To me a cameo is a glimpse at a character. A first appearance you get to see who that character is and learn their name and some of what they can do. A first full appearance they are part of the story. Now the first appearance of Gambit and like characters when dealing with publication dates consider continuity. Great job in breaking it down.
There's only one way to settle this debate and that's to eliminate the "cameo" distinction completely. If they appear in a comic for the first time, regardless of numbers of panels or dialogue, then that's their "First appearance" and there's nothing to argue about. Now that doesn't mean the market can't still favor their second appearance, which honestly is almost always determined by which cover is better.
I just recently got into comic books and honestly I have never really understood why there is a distinction between first appearance and first full appearance. This vid really cleared it up for me! I do however consider any sort of a reveal of the character (even if it's a shadow) as a cameo :) congrats on 8000 subs btw! And keep up the good work!
I think a lot of the cameo v full appearance debate is just about giving comic books significance when there wouldn’t otherwise be significance to them. First cameo, first appearance, first cover, first solo story, first fight between blank and blank, first silver age appearance (no one ever says first bronze or copper age appearance).
On Darkseid, and following your rules, Jimmy Olsen 135 is his first appearance. Appears on two panels, dialogue across two panels, plus has a look closer to what we know today. Another odd is Grail (Darkseid’s daughter). Justice League 40 is a cameo (one panel only, face concealed), FCBD divergence is her first appearance (multiple panels, dialogue), and Justice League 41 is first full
I think cameos are smaller appearances with a few panels like you said in the beginning. First appearances may feature the character in the cover and have a large presence in the comic. Just what I thought.
I think you really hit on something with this video. I think you’re right. Fans tend to favor the better cover as the first appearance if it’s up for debate.
I feel a first appearance is a first appearance. No cameo, no "oh they were only in one panel etc." The first time the character is seen is their first appearance. Hulk 180, ASM 299, etc. should just be strict first appearances in my opinion
Damn a entire run I thought you would have wanted to keep that cuz you really seem to like the knightfall series and shows of the bat is right after it
I think the Superman: MoS arm shot of Doomsday, although in a few panels with the character being named, falls into the cameo category given that it really shows about half of one arm of the character. My two cents. Terrific video!
I have a copy of X-Men Annual 14 and get told all the time it's not Gambit's first appearance. I've always considered it one over 266, due to the very reasons you brought up.
@@MintHunterComics wow that's insane so you eventually have to send it back to get reslabbed to get to note updated ...I did not know that ! Publishing keeps some tricks up their sleeve to be very cautious about then .
A first appearance, is a first appearance. It doesn't matter if it's only one panel. A couple of 1st appearances to consider: Yelena Belova's first appearance in Inhumans #5 is another book that is being overlooked in favor of Black Widow #1, particularly the 1 in 4 variant. Catalina Chavez actually appears in one panel in America Cavez: Made in America #1, and she appears in multiple panels/pages in issue #2. However, speculators were jumping on issue #3.
I'd like to jettison the cameo/first appearance vs full appearance insanity. IMO it should be 1) Teaser -- and Hulk 180, and ASM 25 are PERFECT examples of that, and 2) Full Appearance. A teaser allows some flexibility. But the market will do what the market will do.
@8:55 I agree. I'd like to see a viewer poll vote on X-Men Annual #14 vs Uncanny X-men #266 and see what the overall census is for Gambit's cameo vs 1st appearance. To me X-men Annual #14 is the most obvious to be titled as 1st Gambit first appearance. Uncanny X-men #266 should be retitled as first cover appearance.
I think it's because chronologically, #266 came before X-Men Annual #14 judging by how it's written. Which is why even the CGC considers #266 his first full appearance and the former a cameo. It's all a mess either way, but at this point, I don't think it's going to change.
The weirdest cameo that I am aware of is Hawkeye versus Deadpool 0, which is the first cameo appearance of Jane Foster Thor and Spider-Gwen, which is so random.
AWWWW! I should have added that one in here! Doi.... I think that's a cameo for sure: no dialogue, no name drop, just one (it was just one right?) panel of them in halloween costumes
Great video, thanks! I remember back in 5th grade one of my teachers had a copy of Hulk 180 and 181 on her bookshelf. I read those books probably 100 times back then. I wish I had them both now.
