tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7105844689832543332.post3838021154589153123..comments2024-03-27T11:32:34.392-07:00Comments on NOT A HOAX! NOT A DREAM!: MARVEL TEAM-UP #64Matthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580725636327122073noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7105844689832543332.post-43879180580139246052016-03-07T17:48:45.681-08:002016-03-07T17:48:45.681-08:00You’re welcome. Knowing myself as I do, I think it...You’re welcome. Knowing myself as I do, I think it would’ve been harder for me <i>not</i> to look that up. 8^)Blamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07342343767763035991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7105844689832543332.post-88527853126325895752016-02-29T10:52:31.448-08:002016-02-29T10:52:31.448-08:00Thanks for that research, Blam! I also took the &...Thanks for that research, Blam! I also took the "flying bathtub" as the Fantasticar, but didn't go much beyond that.<br /><br />Claremont turning a random woman retroactively into Misty is bizarre, because it's not like it adds anything to her character -- but it's also somehow a totally Claremontian thing to do.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14580725636327122073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7105844689832543332.post-39489516073016665222016-02-29T05:43:22.988-08:002016-02-29T05:43:22.988-08:00// I’m unsure if this was officially an appearance...<br><i>// I’m unsure if this was officially an appearance by Misty Claremont is calling back to, or if he's retroactively making a nondescript woman into Misty. //</i><br /><br />The mention of “some dude in a flyin’ bathtub” got me to look since it sure sounded like <i>[a]</i> a very specific reference and <i>[b]</i> the Fantasticar. I did a chronological GCD search on the character of Misty Knight and discovered in the Notes to her actual first appearance in <a href="http://www.comics.org/issue/28360/#185609" rel="nofollow"><i>Marvel Premiere</i> #21</a> that, yes, in <i>MTU</i> #64 Claremont was retroactively declaring an unidentified woman seen back in <i>MTU</i> #1, fitting Misty’s description three years before she was introduced, to have been Misty Knight.<br /><br>Blamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07342343767763035991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7105844689832543332.post-75869907135857092242015-10-26T07:15:17.358-07:002015-10-26T07:15:17.358-07:00As we'll see over the next two installments, t...<i> As we'll see over the next two installments, there was no rule preventing MARVEL TEAM-UP from tossing the same guest-star's name on the masthead two months in a row. </i><br /><br />Ah. I was just about to ask about that, because a rule AGAINST using the same guest star's name twice in a row was the only reason I could come up with for why the Daughters of the Dragon got title billing for this issue. Austin Gortonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14281239771248780430noreply@blogger.com