because I remember reading about comics selling in the high tens of thousands (80,000-90,000) but now it seems like 30,000-50,000 is considered high top sellers. When was the peak, and how much was being sold at that peak, and when did it start dropping off?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
Madkal posted:Is there any reports out there showing how much comicbook readership has dropped over the years. I don't mean over the last 5 years odd but more in the last 20 odd years. I am curious because I remember reading about comics selling in the high tens of thousands (80,000-90,000) but now it seems like 30,000-50,000 is considered high top sellers. When was the peak, and how much was being sold at that peak, and when did it start dropping off? I don't have numbers, but I'd imagine that in my lifetime, the peak comic readership was for Death of Superman. I mean, that was huge. TV News stations took time to report on this event like it was a real person that was dying. This is also about the same time where everyone was convinced that there was good money in comics collecting. People were under the assumption that they could buy any comic with "#1" on the cover, and in 20 years, it would easily net $10,000. If Death of Superman was the peak, your average Joe realizing that comics were more or less worthless on the open market would be the bottom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:I don't have numbers, but I'd imagine that in my lifetime, the peak comic readership was for Death of Superman. I mean, that was huge. TV News stations took time to report on this event like it was a real person that was dying. I thought X-Men #1 was the best selling comic of all time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
Senor Candle posted:I thought X-Men #1 was the best selling comic of all time. I believe the top two are X-Men #1 and X-Force #1. That being said, even though I was about two at the time, everything I've seen suggests that "The Death of Superman" was probably the bigger "event" in terms of popular consciousness. If I recall correctly, there's a bit in Sean Howe's book where he discusses a scene from the Marvel bullpen in either the mid- or late-1990s where a bunch of editors are lamenting how the comic industry must be collapsing because one of their books had fallen below half a million copies shifted a month (granted, I may have imagined that or made it up).
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Wasn't X-Men #1 overhyped and retailers bought way more than they eventually sold? I was reading something as a lot of shops sunk significant money into buying copies, then had trouble digging out of the hole.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
edit: Whoops, this was supposed to be in the chat thread, sorry
Benito Cereno fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
There were a bunch of steadily ramping up "million copies sold" books in the early 1990s thanks to the speculator boom. Spider-Man #1 (two covers) sold about 2,500,000 copies in 1990. X-Force #1 (five different trading cards) sold about 5,000,000 copies in 1991. X-Men #1 (six covers) sold about 8,000,000 copies in 1992. Estimates for all the printings of Superman #75 were between 2.5-3 million in 1993. There were a lot of comics that sold a million copies (of a first issue or gimmick/event issue) in the early 1990s. Image had a spell where they'd do trade ads to the effect of "CONGRATULATIONS TO SPAWN #8 AND YOUNGBLOOD STRIKEFILE #1 FOR SELLING A MILLION COPIES THIS MONTH". I think Turok (thanks especially to ValiantFans.com and their insane curation) is a pretty good indicator of how comic sales went in the 1990s though. July 1993: Turok #1 WITH CHROMIUM COVER AND SUPERSTAR ARTIST BART SEARS! 1,750,000 copies sold August 1993: Turok #2 without a fancy cover: 550,000 September 1993: Turok #3 whoops Bart Sears can't keep a deadline: 425,000 December 1993: Turok #6 after six months: 250,000 June 1994: Turok #12 after twelve months: 105,000 December 1994: Turok #18 after a year and a half: 75,000 June 1995: Turok #24 after two years: 38,000 December 1995: Turok #35 after 2.5 years and some doubleshipping: 25,000 June 1996: Tuork #45 after three years and some more doubleshipping: 15,000 There's no way there were ever 1.75 million people reading Turok, and stories abound of people who bought CASES of various hot comics and salted them away to make a fortune. A lot of comic shops lost their shirt as a result of bad ordering, whether that was out of greed (deliberate hoarding) or poor planning (expecting to sell as many copies of Turok #3 as Turok #1) or just having trouble navigating the shark infested waters of Deathmates and a dozen "new universes" and gimmick covers and constantly delayed books. I'm super skeptical that any Marvel editor was upset that one of his books dropped below 500,000 at any point after the 1960s, save for maybe an X-Men editor for a period of like 18 months in the early 1990s. Picking a Diamond Top 100 list out of a hat, let's look at it next to ValiantFan's numbers: This is from Wizard #20, a list from February 1993: Rai and the Future Force #9 was in at #4, outselling every Marvel book released. It was a heavily hyped book, and sold around 800,000 copies. The only books that outsold it that month were Stormwatch #1, Spawn #10, and Darker Image #2 which never actually came out but people sure ordered a lot of copies of it! The next Valiant book on the chart was Magnus Robot Fighter #24, selling an estimate 400,000 copies. Slotted in directly above it on the charts were Venom, X-Men and Uncanny X-Men, which could have sold 500,000 in theory. Down at 22 was Bloodshot #4, with an estimated print run of 325,000. In between it and Magnus you have Hellstorm*, Fantastic Four*, X-Force, Spider-Man 2099, Namor*, Punisher 2099, Wild Thing*, X-Factor, and Wolverine. (*a collector's item first issue and/or gimmick cover) Skipping past a bunch of stuff to the middle of the pack, Archer & Armstrong #10 was 45th on the charts, with an estimated print run of 215,000. That's enough to put it ahead of a couple dozen Marvel titles. It's still impressive (well, 'impressive') to see books down in the middle of a Top 100 selling 200,000+, but this was more to do with people drunk with speculatory power, not a reflection of a larger reading audience. By 1995 the bottom had largely dropped out of the "speculator boom".
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
The speculator boom was a fascinating phenomenon just because of how many people misunderstood or were mislead about why exactly certain comic books were worth money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
Wouldn't the highest era for overall sales be somewhere from the 40's to 60's when every boy in America got their copy of Superman down at the corner store for 10 cents?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Teenage Fansub posted:Wouldn't the highest era for overall sales be somewhere from the 40's to 60's when every boy in America got their copy of Superman down at the corner store for 10 cents? By the end of the 1960s practically nothing was cracking half a million, and continued to drop off during the 1970s. By the time the Direct Market came about, people got shitfire excited for Dazzler #1 selling 426,000 copies in 1981.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:If Death of Superman was the peak, your average Joe realizing that comics were more or less worthless on the open market would be the bottom. Good thing nobody's realized that and they continue to give me four copies of Spawn #1 like I give half a poo poo, then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
Edge & Christian posted:There's no way there were ever 1.75 million people reading Turok, and stories abound of people who bought CASES of various hot comics and salted them away to make a fortune. I'm not sure what's more bemusing; that people were convinced their holofoil special edition copy of Youngblood #1 or whatever was going to be worth millions of dollars, or that some of them still do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 12:11
|
|
|
Was Spawn #1 ever worth more than cover price?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
Len posted:Was Spawn #1 ever worth more than cover price?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
I have a box of 90s comics at home in Canada. Might as well burn them (we live in the country) because Shadowhawk 1? Spawn 2? What the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 16:01
|
|