If it's still open I would cherish that shadow of the bat run forever. I'm building a collection for my sons and would love to finish it off and pass it down
For me, the debate of cameo vs first full doesnt really matter, I will just do my best to get both (or more) of the books. I can see both sides of the coin really, I just want all the books and let the market dictate which is the most valuable lol, excellent video and topic as always!!
From Go Collect.... Amazing Spider-Man #298 in a 9.8: $700 Amazing Spider-Man #299 in a 9.8: $975 Amazing Spider-Man #300 in a 9.8: $10,000 “First Full Appearance” is what drives the market. Great video. Keep on Hunting!!!
The most frustrating thing to me is that it's never been consistent. I blame Overstreet to be honest. They were the first ones I saw doing that years ago. They were the ones who called Jimmy Olsen the 1st Darkseid but called Hulk 180 a cameo. It's silly, the first time a character appears is the first appearance. You'd never do that in the movies for example. Nick Fury joined the MCU in Iron Man 1, period.
For me if they are shown in full(like wolverine in 180) it's a first appearance. The only time I consider it a cameo is if it's like a shadow or a piece of an arm or something like that(unless it's throughout the book like killer crock). I think the 181/300 FA crowd are just salty that they paid a lot for not a first appearance.
I love shadow of the bat I have 22 copies of issue 19 first appearance of tally man . My aunt was trying to get me more then one book but she just bought a lot of the same copies I don’t mind tho it’s a good book
The problem is not if it is cameo or first appearance, the problem is that people who already invested a lot of money in their first appearances will never accept that the number before the one they say cameo will never become first appearance. The most tangible sample is that of X-men 266, when it became known that X-MEN annual 4 is really the first Gambit release, immediately many influencers in the comics environment sent it to cameo, obviously they were not going to accept that this number that It is cheaper to gain ground to 266, of course, they were not going to lose all their investment. X-men annual is the clear example that it is the first appraisal, whoever likes it. Thats the reality. And I'm not going to get into the Hulk 180-181 or AMS 299 - 300 is wasting time. Greetings and thanks for exposing the reality on this issue. Greetings.
Exactly - how do you tell someone that's known for years a book is a first appearance only to tell them it's not actually the first appearance?! it's tough. and hard to swallow! but nonetheless true
Mint-Hunter, you have some of the most intelligent content out there for all things comics! Keep up the good work! And from your last video, I'm glad I'm not the only clown out there....
UNDERSTANDING THE DEFINITION OF CAMEO: There are two separate textbook definitions of cameo. One relates to plays or written works that use live actors (plays, film, etc). This is the one that folks refer to when the character making the cameo needs to be an "already established character." The second definition for cameo pertains to literature. For literature, the "already established" factor is not needed. Hence, using the term cameo in a comic book can absolutely - according to definition - pertain to a character that we have never seen before.
I agree, 180 is a first appearance... in cameo. The word cameo is used for good reason and I like how you were the only person who took the time to explain it's proper use. In the video, creating comic book rules and guidelines for the defintion of a cameo is a flawed approach. Basically, one person decided what questions to ask. Why not ask how many pages does thge person appear instead of how many panels? How many panels is the character visible on nstead of speech bubbles? People want to recreate their own definition of what a cameo (or even get rid of it) to favor the outcome they want.
Nice attempt to put structure to the discussion. Ultimately, though, because comics are a form of art, people will add their own bias and subjectivity. Thus, usually the book that is more well liked or has better cover appeal wins the discussion....even when it clearly is not the "technically" correct option.
I've always considered ASM 299 1st appearance of Venom too. With Gambit I understand the annual 14, but when you see that 266 story was 1st it makes more sense too, like you mentioned.
Well done video with some great examples my friend. I will throw one more monkey wrench out there for one big book. If you have ever read Marvel’s Official Handbook Of The Marvel Universe #12 from December of 1983 then you should know that Marvel Comics officially listed Wolverine 1st appearance as Incredible Hulk #180. That’s right from the horse’s mouth and just starts a whole new conversation lol.
