|
The Spidey rights were also an extra-special clusterfuck because of the Carolco bankruptcy or whatever. I still have no idea how all that worked out, or how Sony ended up being the one holding the prize at the end.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 13:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:09 |
|
|
I think Columbia ended up with them, then Sony acquired Columbia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 14:26
|
|
|
Gavok posted:The movie's up on YouTube twice, so you can check it out there. Official release? Not so much, though they are releasing a documentary on it soon. That @gavin4l guy sucks, he makes bad wrestling puns and likes stupid poo poo. @DickeyeSmash is where it's at.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:Is it even possible to see that movie? I know the cast made media/con appearances but it was never actually released. There's a bunch of BSSers on Twitter. Mine is @EndlessMike (like anyone would want to follow me)
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
My twitter name is the same as my SA name.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 14:59
|
|
|
Ooooh, we're sharing twitters? I'm @rallyv I talk some comics, a lot of bullshit too but with con season coming up, I'll have at least an influx of comicy tweets during Denver Comic Con and SDCC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:That's silly. Skrulls first appeared in the Fantastic Four's second ever issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:It's about association more than anything else which is why we ended up with the weird situation involving Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. Kingpin is also strictly under the Daredevil franchise despite originally being a Spidey villain. Which I can understand, but I always got the impression the Skrulls were mostly still associated with the Fantastic Four. The only Avengers thing I can think they are tied into is the Kree-Skull War, and maybe Secret Invasion if you count that as primarily Avengers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
WickedHate posted:Which I can understand, but I always got the impression the Skrulls were mostly still associated with the Fantastic Four. The only Avengers thing I can think they are tied into is the Kree-Skull War, and maybe Secret Invasion if you count that as primarily Avengers. I think its a greater marvel thing. That they are not defined by just one franchise, so the race is still owned by Marvel. The Skrull Beatles should be in the next movie. bobkatt013 fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Apr 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:My twitter name is the same as my SA name. Same here, @hakkesshu, though I don't tweet a lot (which might be a good thing I dunno!)
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
I'd share my twitter but not only do I almost never tweet but I don't tweet about comics when I do. The last time I tried being at all active was because Debbie Roch on nagged me into it when I met her at a horror con, after me laughingly mentioning we both still followed each other in spite of my sparse habits.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
I am @Mancallediam (I think) but I hardly ever tweet because I still haven't figured it out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
I don't really tweet about comics much either, so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
I'm @Zenbomb, though I post here more often than I even look at Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
Edge & Christian posted:Ron Perelman (through his holding company MacAndrews and Forbes) bought Marvel in 1989. I know who it actually is but every time I see this I always think that this guy  bought Marvel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Hey guys comixology's doing a sale on Invinciblhahahaha no but really though, don't buy that lovely comic. On a serious note, is Superior Carnage any good? Bearing in mind that I'm almost a Gavok-level fanboy for '90s symbiote poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
I'm @HendrixTrog
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
I'm @TheRealCapnAndy if sporadic tweets that are almost always stupid thoughts that I feel like shouting into the void are your sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Why anyone would feel the need to go look at my (only rarely comics-related) Twitter is beyond me, but since that seems to be the thing we're doing now, it's @dcb42.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Hey guys comixology's doing a sale on Invinciblhahahaha no but really though, don't buy that lovely comic. It's not bad. The first four issues are awesome, but the last issue is a huge letdown in a lot of ways.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
I've been thinking about dropping a lot of my big-two books or moving them to digital but it just occurred to me that for example it's $4 for Batman #30 at the comic shop, or $4 for it on ComiXology. Is this pricing just down to the whole "digital is a threat to retail, so lets succumb to retail's demands" thing or is there another reason? I mean obviously people need to get paid but surely it cost more to make a physical book than it does to distribute it digitally? I'd move so much more to digital if it were a little cheaper. Edit: I guess operating costs for Comixology come into play here. Sundowner fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
I know someone brought this up before, but goddamn the Life and Times of Scrooge album is amazing. It's up on Spotify now. Everyone should really give it a listen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
Sundowner posted:I've been thinking about dropping a lot of my big-two books or moving them to digital but it just occurred to me that for example it's $4 for Batman #30 at the comic shop, or $4 for it on ComiXology. Is this pricing just down to the whole "digital is a threat to retail, so lets succumb to retail's demands" thing or is there another reason? I mean obviously people need to get paid but surely it cost more to make a physical book than it does to distribute it digitally? I think the printing costs are a pretty small share of the costs of a comic. Most of it is just paying the writer, artist, etc E: actually, the store and diamond take like half the price. I'm sure comixology could come down a bit, I don't think being 50 cents cheaper is enough to sway many people StumblyWumbly fucked around with this message at 15:21 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Metal Loaf posted:Jim Shooter almost bought Marvel, but Perelman's bid ended up being slightly higher. I wonder what things would look like now if it had gone the other way. Shooter fires Todd McFarlane off Amazing Spider-Man for not understanding storytelling fundamentals and replaces him with Don Perlin. Erik Larsen and Rob Liefeld never get hired by Marvel and continue working on C-list DC titles. Image Comics never happens as a result. Shooter doesn't let Marvel get into the variant cover gimmick, so the speculator boom never happens and the comics market doesn't implode in 1993. Marvel never abandons their core demographic of children ages 8-13 and continues to publish a lot of licensed comics, eventually picking up the licenses to Pokemon and Sailor Moon. The manga boom never happens as Marvel produces their own adaptations of the most popular anime properties instead of translating the Japanese originals. In the present day, comics are still mainly a mass market medium aimed at children, but with more comics shops still open thanks to the market not tanking in 1993, creator-owned books aimed at adults still flourish on the margins. Shooter eventually sells out to Disney and retires a wealthy man. The first Avengers movie comes out with a storyline based on the Korvac saga instead of The Ultimates and bombs at the box office.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
