|
Post by chadwilliam on Aug 12, 2018 19:09:56 GMT -5
So recently I acquired Web of Spider-Man #18 which commands a hefty $15-20 price tag on a lot of online auctions. Thankfully, I only spent a couple bucks on my copy. I read it and....well....where is Venom in this!?!? It says he appears in the shadows...is it the end page when Peter is pushed onto the train tracks? A human hand does that though. I am perplexed. For an issue commanding so much it really seemed to have nothing to do with Venom/the symbiote/ Eddie Brock, which I was under the impression it would. OK, here's the weird thing. Venom was initially planned to be a woman and while that idea had been scrapped by the time Eddie Brock did show up, the idea seems to have still been in play when that human hand in Web 18 pushed Peter Parker in front of the train. So it's a cameo for Venom but a cameo of a version that never made it into print (the hand itself could be any gender, but you'll not the pink coat it's attached to) beyond that single panel. "Venom was going to be a female: a woman sees her husband die in an accident, where the driver was watching Spider-Man when they hit the husband. The wife loses her sanity and focuses the hatred towards Spider-Man". From nexter.org/facts-venomApparently, Jim Salicrup didn't like the idea and Venom was shelved for about two years. It makes me wonder if there are other characters whose first full appearance followed their first cameo appearance by such a wide span of time.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 12, 2018 21:08:46 GMT -5
Well, let's see, Proteus' name (as Mutant X) appeared in X-Men #104 (Apr 1977 cover date), on a cell whose integrity has been breached, thanks to Magneto. He doesn't show up again until #125 (Sep 1979) where he attacks one of Jamie Maddrox's duplicates. The story progresses through #128, when he is killed by Colossus. So, two years there.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2018 22:26:44 GMT -5
Is true, that the Star Wars Movies (future) are dead? ... I just came back from Lunch with a friend and he told me this and I was a bit surprised by this. The spin-off movies are on hold apparently, due to Solo underperforming and, allegedly, the fan backlash over The Last Jedi. Well I don't think anything official was ever said by Lucasfilm, and it was Bleeding Cool reporting something someone posting on Reddit said they overheard someone at Lucasfilm saying that gave this traction, and of course all the spoiled entitled fanboys who hate everything Disney has done with Star Wars jumped all over it to proclaim their victory over Star Wars and grasping at the validation they can't get anywhere else in their lives that gave this story life. And even Lucasfilm saying no change to their plans has been decided on and that these were unfounded rumors has done anything to dissuade those entitled validation seekers that it isn't true and they aren't triumphant champions of the "real" Star Wars legacy. And more comic and fan news sites keep jumping on the bandwagon saying this, so of course the more you repeat something the truer it is even if it has no foundation in truth whatsoever. -M
|
|
|
Post by comicsandwho on Aug 13, 2018 14:05:51 GMT -5
So recently I acquired Web of Spider-Man #18 which commands a hefty $15-20 price tag on a lot of online auctions. Thankfully, I only spent a couple bucks on my copy. I read it and....well....where is Venom in this!?!? It says he appears in the shadows...is it the end page when Peter is pushed onto the train tracks? A human hand does that though. I am perplexed. For an issue commanding so much it really seemed to have nothing to do with Venom/the symbiote/ Eddie Brock, which I was under the impression it would. OK, here's the weird thing. Venom was initially planned to be a woman and while that idea had been scrapped by the time Eddie Brock did show up, the idea seems to have still been in play when that human hand in Web 18 pushed Peter Parker in front of the train. So it's a cameo for Venom but a cameo of a version that never made it into print (the hand itself could be any gender, but you'll not the pink coat it's attached to) beyond that single panel. "Venom was going to be a female: a woman sees her husband die in an accident, where the driver was watching Spider-Man when they hit the husband. The wife loses her sanity and focuses the hatred towards Spider-Man". From nexter.org/facts-venomApparently, Jim Salicrup didn't like the idea and Venom was shelved for about two years. It makes me wonder if there are other characters whose first full appearance followed their first cameo appearance by such a wide span of time. The Monitor, of 'Crisis on Infinite Earths', first appeared in a cameo in a 'New Teen Titans' issue in 1982. At that time, the series that became 'Crisis on Infinite Earths' was supposed to be published in 1983, as 'History of the DC Universe'. DC ultimately decided to postpone things til its 50th anniversary in '85, so the Monitor didn't start showing up again until 1984, as they spent all that year building up to the renamed 'Crisis'.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 14, 2018 0:42:21 GMT -5