This is true! it was ONCE considered the 1st appearance and got lost a bit there. But now everything is coming full circle and folks are remembering it saying it IS once again the first app!
great vid I believe a first appearance has to show the face (at least) of the character that's why I don't really count shadow of the bat as zsasz's first appearance considering has in a giant metal cylinder with only his mouth showing
These distinctions will be argued for the rest of history, but I like your take on this. For me, I am OG and when a character appears, it is a first appearance
I enjoyed your cameo in this video. Newer subscriber. Thanks for the videos. Curious on your thoughts on that Miles Morales previews sale for like $9000
Speaking from the future, I want to address the first appearance(s) of Red Claw in continuity. She has a first cameo appearance in Catwoman volume 5 #43 and a first full appearance in Catwoman volume 5 #44. This example is 99% identical to Wolverine's appearances. You see Red Claw from the knees up in one panel with dialogue and a name drop on the last page in the #43. It's only one panel, but I wonder if dialogue and a name drop could substitute for multiple panels.
I think if the character just appears in the background of a frame with no name or any mention then its not a first appearances but if they are part of the story then it counts. but i just go by key collector or the general consensus tbh. Great vid man! hope you smash that 8k subs soon!
Cameo has a very distinct use: Minor role (appearance) of someone who is already well known (established, famous). It is very cut and dry. If an unknown character shows up, even if just a single panel, it is obviously a first appearance. It is literally the first time that character appeared. Once again, cut and dry, no voting needed. By definition, if they show up for the first time ever, no one other than the creator has heard of them. Here is where you can use cameo: Let's say in an Avengers film, they introduce a new character that does not exist in the comics. That is obviously the first appearance in that particular genre. Let's say that character becomes famous enough that the character makes a brief appearance in a comic. Now you have a cameo.
This is similar to Bishop's first appearance on Uncanny X-Men 282 and 283. Regardless, I would still buy both cameo and full appearances. Maybe it's just me completing the set Good video as well. Informative.
Great vid! I think a first appearance is if you see the caracter for the very first time and he is actually in the storry. I only think you can say it's a first cameo if you see the caracter just quick and a littel nothing more the caracter is not in the storry at all. Like ASM 360 and 361. A perfect example
EXACTLY! the reason these non first appearances have been declared as "first appearances" through the years is usually it comes down to which has a sexier cover! lol
It is weird how the market dictates a lot of these things. And sometimes you see the market changing its mind. I wonder if they ever would for Venom and make 299 the more desired comic book.
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA Finals D1 | Fall | ยิงต้องโหด ให้เหมือนโกรธกันมาก่อน](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OnTdfGySmds/mqdefault.jpg)
To me a cameo is a glimpse at a character. A first appearance you get to see who that character is and learn their name and some of what they can do. A first full appearance they are part of the story. Now the first appearance of Gambit and like characters when dealing with publication dates consider continuity. Great job in breaking it down.
Well said.
There's only one way to settle this debate and that's to eliminate the "cameo" distinction completely. If they appear in a comic for the first time, regardless of numbers of panels or dialogue, then that's their "First appearance" and there's nothing to argue about. Now that doesn't mean the market can't still favor their second appearance, which honestly is almost always determined by which cover is better.
I like the distinction of cameo. I don't look at it so literally as the "first app" the majority of collectors use cameos to describe a soft 1st app
I totally agree with you that 299 is the first appearance of Venom and that 298 is a cameo.
No doubt!
I just recently got into comic books and honestly I have never really understood why there is a distinction between first appearance and first full appearance. This vid really cleared it up for me! I do however consider any sort of a reveal of the character (even if it's a shadow) as a cameo :) congrats on 8000 subs btw! And keep up the good work!
Your getting that Carnage issue signed and getting that awesome yellow signature series label yes!!! 😆👍
Can't wait!
Good news I’m going to upgrade my membership the comic book I was gonna get sold out so I figured I’ll just upgrade
Oh hell yeah! Welcome to the extended club!
I've never even really thought about the distinction tbh, typically I just go off if what Key Collector says
Hahaha Key Collector is pretty accurate out of all the apps I will say
Key Collector makes a lot of mistakes on appearances, I don't trust them at all.
