Gatsby77

I didn't mind Leia suddenly being very powerful in the force. Recall that she received Luke's telepathic message all the way back in Empire, and she flew through space in The Last Jedi. Showing her training with Luke was actually a high-point for me. Of *course* she would train to be a Jedi post-ROTJ, once she discovered she was Luke's sister and thus force-sensitive. I *hated* that Luke's ghost caught Rey's lightsaber and chided her about treating it with respect -- just moments after we saw Kylo Ren realize his true destiny and throw away his own lightsaber -- just as Luke had in both ROTJ and TLJ. I've said it before and I'll say it again - the saga is absolutely consistent in portraying that true Jedi mastery = realizing that you don't need a lightsaber after all. The most idiotic part of the film for me was the force healing-bring-back-from-the-dead power. Had that actually been a thing, Anakin could have resurrected Padme and Luke could have saved his father in ROTJ. Clearly made up for this film, and invalidates much of the first six films. Chewbacca should have stayed dead when the cruiser blew up. I *love* Chewie, but that would have given greater weight - and stakes - to the proceedings.

Yeah - my takeaway was they were biting off of Highlander -- with Sideous channeling all of the Sith and Rey channeling all of the Jedi. But in the end, there can be only one.

Just got back.

Umm...comparing Endgame, which amassed 100,000+ audience votes almost instantaneously vs. 1917 having <1,200 audience votes when it's been screening for nearly a month, is comparing apples and hand grenades. The former is suspicious; the latter's not.

Exactly - and a dozen of those reviews are dated Nov. 25-26. It's been screening in major cities throughout North America over the past month. And the dates on the various Twitter reviews reinforce this. Thus, no reason to doubt the audience review scores based on quantity alone.

This is incomplete. NYC crtitics' screening was Nov. 23. The Hollywood premiere / advance screening took place on Dec. 17. Toronto held an advance screening on Dec. 18. It's been around.

I can believe that 1,200 people have seen this film already and voted on it - through sneak previews and the like. It's likely also been released already on military bases worldwide.

Yeah - and the reason Cinemascore's considered the most accurate is that it actually guarantees voters actually saw the film - they're polled as they leave.

Yesterday afternoon, "Rank the Star Wars films" was briefly trending on Twitter. It's worth looking up, but in general Empire was considered the best (duh); Attack of the Clones was considered the worst (barely beating out The Phantom Menace); and The Last Jedi was generally in the top half. Also, folks tended to see Return of the Jedi as merely average - which I could agree with. Here's one such ranking (with which I largely agree): Empire Strikes Back A New Hope The Last Jedi The Force Awakens Return of the Jedi - Rogue One Revenge of the Sith The Phantom Menace - Solo Attack of the Clones

I watched this last night. Can't believe it cost $150 million.

That's a good joke, but don't forget that Luke was also a whiny little person_without_enough_empathy throughout *all* of Star Wars and half of Empire. His arc and portrayal in TLJ is entirely consistent with that of Yoda's and Obi-Wans -- that true Jedi masters tire of war, understand it's not the answer, and (tend to) retreat to the shadows in their later years. From Yoda's "Wars not make one great" introduction and initial reluctance to train him, through to Ben's world-weariness. And Luke's *long* understood that violence is simply the way to the Dark Side. Hence why he throws away his lightsaber during the final battle with Vader in Jedi - just as he again throws it away when presented it by Rey. His portrayal in the TLJ -- as a reluctant, reclusive pacifist -- is *entirely* consistent with how we saw elder Jedis portrayed in the OT.

Great - that's what we need. The amazing screenwriter behind BvS and Justice League.

That's the thing. Solo was just mediocre; servicable - like Dr. Strange or Ant-Man. Which is fine - if we're okay with some Star Wars films being minor one-offs and accepting that not every film needs to be a $1 bn.+ blockbuster event. My issues with it were two-fold: Over-explaining *every* part of the events that played into forming the Solo we met in A New Hope. A previous poster mentioned this - that by the end of Solo he was basically already the Harrison Ford version, with no further growth possible in the intervening years. I felt the same way with X-Men: First Class -- which took the cheap way out by paralyzing Xavier at the end - instantly relegating him to the wheelchair in his 20s. Rather than saving that critical event for the second or third chapter. It prematurely (and needlessly) stunted his character growth. Honestly, plot-wise, Firefly did it better -- and fifteen years ago, on a TV budget. Think I'm joking? Solo's plot was basically "The Train Job" and "Trash" combined, with Qi'ra. standing in for Saffron. Again - it wasn't *bad* but it was a missed opportunity, because it could have been so much more.

How is this any different from CVA? Whatevs. I'm old enough to remember the first Overstreets Grading Guide, where bindery defects / miscuts knocked a book down to VF.

Ghost can be seen at ~1:01 of the final trailer.

Did you see that Ghost is clearly visible in the first trailer for this film as well? To the upper right of the Millennium Falcon in the Rebel armada scene.

8:00 am Eastern, and Rotten Tomatoes is currently holding at 60% positive. That's better than The Phantom Menace but worse than Attack of the Clones. I've got a bad feeling about this...