OK, here's the weird thing. Venom was initially planned to be a woman and while that idea had been scrapped by the time Eddie Brock did show up, the idea seems to have still been in play when that human hand in Web 18 pushed Peter Parker in front of the train. So it's a cameo for Venom but a cameo of a version that never made it into print (the hand itself could be any gender, but you'll not the pink coat it's attached to) beyond that single panel. "Venom was going to be a female: a woman sees her husband die in an accident, where the driver was watching Spider-Man when they hit the husband. The wife loses her sanity and focuses the hatred towards Spider-Man". From nexter.org/facts-venomApparently, Jim Salicrup didn't like the idea and Venom was shelved for about two years. It makes me wonder if there are other characters whose first full appearance followed their first cameo appearance by such a wide span of time. The Monitor, of 'Crisis on Infinite Earths', first appeared in a cameo in a 'New Teen Titans' issue in 1982. At that time, the series that became 'Crisis on Infinite Earths' was supposed to be published in 1983, as 'History of the DC Universe'. DC ultimately decided to postpone things til its 50th anniversary in '85, so the Monitor didn't start showing up again until 1984, as they spent all that year building up to the renamed 'Crisis'. Though he was actually seen in GI Combat, before his reveal in Crisis, in a bit of a slip-up. Well, it felt like a slip-up, in retrospect; but, that wasn't a widely seen book. Hugo Strange had one long stretch between appearances, his last Golden Age appearance was Detective Comics #46, in late 1940, and doesn't appear again until Detective #471, in 1977. In that same run, Deadshot had appeared in Batman #59, in 1950, and didn't return until Detective #474,, also in '77. Englehart really went digging for "new" Batman enemies, who had mostly been forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Aug 14, 2018 1:30:33 GMT -5
The Monitor, of 'Crisis on Infinite Earths', first appeared in a cameo in a 'New Teen Titans' issue in 1982. At that time, the series that became 'Crisis on Infinite Earths' was supposed to be published in 1983, as 'History of the DC Universe'. DC ultimately decided to postpone things til its 50th anniversary in '85, so the Monitor didn't start showing up again until 1984, as they spent all that year building up to the renamed 'Crisis'. Though he was actually seen in GI Combat, before his reveal in Crisis, in a bit of a slip-up. Well, it felt like a slip-up, in retrospect; but, that wasn't a widely seen book. Hugo Strange had one long stretch between appearances, his last Golden Age appearance was Detective Comics #46, in late 1940, and doesn't appear again until Detective #471, in 1977. In that same run, Deadshot had appeared in Batman #59, in 1950, and didn't return until Detective #474,, also in '77. Englehart really went digging for "new" Batman enemies, who had mostly been forgotten. I wonder how much of this had to do with the arrival of Michael Fleischer's Batman Encyclopedia upon the scene in 1976. I suppose Hugo Strange's resurrection could have had a lot to do with the then recent reprinting of Batman 1 in oversized format (which would also have explained its influence upon Englehart's Joker tale) but who would have known of Deadshot without having read that copy of Batman 59 from a quarter century previous? Once Fleischer's book came out, we got to see the return of a lot of great villains who had been forgotten over the next several years - Basil Karlo (by Fleischer's own hand), The Crime Doctor, The Monk, Dr Death, Prof Milo to name but a handful. Of course, when it comes to characters disappearing for decades, Batman takes the cake - no Riddler between 1946 and 1965, no Scarecrow from 1943 until 1967, good-bye Two-Face from 1954 to 1971 (with a World's Finest exception), even The Penguin vanished for seven years after 1956.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 14, 2018 12:26:09 GMT -5
Though he was actually seen in GI Combat, before his reveal in Crisis, in a bit of a slip-up. Well, it felt like a slip-up, in retrospect; but, that wasn't a widely seen book. Hugo Strange had one long stretch between appearances, his last Golden Age appearance was Detective Comics #46, in late 1940, and doesn't appear again until Detective #471, in 1977. In that same run, Deadshot had appeared in Batman #59, in 1950, and didn't return until Detective #474,, also in '77. Englehart really went digging for "new" Batman enemies, who had mostly been forgotten. I wonder how much of this had to do with the arrival of Michael Fleischer's Batman Encyclopedia upon the scene in 1976. I suppose Hugo Strange's resurrection could have had a lot to do with the then recent reprinting of Batman 1 in oversized format (which would also have explained its influence upon Englehart's Joker tale) but who would have known of Deadshot without having read that copy of Batman 59 from a quarter century previous? Once Fleischer's book came out, we got to see the return of a lot of great villains who had been forgotten over the next several years - Basil Karlo (by Fleischer's own hand), The Crime Doctor, The Monk, Dr Death, Prof Milo to name but a handful. Of course, when it comes to characters disappearing for decades, Batman takes the cake - no Riddler between 1946 and 1965, no Scarecrow from 1943 until 1967, good-bye Two-Face from 1954 to 1971 (with a World's Finest exception), even The Penguin vanished for seven years after 1956. Oh, I'm sure it had a lot to do with it and meant to say it seemed like Englehart had a copy of the book by his typewriter. Strange was a great villain in the 40s and proved to be perfect in the 70s. i think the problem in between was that he was very much of the pulp era and once DC became the big, high profile publisher, they moved more and more away from the pulpier tales. Deadshot I can kind of understand, if you read that original story. he's a socialite who becomes a vigilante gunfighter, who challenges Batman for the hero role of Gotham, only to be revealed to be a crook. A gunfighter/dandy is a bit limited in that era of comics, especially after the Code. With the easing of the Code in the 70s, plus the prevalence of men's adventure series (Mack Bolan, the Destroyer, et al), a villain like Deadshot is more viable, especially with Marshall Rogers' slick redesign.