As a new collector I like first appearance vs first full appearance
I think a lot of the cameo v full appearance debate is just about giving comic books significance when there wouldn’t otherwise be significance to them. First cameo, first appearance, first cover, first solo story, first fight between blank and blank, first silver age appearance (no one ever says first bronze or copper age appearance).
I say first bronze and copper appearance! lolol
I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of Hulk 180 being more than a cameo! Subbed!!! 👍🏼
Amazing breakdown over cameos and appearance!
I'm glad you think so!
On Darkseid, and following your rules, Jimmy Olsen 135 is his first appearance. Appears on two panels, dialogue across two panels, plus has a look closer to what we know today.
Another odd is Grail (Darkseid’s daughter). Justice League 40 is a cameo (one panel only, face concealed), FCBD divergence is her first appearance (multiple panels, dialogue), and Justice League 41 is first full
Good catch Rob - I missed that one! I agree with Grail
I am 100% behind having a cameo and a first separately.
Indeed. -same here
I think cameos are smaller appearances with a few panels like you said in the beginning. First appearances may feature the character in the cover and have a large presence in the comic. Just what I thought.
That aligns with our definition! Cheers DK League!
Thank you for covering this topic. I really enjoyed you explaining the difference.
I think you really hit on something with this video. I think you’re right. Fans tend to favor the better cover as the first appearance if it’s up for debate.
It's all about that ART that drives a comic hahaha
Looking forward to more of this type of content. Thanks.
More to come!
I feel a first appearance is a first appearance. No cameo, no "oh they were only in one panel etc." The first time the character is seen is their first appearance. Hulk 180, ASM 299, etc. should just be strict first appearances in my opinion
Our definition tends to agree with you! we're a little stricter with ours but your opinion is valid!
@@MintHunterComics Nothing wrong with be strict on comic books!
Guess I'll have to buy all appearances whether it's considered a "cameo" or "first appearance" just to cover my bases lol.
That's one way to do it! Hahaha
Damn a entire run I thought you would have wanted to keep that cuz you really seem to like the knightfall series and shows of the bat is right after it
True but I want to make sure I take care of the comic community first and foremost!
Great video James. It's a debate that will rage forever however first "full" will in most cases always be more sought after.
This is most certainly true
First reveal ought to be more of a thing. Anyhow, word up!
Thanks my man!
Haha this is soooo interesting! Thanks for the great video!
Thanks Jarno!
I think the Superman: MoS arm shot of Doomsday, although in a few panels with the character being named, falls into the cameo category given that it really shows about half of one arm of the character. My two cents. Terrific video!
Great video as always! Thanks for the info.
Thanks for watching!
I like to think that 180,181, and 182 are all apart of the same appearance since it is the same story. A wolverine fan would want all three.
Now this is very true - any Wolvy fan would want em all
I have a copy of X-Men Annual 14 and get told all the time it's not Gambit's first appearance. I've always considered it one over 266, due to the very reasons you brought up.
Don't let em tell ya otherwise!
Great video love the info never thought of these keys in that way lol
Glad it was helpful!
FINALLY! Someone calls it right. Some of these are debatable but X-men 266 is definitely not a 1st appearance at all, its just a 1st cover.
Agreed, there's so leeway with some of these but not with Gambit at all lol
I like your breakdown of cameo vs first appearance.
Great video, really enjoying your videos, keep it up
Thanks my man!
I think it's safe to say that the panel of importance would be the upper right cgc panel shortly after the upper left panel of the slab 😅
Often times CGC notes are wrong! I've had to correct them many times
@@MintHunterComics wow that's insane so you eventually have to send it back to get reslabbed to get to note updated ...I did not know that !
Publishing keeps some tricks up their sleeve to be very cautious about then .
Great stuff as always man.
Glad you enjoyed!!!
For Me if you can see the character in full, has dialogue its a first appearance, even more if he shows his abilities or powers
Powers should be an extra category I agree
Awesome information and I couldn’t agree more. Great video 💪🏻💪🏻💪🏻
I was going through my 90s comics the other day and found 7 asm 361s(3 newstand) and they were in perfect shape.
Well Damn!!!
A first appearance, is a first appearance. It doesn't matter if it's only one panel.
A couple of 1st appearances to consider:
Yelena Belova's first appearance in Inhumans #5 is another book that is being overlooked in favor of Black Widow #1, particularly the 1 in 4 variant.
