View Full Version : Cable Is Back!!!!!!
Iron Man 49
02/27/2003, 03:51
"My name is Nathaniel Dayspring Summers and your either with me or against me."
I went to my local comic shop today (Cheap plug for St. Marks Comics) and picked up most things Marvel. I read another wonderful issue of Weapon X....and who do I see but CABLE!!! WOOOOOOOOT! This is great. The Big C maybe does have a future in clix after all. Now if we could just get Ghost Rider, Deadpool, and Maverick....
Ian_Cormack
02/27/2003, 10:16
isn't he called soldiar x now ? sorry if i didn't write it right . i no speel so good :p
LurkMaster2000
02/27/2003, 12:32
Originally posted by Iron Man 49
...I read another wonderful issue of Weapon X....and who do I see but CABLE!!! WOOOOOOOOT! This is great. The Big C maybe does have a future in clix after all. Now if we could just get Ghost Rider, Deadpool, and Maverick....
why don't ghost rider, deadpool, and maverick have a future in clix right now, anyway?
Their liscenses belong to the independant authors, not Marvel itself. There have been many disputes over this and that, but Marvel doesn't have them and they aren't getting them back any time soon. That's why they are called Agent X and Soldier X, instead of Deadpool and Cable. The authors own the trademarked names of Deadpool and Cable.
If we get them, it'll probably be through Indyclix.
de4dp00l
02/27/2003, 12:58
Marvel still owns Cable and Deadpool. Rob Liefeld does not own these characters like so many people believe, and if he were to publish a Deadpool or Cable book with another company, Marvel would sue him into oblivion. Which would be nice, since he's probably the worst artist I've ever seen doing comics professionally. Marvel's company line is that they renamed Soldier X (Cable), Agent X (Deadpool) and X-Statix (X-Force), and gave them new looks, to try and draw in new readers to titles that have had sluggish sales.
I can't say for sure about Maverick or Ghost Rider, but I very strongly suspect that Marvel still owns the rights to them as well. Marvel doesn't really do creator owned characters, or at least, they didn't used to.
No, Rob Liefel does own the copy rights to the Cable, Deadpool and X-Force names. Thats why Marvel had to change all 3. Marvel owns the characters, which is why they can use Nathan Summers as Solder X and keep the characters basically the same but not the name Cable, same with the others.
Pontifex
02/27/2003, 13:28
The lagging sales of Deadpool had nothing to do with the character's marketability, and EVERYTHING to do with the despicably weak writers that took over issues 25-50 or so.
That someone else owns the characters makes sense; after all, they could turn Agent X back into Deadpool in a single issue if they were willing or able to do so.
JustFrodo
02/27/2003, 13:33
Totally off-thread, but Pontifex's signature is the funniest thing I've read in months!
Call me Mod Geek #37
Ian_Cormack
02/27/2003, 19:49
why don't ghost rider, deadpool, and maverick have a future in clix right now, anyway?
Mavrick doesn't have a future in heroclix because marvel killed him off. (wolverine 166)
i'm not sure...but Agent Zero from the Weapon X series is quite similar to Maverick....any ideas?
AdamWarlock
02/27/2003, 20:14
Maverick being dead (I was unaware, that's somewhat of a shame) is not enough reason on its own to keep him out of clix. There are a few dead people in the game right now or confirmed to be coming up: MAGNETO, Mojo, Psylocke, Hobgoblin (as Ned Leeds, the version they chose for his LE), Yellowjacket (Rita Demara, not Hank Pym the figureless promo base), probably more. Death doesn't keep comic characters down for long.
If Maverick isn't in the game or won't be in the game, its because they don't think enough people care about him to bother or they can't decide which diverging version of his powers to use in design.
Ian_Cormack
02/27/2003, 20:17
I would love to see a Maverick Heroclix. I could him kill sabrethooth over and over for revenge. If you haven't read wolverine 166# He beat him in a close battle by clawing into his stomic and hurling him of a roof :(
Muddge13
02/27/2003, 20:24
If i remember right Venom was McFarlands idea or his style. When he left Marv he drew an copy of Ven and change his story. Spawn can do what Ven can do but my point is Marv own everything they put in thier comics besides the adds.
