Welcome Guest Active Topics
CCL Messageboard » Comic Book Talk » Comic Books » Is a characters first cameo app. His first app.

Is a characters first cameo app. His first app.

chrisnwi
Monday, October 28, 2013 11:42:04 PM
Rank: Supporting Cast
Groups: Member
Location: Indiana
Joined: 11/3/2010 | Posts: 12 | Points: 36
My topic today is a cameo the first true first appearance of a character. I recently got Incredible Hulk #180 which is the first cameo app. of wolverine, now question is to all you people out there does that count as his first app. Because as we all now #181 is his first full app. So hence it's worth more now here is the debate I have fantastic four #48 the first app. of silver surfer and the first cameo of galactis now that is listed as his first app. So the question remains what is the true first app. of wolverine. So your post I want to here what you people think.
Chris Nwii
comicscastle
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:04:58 AM
Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Member
Location: New Jersey
Joined: 1/30/2008 | Posts: 15,554 | Points: 436,509
1st is 1st, but as in the case of Wolverine or Venom sometimes 2nd or 3rd is worth more.


The following stores are all stores that I've dealt with or have become friends with through the forums and I highly recommend them all.
Comics Castle-AKA Pat McCauslin
Alpha Comics--ComicVortex--Comic Cellar--Hall of Heroes--Swifty's Olde Tyme Comic Shoppe


BruceReville
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:26:12 AM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/21/2010 | Posts: 1,086 | Points: 3,258
Jimmy Olsen 134 is credited with Darksied's first appearance and all you see is this:



1 panel on a TV monitor - his first Full Appearance is Forever People 1 after another 2 panel cameo in Jimmy Olsen 135
Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Collect Again --- VARIANTS STRIKE!



Thundercron
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:48:05 AM
Rank: Celestial
Groups: Member, Super Seller
Location: Redland, Oregon
Joined: 9/14/2008 | Posts: 3,363 | Points: 39,534
Shop at My Store
It's odd how some collectors go crazy over the one-panel cameos for some characters (Wolverine, Darkseid, etc), but not for others. Cable first appeared in one panel at the end of New Mutants #86, for example, but nobody cares. Gambit first appeared in Uncanny X-Men Annual #14, just a few weeks before Uncanny X-Men #266 hit the stands. I believe he was in the background for a few panels and didn't even say anything, and although the book guides out higher than other annuals, it's actually pretty common and can be had for little money.

So it doesn't make sense.
chrisnwi
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:30:52 AM
Rank: Supporting Cast
Groups: Member
Location: Indiana
Joined: 11/3/2010 | Posts: 12 | Points: 36
I agree it seeing as I have all of those books (except for the darkseid i have that in trade) it does not make very much sense at all because I did pick up new mutants #86 and uncanny x-men annual 14 and amazing spiderman 298 & 299 for cheaper than new mutants 87, uncanny x-men 266 and much cheaper than what I paid for amazing spider man 300
Chris Nwii
teh_longinator
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 7:08:28 AM
Rank: Large Noggin
Groups: Member
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Joined: 9/1/2012 | Posts: 318 | Points: 954
chrisnwi wrote:
I agree it seeing as I have all of those books (except for the darkseid i have that in trade) it does not make very much sense at all because I did pick up new mutants #86 and uncanny x-men annual 14 and amazing spiderman 298 & 299 for cheaper than new mutants 87, uncanny x-men 266 and much cheaper than what I paid for amazing spider man 300


I picked up New Mutants #86, and Uncanny X-Men #266 out of the dollar bins at the last convention I went to. Each would only score maybe a VF / 8.0, but... it's a biiiggg difference between that and what the next issue up is.

I, for one, count cameos as the first appearance. They appeared there first... Why do they need to be in the whole issue before someone puts value on it.
Cave Comics
I buy comics so that I can sell comics, to buy more comics.

Check out my eBay listings at http://www.ebay.ca/sch/tehlonginator/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=
Reggie
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:19:42 AM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member, Subscriber
Location: Florida
Joined: 3/8/2007 | Posts: 2,066 | Points: 33,844
teh_longinator wrote:
chrisnwi wrote:
I agree it seeing as I have all of those books (except for the darkseid i have that in trade) it does not make very much sense at all because I did pick up new mutants #86 and uncanny x-men annual 14 and amazing spiderman 298 & 299 for cheaper than new mutants 87, uncanny x-men 266 and much cheaper than what I paid for amazing spider man 300


I picked up New Mutants #86, and Uncanny X-Men #266 out of the dollar bins at the last convention I went to. Each would only score maybe a VF / 8.0, but... it's a biiiggg difference between that and what the next issue up is.