I can't speak for Image books because I don't recall buying any from newsstands, but my local newsstand in suburban Philly received books three weeks after they were released to comic book shops. This knowledge came in handy for quick comic shop sell-outs like ASM 361 and Man of Steel 18. Also, I know that locally Youngblood # 1 sold out far faster than Spawn 1 did. Spawn # 1 was still available for reorder for several months in my area, whereas Spawn # 2 sold out quickly and thus became a $4 book. In contrast, despite Youngblood # 1's being "limit 5 per customer" from day-of-release, it quickly rose to $7.50 within two months...

While I'm disappointed that this trailer seems to confirm Kazanski's death, this is my most anticipated film of 2020. Really hoping they go the Battlestar Galactica / Space Cowboys route with this - where Chinese or Russian hacking grounds our fleet of drones & F-35s and Maverick is thus called back to combat duty because he's one of the few still able to fly an old-school F-14.

4 days, y'all! I'm getting excited!

You're kidding, right? For the 1980s alone Batman 428 isn't in the same league as either The Dark Knight Returns # 1 or The Killing Joke. I'd think Dark Knight Returns speaks for itself in its impact not only on the popular conception of Batman but on the comics medium as a whole. But The Killing Joke is a perfect example of what Batman 428 could have been, but was not. Bolland art, baseline story, modern Joker origin, and grim/gritty adult story aside, the primary difference is: DC stuck with the key event of The Killing Joke. Barbara Gordon - Batgirl - is paralyzed. And - unlike Robin, who reappears less than three years later - the story and ramifications or Barbara Gordon's paralysis play out over the next 20+ years. Yeah - it eventually got retconned out in New 52, but that doesn't negate that the ramifications of that storyline were felt for decades - particularly with Oracle's presence in Birds of Prey. Meanwhile, both Jason Todd's first appearance and his death are about as important today as Kyle Radnor's first appearance as the new Green Lantern. Fun books, but not nearly as promising or important as they once were.

This is false. American Entertainment (or the like) did advertise it -- and Predator/Magnus Platinum, among others as an incentive variant direct to customers ("Buy 50, or 100 copies, get 1 special copy"). Example: the ad on the back cover of Spawn # 1 has a solicitation for "buy 100 copies of WildCats # 1, get one gold." This may not have been how they were allocated at the distribution level, but it certainly was how they were marketed to collectors on the wholesale sub-distribution level. So from a practical perspective, there *at least* enough to go around for 1:100.

Long Holiday play period may be irrevelant with Taylor Swift's Cats dropping next week.

Hmm... lots to unpack here. Some thoughts: It makes perfect sense that ASM 298-300 and contemporary X-Men issues have higher print runs than Batman at the time. Batman print runs were largely dead in the 1980s until Batmania hit -- and the first trailer for the Batman film didn't hit until what? June 1989? Still, based on those print runs, it's fair to say Batman 428 had a print run roughly equivalent to that of New Mutants 87, no? And Cap City was what, 40% of the market at the time? Less? That's a fairly large print run relative to a) today's; and b) (more importantly) today's collector base. Two big distinctions, though: 1) The equivalent books you mention are first appearances, with today's values driven largely by media/movie appearances. Bats 428 isn't. It's the temporary death of character in a storyline that has no more relevance today than a fanciful What If? storyline. Because Robin's alive and active in DC comics today and has been for >25 years. And Jason Todd's alive and active in DC comics today, and has been for >15 years. 2) Demographics continue to mitigate against the book. In another thread you mused about the diminished demand for story-based keys (I think re. Silver Surfer 34-35?). That holds true here as well. Bats 428 is now 31 years old. So if you bought it off the stands, and/or participated in the 1-900 campaign, you're (at least!) pushing 40 years old. People under 40 have no emotional attachment to the book the way older folks may. They weren't buying the story off the stands, and likely weren't active a year later, when folks like you and I started collecting and it was an aspirational $35 wall book at <6 months old. *That's* why I loved the book. The first time I entered a comic shop, the wall books of my dreams were Batman 426 ($45), 427 ($35), 438 ($35), and 429 ($12). The generation of comic book collectors below us (those who grew up on Walking Dead 1 as their Batman 428 or Harbinger 1 and the Nolan films rather than the Keaton ones) don't have that attachment. But - putting aside that it's not particularly rare, or a first appearance, or likely to be the basis of a Hollywood movie anytime soon... The book is well along on its journey to mere footnote because both of its key events have been long-since been nullified by retcon. That's huge. It's a good story, with good art, that was a super-key for a brief period of time. But that time's passed, and will continue to diminish.

No. You've been wrong about the long-term potential, rarity, and pricing on this book for ~12 years now. Since our discussions over on Whet's Lyria board, when you said I'd never be able to find a 9.8 for $150 (I've bought three at that price, and will note the last GPA sale notched $180). It was highly collected *at the time* and also skyrocketed instantly, which meant more copies were saved from the jump, tough black cover or not. There are still *far* more copies out there remaining to be slabbed, if people cared to do so. But it also ceased to be relevant the moment Tim Drake became Robin. See also Harbinger 1 in 9.8, where you once went to war with me over my prediction that we'd see a solid 250 9.8s of that book the day the movie was released. There are now more than 400, with any potential film still at least 3 years away.