Catalina Chavez actually appears in one panel in America Cavez: Made in America #1, and she appears in multiple panels/pages in issue #2. However, speculators were jumping on issue #3.
I'd like to jettison the cameo/first appearance vs full appearance insanity.
IMO it should be 1) Teaser -- and Hulk 180, and ASM 25 are PERFECT examples of that, and 2) Full Appearance. A teaser allows some flexibility.
But the market will do what the market will do.
@8:55 I agree. I'd like to see a viewer poll vote on X-Men Annual #14 vs Uncanny X-men #266 and see what the overall census is for Gambit's cameo vs 1st appearance. To me X-men Annual #14 is the most obvious to be titled as 1st Gambit first appearance. Uncanny X-men #266 should be retitled as first cover appearance.
Ooooh I should totally do that
I think it's because chronologically, #266 came before X-Men Annual #14 judging by how it's written. Which is why even the CGC considers #266 his first full appearance and the former a cameo. It's all a mess either way, but at this point, I don't think it's going to change.
Congratulations on closing in on 8k!
Is it clearly defined how CGC defones these things, since they put these statements on the top of the cases? Great video, thanks!
Not necessarily - CGC notes are sometimes blank for notable books. use Key Collector before using CGC notes
As an OCD Completest I have to buy both first cameo and first appearance on characters I like just to cover all bases.
Hahahaha #same
The weirdest cameo that I am aware of is Hawkeye versus Deadpool 0, which is the first cameo appearance of Jane Foster Thor and Spider-Gwen, which is so random.
AWWWW! I should have added that one in here! Doi.... I think that's a cameo for sure: no dialogue, no name drop, just one (it was just one right?) panel of them in halloween costumes
@@MintHunterComics it's actually three or four panels but they're all the same because they're in the background and there is no dialogue
Excellent work!
Ayyyy thank you!
Yay discussing comic book language/terminology!
Woot woot!
Great video, thanks! I remember back in 5th grade one of my teachers had a copy of Hulk 180 and 181 on her bookshelf. I read those books probably 100 times back then. I wish I had them both now.
You had way cooler teachers than I ever did that's for sure!
if i see a name and face you appeared that’s basically it. if i hear a name called out that’s just a camek
Interesting take!
Wolverines “cameo” feels more like a first appearance to me
It still may to many people! but by our criteria it's bumped up
@@MintHunterComics in that case Using the same criteria, isn’t Venoms 1st app ASM 299 not 300?
It is both. It is a first appearance, in cameo.
Batman Beyond (Batman/Superman 22) vs Superman/Batman Annual 4 Should be its own video
Seriously lol
I like both. Because it puts a spotlight on 2 or 3 books not just one. And it makes good conversation, witch is a healthy thing.
Amen to this
Was hoping you'd discuss Trigon's 1st appearance. That's a tough one..
New teen titans 2, he has dialogue with Raven
If it's still open I would cherish that shadow of the bat run forever. I'm building a collection for my sons and would love to finish it off and pass it down
For me, the debate of cameo vs first full doesnt really matter, I will just do my best to get both (or more) of the books. I can see both sides of the coin really, I just want all the books and let the market dictate which is the most valuable lol, excellent video and topic as always!!
Hulk 181, to me, is the comic that truly matters for Wolverine.
Most would agree BUT 180 meets all of our criteria!
Agree
From Go Collect....
Amazing Spider-Man #298 in a 9.8: $700
Amazing Spider-Man #299 in a 9.8: $975
Amazing Spider-Man #300 in a 9.8: $10,000
“First Full Appearance” is what drives the market.
Great video. Keep on Hunting!!!
First FULL app is usually the favorite anyway but it's still interesting to note that the 1st app was NOT the big famous issue! lol
I would have to agree with you. All set a side you have to love it or leave it. Great video.
The most frustrating thing to me is that it's never been consistent. I blame Overstreet to be honest. They were the first ones I saw doing that years ago. They were the ones who called Jimmy Olsen the 1st Darkseid but called Hulk 180 a cameo. It's silly, the first time a character appears is the first appearance. You'd never do that in the movies for example. Nick Fury joined the MCU in Iron Man 1, period.