I, for one, count cameos as the first appearance. They appeared there first... Why do they need to be in the whole issue before someone puts value on it.


I agree. Even if it is just one panel. It's the first time anyone has laid eyes on that character in a comic book.....ever. Therefore it is that character's first appearance.

BruceReville
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 11:48:01 AM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/21/2010 | Posts: 1,086 | Points: 3,258
Reggie wrote:
teh_longinator wrote:
chrisnwi wrote:
I agree it seeing as I have all of those books (except for the darkseid i have that in trade) it does not make very much sense at all because I did pick up new mutants #86 and uncanny x-men annual 14 and amazing spiderman 298 & 299 for cheaper than new mutants 87, uncanny x-men 266 and much cheaper than what I paid for amazing spider man 300


I picked up New Mutants #86, and Uncanny X-Men #266 out of the dollar bins at the last convention I went to. Each would only score maybe a VF / 8.0, but... it's a biiiggg difference between that and what the next issue up is.

I, for one, count cameos as the first appearance. They appeared there first... Why do they need to be in the whole issue before someone puts value on it.


I agree. Even if it is just one panel. It's the first time anyone has laid eyes on that character in a comic book.....ever. Therefore it is that character's first appearance.



So....what about retcon first appearances - there was a retcon that places Cable as a baby in Uncanny X-Men 201 4 years earlier - it is even considered canon and confirmed canon in Issue 6 of Cable's first series.

LINK
Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Collect Again --- VARIANTS STRIKE!



BurningDoom
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:03:42 PM
Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Beta, Guru, Member, Moderator, Movies Host, TV Host
Location: Redding, CA
Joined: 1/5/2007 | Posts: 12,826 | Points: 61,211
BruceReville wrote:
Reggie wrote:
teh_longinator wrote:
chrisnwi wrote:
I agree it seeing as I have all of those books (except for the darkseid i have that in trade) it does not make very much sense at all because I did pick up new mutants #86 and uncanny x-men annual 14 and amazing spiderman 298 & 299 for cheaper than new mutants 87, uncanny x-men 266 and much cheaper than what I paid for amazing spider man 300


I picked up New Mutants #86, and Uncanny X-Men #266 out of the dollar bins at the last convention I went to. Each would only score maybe a VF / 8.0, but... it's a biiiggg difference between that and what the next issue up is.

I, for one, count cameos as the first appearance. They appeared there first... Why do they need to be in the whole issue before someone puts value on it.


I agree. Even if it is just one panel. It's the first time anyone has laid eyes on that character in a comic book.....ever. Therefore it is that character's first appearance.



So....what about retcon first appearances - there was a retcon that places Cable as a baby in Uncanny X-Men 201 4 years earlier - it is even considered canon and confirmed canon in Issue 6 of Cable's first series.

LINK


In cases like that, you usually see notes on a character's Wiki profile or on the back of a trading card like:

First Appearance (as a baby): Uncanny X-Men #201
First Apperance (as adult Cable): New Mutants #87
Make sure that you read and understand the forum rules here
jhorsley3
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:45:57 PM
Rank: Metahuman
Groups: Member
Location: Seattle, WA
Joined: 6/20/2007 | Posts: 194 | Points: 665
First appearance is first appearance. I get annoyed with 1st brief app and 1st full app. X-Fact 5 and 6 for example. Hulk 180 and 181.

We have a similar situation with the DC New 52 and Catwoman #23, 1st Joker's Daughter. She's only on the last page. Her first full would be Detective 23.2...or really Batman Family #8 from the 70's. It's confusing.
Like our facebook page: Th3 Comics
Thundercron
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 12:56:24 PM
Rank: Celestial
Groups: Member, Super Seller
Location: Redland, Oregon
Joined: 9/14/2008 | Posts: 3,363 | Points: 39,534
Shop at My Store
How about Superior Spider-Man? A lot of people cite Daredevil #21 as his first appearance, since it came out a few weeks before Amazing #700. What people don't ever mention, though, is that Amazing #698 should be his first appearance, since that was the first issue with Doc Ock parading around as Spidey while Pete was in Ock's body.
jhorsley3
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:11:17 PM
Rank: Metahuman
Groups: Member
Location: Seattle, WA
Joined: 6/20/2007 | Posts: 194 | Points: 665
Good point. It's interesting. I've often wondered why we care more for a full appearance of some over others.

