Personally, I love finding low grade books. Not anything that's like completely trashed, but some wear to the edges, some chipping, some fading, maybe a crease or two, I'll take those all day long AND find a place to display them with pride. Last spring I found an Amazing Spider-Man #40 in a bargain bin at a swap meet for $5. It was a beater but I couldn't have been happier with my find. Any 60's Marvel I'd take in just about any condition.
Here ya go. Bonus two inches.
Unfortunately it's about 1.5" taller than my display case can accomodate. If it had knee articulation, I could make it work. Alas.
I'm using the 8" retro figure right now. It leaves a lot to be desired.
You don't want to go with the Toybiz Sentinel, huh? 🙂
Unfortunately it's about 1.5" taller than my display case can accomodate.
That's where I am if the 27" Galactus is real, I could make a space for 26", but don't wanna hunch him at all. Galactus doesn't hunch. But eh, probably just an excuse to not spend the money really.
@enigmaticclarity Wait dude. You have FF 1-100 in high grade? What the what!My goal was everything in 9.0 or better (on a scale from 1 to 10) just to make the hunt of collecting last a LOT longer, and I got over 95% of the way there on my favorite two titles FF and ASM. Loved every minute of the hunting; it's a ton of fun. Haven't bough a comic since around 2010, but I'll get back to it eventually.
I hope some of these are insured! I've considered buying first appearance comics of my favorite characters. Still on the fence on whether to go ahead with it. I don't own anything slabbed/graded though.
I keep about 100 in big safety deposit boxes at my bank; I've had those for going on twenty years. I've got a few hundred slabs, but I bought them that way throughout the aughts just to minimize risk of overgrading and especially undisclosed restoration. The biggest reason I didn't have kids until I was 44 is I was too busy in my late twenties and thirties buying the comics I wanted but couldn't afford as a kid. I suppose that's an extreme form of arrested development; no regrets here. I loved doing it then and still love that hobby now, and this is certainly the right place to commiserate with others also afflicted with arrested development. 😎
First appearance issues of popular characters have been a fantastic investment for my entire life and should remain so for long after. I've long thought non-keys would decrease in value once the generations who bought comics off the stands like myself start dying off, but the keys you're referring to should remain in demand for another 50 to 100 years or more. I've tracked financial performance of everything I've bought the entire time, and my comics have consistently outperformed my 401k and the keys do better than the stock market. The historical APY of 401k accounts is about 7.5% and the stock market is around 10%, and the APY of those runs I described above was around 9% last time I checked a few years ago. I haven't checked the keys only in quite a while, but the annual yield of those for me has been close to double that of the runs as a whole so somewhere around 15%. I'm 54 now and will likely retire soon, and my plan for decades has been to play the market on keys in retirement. Now that I'm thinking about this in depth again because of the movie maybe the time is now.... 🤔
I wish action figures were like comics, but new releases almost always diminish the value of older ones. Ah well, it's still fun and that's why we do it.
I didn't have room for 19 inches of Venom, I certainly don't have room for 30 inches of Galactus, as tempting as it may be. I wish there was a way to add/remove parts to make it as tall or small as you want, especially for a character like Galactus that, in theory, grows larger the more he consumes.
I know from the supposed leaks, it won't be a large role, but not seeing
I am sorry, I forget who suggested it initially, but I still love the idea of a Galactus head 'breaking through the wall', like they've done for some Star Wars helmets, or Cap's shield, etc. That's all I'd need and it would definitely convey his size better than a more truncated 27" guy.
I'd be happy enough with that too, or even a quasi-playset or diorama from the waist up. Throw in some basic articulation if you want, maybe put some rubble or something around his waist to make a base for figures to stand on, and call it a day. He's not a character that I'd need to strike many dynamic poses anyway, it's not like he's out there breakdancing in space.
Speaking of Galactus, what's this shit on Wikipedia?
Formerly a mortal man, he is a cosmic entity who consumes planets to sustain his life force, and serves a functional role in the upkeep of the primary Marvel continuity.
Speaking of Galactus, what's this shit on Wikipedia?