OH BUCKY!!!!! and and Aunt May as a Clix. Howard the Duck. Alf.ROM. FooFur. And G.I.Joe . Transformers will really rock. oh the list goes on.........
scissors
02/27/2003, 20:51
This weeks Weapon X was hardly the return of Cable, but given that Soldier X seems to be ending in June it may be the only place you'll get to see him. But I digress, the interesting thing about that panel was that there was someone who looked a hell of a lot like Maverick in the background behind Cable. So much for the Maverick as Agent Zero theory, but at least he may be in heroclix yet.
WadeDeadpool
02/27/2003, 21:19
Wait, hold on. Psylocke is dead? When? Whoa, and I thought I was even a remote X-Men fan...
Psylock died in Xtreme X-men #2, a new villian called Vargas killed her, fought beast and then her hand to hand and took both down very, very quickly.
Iron Man 49
02/27/2003, 21:48
Marvel has the rights to them. Its a freakin patent clause in the creators contract. They own Cable and DP lock stock and barrell. However, if their comics sell a certain figure the grubby little scummer gets a percentage. Maverick was never a confirmed DOA, he was supposed to be dead, But Sabe's can drop him off a roof all he wants. His mutant ability absorb kinetic force. :D
anyhow....bring on that Cable. Can Stryfe be far behind? He did just try breaking out of the netherworld not that long ago...
metzgarob
02/27/2003, 22:02
does it really matter what their names are i mean...
Cable---Soldier X. . . still the same person essentially
so what is all the hub bub about just the name is different . . . on top of that just because nathanial summers was in weapon X (whatever he was called in it) why does he all of a sudden have a future in clix when did he NOT have a future before this issue came out
lurkmaster2000 says...
why don't ghost rider, deadpool, and maverick have a future in clix right now, anyway?
i agree
deadpool i can understand not seeing for a while but most the other charachters you guys are mentioning have quite a decent chance of appearing in the clix
Iron Man 49 - Do some reading. Marvel DOES NOT OWN the names Cable, Deadpool or X-Force, which is why they were all changed. If they owened the names they would have stayed (at least some of them).
metzgarob
02/27/2003, 22:25
Originally posted by sluggo
Iron Man 49 - Do some reading. Marvel DOES NOT OWN the names Cable, Deadpool or X-Force, which is why they were all changed. If they owened the names they would have stayed (at least some of them).
as far as i know this is correct Liefeild said that marvel sould use the names as long as he got money from marvel whenever the names were used... marvel in turn said you can have the names we'll just change them and use the charachters...
as far as i know this is true wish adds to my argument that even though the names changed the charachters/ideas are the same
rcoperich
02/27/2003, 22:49
I know there's that pineapple out there...and Nathan Summers isn't on there. If the pineapple holds up, maybe Cable/Soldier X will be in the next series because Apocalypse is in Xplosion! as a unique. Apocalypse infected Nathan with the virus that caused him to be sent to the future to be saved. Imagine the Clix for Cable...from the Superhero Encyclopedia:
"Powers
As the child of Jean Grey and Scott Summers, Cable inherited his mother's gifts of telepathy and telekinesis and his father's gift of energy storage. Combined those powers make Cable one of the most powerful mutants on Earth. In addition to his mutant gifts, Cable has techno-organic body parts. Cable has been using a psi-simitar, a weapon that amplifies his telepathic powers similar to Psylocke's daggers. Cable is also a master of all military weapons. His knowledge from the future allow him to build machines that the present has never seen."
So once Apocalypse is introduced, it would open up Cable, X-Force members, and Arch Angel (who is the topic of another rant all together).
Iron Man 49
02/27/2003, 22:49
Dont flame me and be wrong fella. It's not very becoming to talk out your but. Marvel has a clause in everybody's contract, but Liefeld had it in his contract that if any issue sold XXXXXX number of copies, he gets cash. He would also get any movie royalties. Kindly get your story straight, as I actually know what im talking about. They changed the name in case they ever make a movie, and MARVEL owns the trademarks to Deadpool, Cable, and X Force. If any of these titles sold incredibly high, liefeld would get royalties. Thats why they changed the names, not because Liefeld owns them. Please know your facts before you flame me....I love know it alls.
metzgarob
02/27/2003, 22:54
i dont think that anyone is flaming you i just know what i was told and i dont know if what your saying is any more legitimate than what i was told previously and seeing as though i dont know you from the next guy im going to take the word of the my "source"
again i dont think anyone is "flaming" you . . . im just telling you what ive read/heard
but again im just curious as to if it is THAT important to you that cable is called "cable" or if you are jsut interested in the charachter and wouldnt care what his name was
Iron Man 49
02/27/2003, 22:56
if They can keep Nate Summers as Cable...then Why cant they keep Wade Wilson as Deadpool? Why is Sam Guthrie still Cannonball? Tabitha smith still BOOM BOOM? James Proudstar still Warpath? THEY OWN THEM LOCK STOCK AND BARRELL.