For me if they are shown in full(like wolverine in 180) it's a first appearance. The only time I consider it a cameo is if it's like a shadow or a piece of an arm or something like that(unless it's throughout the book like killer crock). I think the 181/300 FA crowd are just salty that they paid a lot for not a first appearance.
Hahaha thats what I think as well, just a bit of salty peeps unable to let it go!
I love shadow of the bat I have 22 copies of issue 19 first appearance of tally man . My aunt was trying to get me more then one book but she just bought a lot of the same copies I don’t mind tho it’s a good book
Tally man! what an underrated DC character for sure
The problem is not if it is cameo or first appearance, the problem is that people who already invested a lot of money in their first appearances will never accept that the number before the one they say cameo will never become first appearance. The most tangible sample is that of X-men 266, when it became known that X-MEN annual 4 is really the first Gambit release, immediately many influencers in the comics environment sent it to cameo, obviously they were not going to accept that this number that It is cheaper to gain ground to 266, of course, they were not going to lose all their investment.
X-men annual is the clear example that it is the first appraisal, whoever likes it. Thats the reality. And I'm not going to get into the Hulk 180-181 or AMS 299 - 300 is wasting time. Greetings and thanks for exposing the reality on this issue. Greetings.
Exactly - how do you tell someone that's known for years a book is a first appearance only to tell them it's not actually the first appearance?! it's tough. and hard to swallow! but nonetheless true
Love the videos and your candid comments!
Mint-Hunter, you have some of the most intelligent content out there for all things comics! Keep up the good work! And from your last video, I'm glad I'm not the only clown out there....
Wow, thanks! that's quite the compliment! thanks my man - and hahaha yes it happens to all of us
I want that run!! Nice video :)
UNDERSTANDING THE DEFINITION OF CAMEO: There are two separate textbook definitions of cameo. One relates to plays or written works that use live actors (plays, film, etc). This is the one that folks refer to when the character making the cameo needs to be an "already established character." The second definition for cameo pertains to literature. For literature, the "already established" factor is not needed. Hence, using the term cameo in a comic book can absolutely - according to definition - pertain to a character that we have never seen before.
I appreciate your take my man! I commented on your other comment!
I agree, 180 is a first appearance... in cameo. The word cameo is used for good reason and I like how you were the only person who took the time to explain it's proper use. In the video, creating comic book rules and guidelines for the defintion of a cameo is a flawed approach. Basically, one person decided what questions to ask. Why not ask how many pages does thge person appear instead of how many panels? How many panels is the character visible on nstead of speech bubbles? People want to recreate their own definition of what a cameo (or even get rid of it) to favor the outcome they want.
That's why I try to get them all, Cameo, First Appearance, First Full Appearance, First Cover Appearance. It gets expensive.
Excellent video and certainly a good topic of discussion. Thanks James!
Glad it was helpful!
Nice attempt to put structure to the discussion. Ultimately, though, because comics are a form of art, people will add their own bias and subjectivity. Thus, usually the book that is more well liked or has better cover appeal wins the discussion....even when it clearly is not the "technically" correct option.
Technically speaking these issues to our definition are the 1st apps. -a lot of time it's the first FULL apps that people go nuts for
For me, if there is a name, dialogue and the character is fully shown in the comic then its a first appearance.
I appreciate your take!
If you’re slabbing comics, the most important thing should be 1st cover appearances.
I feel like first appearance should include an identifiable Face shot as well.
Face or partial face shot is pretty important for me
I've always considered ASM 299 1st appearance of Venom too. With Gambit I understand the annual 14, but when you see that 266 story was 1st it makes more sense too, like you mentioned.
Indeed, I truly do wish it came.out first but alas here we are!
Well done video with some great examples my friend.
I will throw one more monkey wrench out there for one big book. If you have ever read Marvel’s Official Handbook Of The Marvel Universe #12 from December of 1983 then you should know that Marvel Comics officially listed Wolverine 1st appearance as Incredible Hulk #180. That’s right from the horse’s mouth and just starts a whole new conversation lol.
This is true! it was ONCE considered the 1st appearance and got lost a bit there. But now everything is coming full circle and folks are remembering it saying it IS once again the first app!