Man, digital sales are impossible to predict. Issue 1 of the comic adaptation of the first Captain America movie has been at the top slot on Comixology all day, and I don't think it's even on sale. Who the gently caress is buying that thing?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
StumblyWumbly posted:I think the printing costs are a pretty small share of the costs of a comic. Most of it is just paying the writer, artist, etc I don't speak for everyone but honestly that might be enough for me to consider it and a dollar less would seal the deal but that's maybe asking too much. Right now digital is hand in hand with what I already pay for a physical book, 50c less is still cheaper and thereby saving money overall when I start to add up the amount of books I'd be getting digitally if they were cheaper. 10 books at $30 becomes 10 books at $25, which leaves room for one or two more books haha.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
Sundowner posted:I've been thinking about dropping a lot of my big-two books or moving them to digital but it just occurred to me that for example it's $4 for Batman #30 at the comic shop, or $4 for it on ComiXology. Is this pricing just down to the whole "digital is a threat to retail, so lets succumb to retail's demands" thing or is there another reason? I mean obviously people need to get paid but surely it cost more to make a physical book than it does to distribute it digitally? Digital pricing directly controlled by content producers seems to be set by "People pay that much in stores, so we can charge the same amount and keep it all for us!" (or at least a bigger slice). Of course this overlooks that MSRP is regularly undercut which makes digital purchases often more expensive than buying the physical media.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
That's a little frustrating. I'd like to move some things to digital. It means being able to catch up on older stuff that's a lot more pricey to pick up physically, like anything between #1-12 of any popular Image series. I much prefer reading paper over pixels but I don't want my physical collection to be just made up of throwaway series that I only liked somewhat at the time. Sure I can give them away or sell them but I could just nip it in the bud and only buy things that I really like and keep my collection boiled down to only the best stuff and still get to read those throwaway/half-decent-not-worth-owning series digitally.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
The publishers have willingly tied physical distribution around their necks like an anchor and it's keeping digital from being what it could be. Basic poo poo like being cheaper than physical media and separate issues merging themselves into a TPB when a story arc is completed is still missing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:The publishers have willingly tied physical distribution around their necks like an anchor and it's keeping digital from being what it could be. Basic poo poo like being cheaper than physical media and separate issues merging themselves into a TPB when a story arc is completed is still missing. This would be amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
Or releasing 'digital TPBs' of events that collect all the issues into one readable line. I was reading Infinity on Marvel Unlimited and the comics have an actual flowchart of all the tie ins, but there's no way to just go "oh yes, I'd like to read what's going on over there"; you have to back out of the entire series, load a new one and select the right issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:Or releasing 'digital TPBs' of events that collect all the issues into one readable line. I was reading Infinity on Marvel Unlimited and the comics have an actual flowchart of all the tie ins, but there's no way to just go "oh yes, I'd like to read what's going on over there"; you have to back out of the entire series, load a new one and select the right issue. I totally understand why and how this would be awesome, but I can't help but feel guilty about the guys who have the actual physical real-world comic shops. Maybe it's wrong to feel guilty about taking business away from them, but I do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
Len posted:This would be amazing. But we can't have internal combustion engines making the poor horse-and-buggies look slow, so it's not done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
So it's a good idea to be a huge rear end in a top hat when you're trying to sell you comics to a local shop. Dude came in, was a huge prick, like a Hrdcore Pawn customer come to life. He had a milkcrate of comics and he was pretty much demanding cash. When I told him we did credit only he kind of half threatened me, told me to stop being a bitch, etc etc. I was just gonna call security when I flipped past something. After confirming what it was I offered him $50 out of my own pocket. He tried for more, I lowered my offer and he accepted. I then process and turned my new purchase into the store for credit, the way our system works I cashed in $41.75 in store credit but I kept two books. Which books you say?  Those sell for $75-100 each.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
That sure is a cool story about being the bigger rear end in a top hat in a situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Wait, were there other books that you cashed in for the store credit or did you take store credit and also keep the books?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:That sure is a cool story about being the bigger rear end in a top hat in a situation. Buying something for less than it's worth makes you a bigger rear end in a top hat than threatening a clerk?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Sarchasm posted:Buying something for less than it's worth makes you a bigger rear end in a top hat than threatening a clerk? Buying something for less than its worth, processing it for credit for credit for yourself, pocketing a couple choice things to sell for even MORE than you paid for it, and then posting about it on the internet to sound like an awesome dude with cool stories does, yeah. The response to the guy being a dick is to tell him to piss off, not to return fire by being a dick back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Buying something for less than its worth, processing it for credit for credit for yourself, pocketing a couple choice things to sell for even MORE than you paid for it, and then posting about it on the internet to sound like an awesome dude with cool stories does, yeah. He wasn't a dick, just a competent comic shop guy and smart collector.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:09 |
|
|
prefect posted:I totally understand why and how this would be awesome, but I can't help but feel guilty about the guys who have the actual physical real-world comic shops. Maybe it's wrong to feel guilty about taking business away from them, but I do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:40
|
|