Actually, Sam and Tab had those names before Liedfield even had the New Mutants in his grubby little paws.
"I actually know what im talking about" - Really? Kinda hard to believe that when you don't know that Liefeld didn't create Cannonball, think Boom Boom is still called Boom Boom (she changed her name to Meltdown, and it has nothing to do with Liefeld) or that Wade Wilson is now called Agent X not Deadpool. I just think someone who "actually knows what they are talking about" would know that. But thats just me.
AshenFang
02/28/2003, 02:55
Heh, what can you say? ..some people just can't accept the fact that some of their favourite characters are gone..
If nothing else you can laugh about it.. picture them sixty years older, still denying the fact that Cable and Deadpool aren't coming back. :D
metzgarob
02/28/2003, 03:12
i will admit that that is pretty funny
When I heard about this last month and did some rersearch online and with some comic shops and the word is basically what ironman49 said. If any issue sells over like 100,000 copies (which at the time wasn't TOO farfetched), Liefeld gets loot. Marel figured they would play safe and just never use the names again. I really hope Liefeld gives to the fans and just relenquishes his royalties he'll never get anyway.
Iron Man 49
03/01/2003, 02:25
If you do your homework kiddies...you will find out Im usually dead on. I said If they continue to use Cables realname, Why cant they use Deadpools. Thats what I was getting at. If Cable is Nate, why cant Deadpool be Wade. Twas a rhetorical. I was unaware about the New mutants prior to Liefield, and Ill conceed that one. Big boys admit when they are wrong. Sales figure met, a$$clown gets royalties. Its the truth. He does not own the names, so please..when you tell me I dont know what Im talking about, and get condescending towards me..be right. Danka.
Ironman you are slightly wrong. The reason they can still use Cannonbal and Boom Boom is Robliefield didn't create them. He did create Cable and Deadpool. If you check any issue with the characters, you will find in the begining a credit "Cable created by Rob Liefeld", "deadpool created by Rob Liefeld" ect ect. Marvel has to pay him a royalty whenever they print this in a book. Hence the name change. Rob had nothing to do with creating Soldier X, hence why they did it.
In interviews both Quesada and Liefield have said that they pay royalities not for using the names "Cable" and "Deadpool," but based on sales for issues featuring those characters. To my knowelege the only person Marvel flat out pays for use of a character is Stan Lee(although that is probably due to the number of his creations and could have changed with Marvel's bankruptcy and Lee's recent law suit).
As long as Cable/Soldier X is still Nate Summers it is the same character, Liefield would still get royalities if Soldier X sold enough. Otherwise Marvel could change Spider-man to "Captain Arachnid" to avoid paying Lee, DC could change Superman's name to "Mr. Alien" and avoid paying the relatives of Siegle and Shuster, and you would see every character that becomes remotely popular undergoing a name change as soon as the marketing department decides they are bringing in enough money.
I checked a lot of my Cable and Deadpool back issues and never once found a "created by Rob Liefeld." I did however find that "Deadpool is a trademark of Marvel Characters Inc." and the same with Cable.
Can you give me issues where you found the "created by" phrase?
greerkind
03/01/2003, 14:30
to back up Rynth, in legal terms, likeness goes hand in hand with name.
that means that along with the names of Cable and Deadpool, go the likeness.
since Nate Summers (a name that Rob Leifeild also created) was Cable and that Soldier X goes by Nate Summers, I'd say it's safe to say that if Ironman49 is right (and he very well may be) then Leifield will get money regardless. Soldier X is obviously Cable. Same real name, same powers, same guy Leifield created.
Deadpool is a different story. If you read Agent X, they try very hard to convince you that he is and isn't Deadpool. As Alex Hayden, Agent X denies being Wade Wilson at every opportunity. Everyone around him is convinced he was Deadpool, but Hayden denies it. Marvel may get around this somehow I'm not sure.