Great video. It really opens up the perspective of cameo vs 1st appearance. 👍🏻
Thanks Paul!
great vid I believe a first appearance has to show the face (at least) of the character that's why I don't really count shadow of the bat as zsasz's first appearance considering has in a giant metal cylinder with only his mouth showing
Good example! I haven't read it in so long I honestly didn't even remember that!
The only correct thing to do is buy all of them. Every comic of every run of every hero ever
Hahahahahaha
Great video!!!
Glad you liked it!
Great video!
Thanks for the visit
These distinctions will be argued for the rest of history, but I like your take on this. For me, I am OG and when a character appears, it is a first appearance
Appreciate your take Steve!
I enjoyed your cameo in this video. Newer subscriber. Thanks for the videos. Curious on your thoughts on that Miles Morales previews sale for like $9000
I think its a bit silly! But I see the perspective on it
Another great video.
I appreciate that - glad you enjoyed!
I really appreciate your approach and calmness. You work through your methods.
Great job!
Personally I think some people consider the 1st appearance to be whichever one they have/ are trying to sell
Hahahaha I def knowsome people that do that!
Speaking from the future, I want to address the first appearance(s) of Red Claw in continuity. She has a first cameo appearance in Catwoman volume 5 #43 and a first full appearance in Catwoman volume 5 #44. This example is 99% identical to Wolverine's appearances. You see Red Claw from the knees up in one panel with dialogue and a name drop on the last page in the #43. It's only one panel, but I wonder if dialogue and a name drop could substitute for multiple panels.
I think if the character just appears in the background of a frame with no name or any mention then its not a first appearances but if they are part of the story then it counts. but i just go by key collector or the general consensus tbh.
Great vid man! hope you smash that 8k subs soon!
As a collector I just get both. So I don't miss out.
The Golden Rule... One who holds the gold makes the rules.
Hahahah I appreciate your take!
Cameo has a very distinct use: Minor role (appearance) of someone who is already well known (established, famous). It is very cut and dry. If an unknown character shows up, even if just a single panel, it is obviously a first appearance. It is literally the first time that character appeared. Once again, cut and dry, no voting needed. By definition, if they show up for the first time ever, no one other than the creator has heard of them.
Here is where you can use cameo: Let's say in an Avengers film, they introduce a new character that does not exist in the comics. That is obviously the first appearance in that particular genre. Let's say that character becomes famous enough that the character makes a brief appearance in a comic. Now you have a cameo.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge I really appreciate it.
this is so much fun
Thanks man, glad you enjoyed!
Excellent! Great job!
Thank you very much! you won the members giveaway my man!
Hulk 180 is a first appearance but the consensus says it's 181. The consensus is wrong in this case and Punchlines case as well.
This is similar to Bishop's first appearance on Uncanny X-Men 282 and 283.
Regardless, I would still buy both cameo and full appearances. Maybe it's just me completing the set
Good video as well. Informative.
Thanks Miguel!
Great vid! I think a first appearance is if you see the caracter for the very first time and he is actually in the storry. I only think you can say it's a first cameo if you see the caracter just quick and a littel nothing more the caracter is not in the storry at all. Like ASM 360 and 361. A perfect example
I like to think that asm 300 is first appearance just because I like the cover more then the 299 😂
EXACTLY! the reason these non first appearances have been declared as "first appearances" through the years is usually it comes down to which has a sexier cover! lol
@@MintHunterComics yeah even tho 299 is a bad cover it’s just 300 is a banger
It randomly made me in subscribe to you but I subscribed to you again
Woot woot welcome back hahahahaha
The Todd father said the 1st appearance is 298. But that is a Cameo
Toddy knows best!
good thing i picked up 266 and annual 14 at the same time lol
Smart man this guy hahaha
1st appearance would be saying their names meaning introducing the character. Cameo would be just “teasing” the character.
It is weird how the market dictates a lot of these things. And sometimes you see the market changing its mind. I wonder if they ever would for Venom and make 299 the more desired comic book.
Probably not - but the reality is - that's the first app!
The last page of 299 is classic though. I think 299 is way undervalued compared to 300.
The Venom hand is a perfect example of what I would call a cameo.
Exactly