Formerly a mortal man, he is a cosmic entity who consumes planets to sustain his life force, and serves a functional role in the upkeep of the primary Marvel continuity.
I'm going to presume this is a reference to his position as one of the three pillars of the Marvel Universe alongside Death and Eternity, and his role in the consumption of life-energy which, at the entropic death of the universe, will allow him to act as a new Big Bang and give birth to the next universe after the 616.
Speaking of Galactus, what's this shit on Wikipedia?
Formerly a mortal man, he is a cosmic entity who consumes planets to sustain his life force, and serves a functional role in the upkeep of the primary Marvel continuity.
I'm going to presume this is a reference to his position as one of the three pillars of the Marvel Universe alongside Death and Eternity, and his role in the consumption of life-energy which, at the entropic death of the universe, will allow him to act as a new Big Bang and give birth to the next universe after the 616.
That must be something added to him here in the 21C; but I dunno that I like making him 'Shiva'. The way I recall his origin being retold in the Byrne run is that Galactus isn't a naturally-occuring 'living force of the universe' but was a deliberate addition by the Eternity of the 615 universe (what else are we to call the universe before the 616?) when it was pre-emptively killed. Then the EarthX series explained the 615 was culled by the trans-universal Celestials and that Galactus was eating their planet-born children as 615 Eternity's revenge against them. That stuff works so much better to explain *all* of these cosmic characters as well as explaining the reason why we mortals, human and alien, get powers in the first place (the Celestials modify the dominate lifeforms to act as anti-bodies against Galactus). Amongst the raft of issues with the Eternals movie was my dislike of them going with their dumbass canon instead of EX's canon.
Gracias, brother.
Speaking of Galactus, what's this shit on Wikipedia?
Formerly a mortal man, he is a cosmic entity who consumes planets to sustain his life force, and serves a functional role in the upkeep of the primary Marvel continuity.
I'm going to presume this is a reference to his position as one of the three pillars of the Marvel Universe alongside Death and Eternity, and his role in the consumption of life-energy which, at the entropic death of the universe, will allow him to act as a new Big Bang and give birth to the next universe after the 616.
That must be something added to him here in the 21C; but I dunno that I like making him 'Shiva'. The way I recall his origin being retold in the Byrne run is that Galactus isn't a naturally-occuring 'living force of the universe' but was a deliberate addition by the Eternity of the 615 universe (what else are we to call the universe before the 616?) when it was pre-emptively killed. Then the EarthX series explained the 615 was culled by the trans-universal Celestials and that Galactus was eating their planet-born children as 615 Eternity's revenge against them. That stuff works so much better to explain *all* of these cosmic characters as well as explaining the reason why we mortals, human and alien, get powers in the first place (the Celestials modify the dominate lifeforms to act as anti-bodies against Galactus). Amongst the raft of issues with the Eternals movie was my dislike of them going with their dumbass canon instead of EX's canon.
Gracias, brother.
We may be interpreting the same thing differently. My interpretation of the Byrne origin/explanation was that he was one of the fundamental forces of the rebirthed universe, and is therefore essential to its survival and proper functioning. I don't think I picked up on him being a last-minute addition by the 615 (love that) Eternity into the burgeoning 616. But that's definitely interesting to think about.
Like you, any additions made to him here in the 21C are unknown to me and I ignore them anyway. I stopped reading new Marvel stuff around the time the first AvX event happened, and stopped reading new DC stuff when they did the Nu52. The only ongoing Marvel series I've continued to read straight through has been Thor, and that's always in trades.
I don't think I picked up on him being a last-minute addition by the 615 (love that) Eternity into the burgeoning 616. But that's definitely interesting to think about.
It's been a long time for me and probably you so lots of it is no doubt fuzzy; but I think it was explained (or retconned) later that the voice in the 3rd box of the 2nd panel is supposed to be the dying 615 Eternity:
And because 616 Eternity is the 'same' as the 616 Eternity that explains why Galactus calls him Father here:
Marvel characters and their daddy issues.
Latest Post: Marvel Cinematic Universe News & Discussion Our newest member: Count von Curdles Recent Posts Unread Posts