Superman Man of Steel 17, first cameo Doomsday sells for more on eBay that Superman Man of Steel 18, the first full appearance.
Like our facebook page: Th3 Comics
SwiftMann
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:50:27 PM
Rank: Beyonder
Groups: Approver, CCL Feature Crew, CR-Guidelines, Member, Super Seller
Location: PA
Joined: 4/19/2007 | Posts: 12,712 | Points: 2,290,533
Shop at My Store
I'm okay with distinguishing between a partial view/shadow view being considered a cameo appearance and the next being the first "full" appearance, but I don't get how even a full view, speaking role could ever be considered cameo. Even if it's just the last panel of an issue.
BruceReville
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:20:41 PM
Rank: Herald of Galactus
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/21/2010 | Posts: 1,086 | Points: 3,258
Ok how about this - Pep Comics 22 (12/41) is sighted as the first appearance of Archie Andrews - yet he also appeared in Jackpot Comics 4 Winter Special (released 11/41 or 12/41 - there is a debate going on about it in the Archie Collector World) - basically Jackpot Comics 4 came out either a full month before Pep 22 or at the same time - and Archie is on the cover of Jackpot Comics 4 with Archie as a new feature and Pep Comics 22 cover doesn't even mention him at all. So which is correct?

LINK
Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Collect Again --- VARIANTS STRIKE!



teh_longinator
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 8:53:26 PM
Rank: Large Noggin
Groups: Member
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Joined: 9/1/2012 | Posts: 318 | Points: 954
I think the "cameo/full" thing was just started by some shady comic dealer who had one, but not the other, and tried to profit.

Like, my LCS is selling Uncanny X-Men #221 for $25, because "Mr. Sinister MIGHT be linked to Wolverine's origin"

Anyone can raise the price of a book 5x it's normal price because of hype.
Cave Comics
I buy comics so that I can sell comics, to buy more comics.

Check out my eBay listings at http://www.ebay.ca/sch/tehlonginator/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=
chrisnwi
Wednesday, October 30, 2013 2:18:24 AM
Rank: Supporting Cast
Groups: Member
Location: Indiana
Joined: 11/3/2010 | Posts: 12 | Points: 36
Wow I found uncanny x-men #221 in the dollor bin at a flea market now it going for $25 bucks here's another one for you about 12 years ago I found Incredible Hulk #181 at a comic shop for $200 bux I talked the owner down to $100 and I got #180 for 20 bux try doing that now with all the x-men and wolverine movies. I was lucky I found #180 for $50 and if I want #181 again the lowest I can find it at is $500
Chris Nwii
rook68
Wednesday, October 30, 2013 3:14:44 PM
Rank: Watcher
Groups: Member
Location: San Diego, CA
Joined: 11/27/2009 | Posts: 609 | Points: 1,827
Yeah, reading the whole thread. I never understood the first cameo appearance and first full appearance thing when it comes to value. First appearance should be first appearance. But what do I know. I own Hulk #180 not #181. Damn it all.
Just for kicks, I think the first cameo appearance of Crossbones was in a couple of panels in Cap #159. If I remember correctly. You see his buff silohette on a branch in a tree. How he didn't break the branch just from his sheer size. I am not sure, lol. And in #160, you see him in all his badarse glory; guns blazing. The thread reminded me of Crossbones and also Killer Croc's first appearances in #357. But the second is said to be his first appearance even though he is only in a few panels in that issue. Again, what do i know.

(referring to an original comic book piece) This is a art gallery my friend and THIS is a piece of art.

Elijah Price "Unbreakable"
played by Samuel L. Jackson


Users browsing this topic
Guest

Forum Jump

Access

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

This page was generated in 0.728 seconds.
(0.593 seconds)

All images on comic collector live copyright of their respective publishers. © Copyright 2015, MidTen Media Inc. GOLO241