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Aug 14, 2018 13:29:24 GMT -5
I heard a story that when Englehart would take over a book, he'd read through the entire run to that point. It may not have been as practical to do that with Detective as with JLA and the books he wrote at Marvel, but it's likely he went through as many file copies of the Batman titles as he could.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Aug 14, 2018 14:33:46 GMT -5
I heard a story that when Englehart would take over a book, he'd read through the entire run to that point. It may not have been as practical to do that with Detective as with JLA and the books he wrote at Marvel, but it's likely he went through as many file copies of the Batman titles as he could. You say that like that's not what every writer should do.
|
|
|
Post by comicsandwho on Aug 14, 2018 15:47:43 GMT -5
Engelhart asked to be excused from the JLA/JSA/Legion of Superheroes team-up, due to lack of familiarity with the latter two groups. Not enough time to read all their stories, I guess!
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Aug 17, 2018 9:02:27 GMT -5
2000 AD question:
Where do the Annuals fall in terms of chronology? The first Rogue Trooper collection has stories from both the 1983 and 1984 annuals at the end, while the last regular issue story is from #317, which came out more or less in the middle of 1983 according to comics.org. It isn't a huge deal but I'd prefer to read the stories from the Annuals approximately where they fell in the original printing timeline.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on Aug 17, 2018 9:58:59 GMT -5
2000 AD question: Where do the Annuals fall in terms of chronology? The first Rogue Trooper collection has stories from both the 1983 and 1984 annuals at the end, while the last regular issue story is from #317, which came out more or less in the middle of 1983 according to comics.org. It isn't a huge deal but I'd prefer to read the stories from the Annuals approximately where they fell in the original printing timeline. Annuals in the UK back then were always a Christmas thing (probably still are). So, while I can't tell you where an annual might fit in among a particular storyline, I can say that they are normally published in September or October of any given year.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Aug 17, 2018 14:50:34 GMT -5
2000 AD question: Where do the Annuals fall in terms of chronology? The first Rogue Trooper collection has stories from both the 1983 and 1984 annuals at the end, while the last regular issue story is from #317, which came out more or less in the middle of 1983 according to comics.org. It isn't a huge deal but I'd prefer to read the stories from the Annuals approximately where they fell in the original printing timeline. Annuals in the UK back then were always a Christmas thing (probably still are). So, while I can't tell you where an annual might fit in among a particular storyline, I can say that they are normally published in September or October of any given year.
Ah, thanks, that's enough for me to go on. Unlike the regular Rogue Trooper feature, the two RT stories in the Annuals weren't written by Gerry Finlay-Day but by another writer (some guy named Alan Moore - anyone ever heard of him?) so I imagine they were stand-alones, outside the regular storyline or at least just fitting into it in a general way. I'll save them for when I've progressed to the appropriate months in their respective years in the regular series.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 9,698
|
Post by Confessor on Aug 18, 2018 5:09:38 GMT -5
Annuals in the UK back then were always a Christmas thing (probably still are). So, while I can't tell you where an annual might fit in among a particular storyline, I can say that they are normally published in September or October of any given year. Ah, thanks, that's enough for me to go on. Unlike the regular Rogue Trooper feature, the two RT stories in the Annuals weren't written by Gerry Finlay-Day but by another writer (some guy named Alan Moore - anyone ever heard of him?) so I imagine they were stand-alones, outside the regular storyline or at least just fitting into it in a general way. I'll save them for when I've progressed to the appropriate months in their respective years in the regular series.
Something else I should've mentioned is that in the UK an annual would come out the year before the date appearing on its cover. So the 1983 annual would've been published in September 1982 and the 1984 annual would've come out in September 1983.
|
|
|
Post by String on Aug 18, 2018 11:51:02 GMT -5
I saw a comedy bit the other night based around the slow but steady disappearance of phone booths around NYC and it got me wondering.
In the comics, has Clark ever changed into Superman in a phone booth? If so, barring flashbacks, when was the last time he actually did so?
|
|