And I still believe Agent Zero in Weapon X is Maverick. If you've read the entire series so far, it only makes sense. Agent Zero blatantly knows Wolverine and Sabretooth and has a bit of a hostility towards both (understandibly so if he is Maverick). Just my two cents on that one.
Carry on...
scissors
03/01/2003, 18:32
I still say Maverick was in the background with Domino and Meltdown when Nate made his speech in this weeks Weapon X...
Iron Man 49
03/02/2003, 03:55
Who were the other two then, Im very interested on your opinions...I'm guessing leech and Whats her name Siren?? Banshee's niece...
That's a really hard call. I agree that the big guy in the back looks like Mavrick and I'm guessing Domino was the second person in... she and Nate always were together alot... the other two are quite a bit more difficult... the hunched over green guy looks like the newer toad, but I highly doubt they'd throw him in there... The other woman is most likely Meltdown... maybe even a revamped Dazzler... she's got that Dazzler haircut...
Spinebreaker
03/02/2003, 20:13
>>>in legal terms, likeness goes hand in hand with name.
that means that along with the names of Cable and Deadpool, go the likeness.<<<
Not necessarilly. When DC sued Marvel over Captain Marvel's resemblance to Superman, DC won the rights to the character's likeness.
However, Marvel still retained the right to the name Captain Marvel.
This being said, both companies are allowed characters called Captain MArvel, but only Marvel can do a comic called 'Captain Marvel' Generally DC comics based around Captain Marvel are called 'Shazzam' or something similar. But DC are the only company with rights to that image of captain Marvel (The big red cheese version)
Rynth wrote :
>>>In interviews both Quesada and Liefield have said that they pay royalities not for using the names "Cable" and "Deadpool," but based on sales for issues featuring those characters. To my knowelege the only person Marvel flat out pays for use of a character is Stan Lee<<<
I think that SHOULD end the debate. The reason they changed the names of the characters is probably spite. The same reason they changed the Expansions name from 'Excelsior' to 'X-plosion' when Stan Lee got a little pi$$ed Marvel decided to completely ignore a contract.
Rogueslaw
03/04/2003, 15:24
just wondering are u all posatve that Liefield created nate Summers. I know he was workig on x-factor at the time but, I don't think he was writing at the time so I don't think he has claim on nate summers. Though he does have it on x-fore, cable and Deadpool.
As fo the Weapon X thing. At least at my shop we believe that Mav is agent zero and that he is with cable at the end of the newest weapon x. As for the mystery people I think they are Domino, maverick, and Rachel Summers, The other guy I'm not to sure on.
Pip the Troll
03/04/2003, 15:30
Hmmm yea i agree that it looks aot lke maverick, but that dont make much sense
cause i was like 99 percent sure, that maverick became agent zero in the weapon x comics
anyywas i love seein dom and cable ready to get into action
cheers
metzgarob
03/04/2003, 15:31
yes i do believe that rob DIDNT create nate summers but DID create his alias cable
also someone had propsed that the other guy standing around is leech but if u have read the book you would know that leech is still fairly small and attached to the power draining device atop weapon X HQ
but i could be wrong he could have been rescued by soldier X but i think the guy in the picture being referenced is to large to be leech
scissors
03/04/2003, 21:36
Couldn't the hunched over guy be Nate's mentor Blaquesmith?
Rogueslaw
03/05/2003, 04:36
yeah it is blaquesmith. I forgot the name of the guy and since I read the store copy I didn't have one of my own on hand.
Grey_Hulk
03/05/2003, 05:20
On a semi-related note...didn't Deadpool also buy the farm at the end of the Wolverine/Deadpool 'Weapon X' Trade paperback? Alright, its Marvel so people don't stay dead very long... :)
Rogueslaw
03/05/2003, 15:16
jut to point out agent zero andthe guy at the end of the newest weapon x are both Marvrck in my opinon. If u have noticed they don't keep the people of wapon x on a short leash. So with tha in mind Mavrick could be playing a double agent and feeding cable info about this weapon x project. That would explain how cable....errr Soldier X(what a lame name)(just wondering did someoe think that if they put X in the tittle that sales would go up?) got all that inteligance about weapon x.
Pip the Troll
03/06/2003, 01:56
ahhhh yea that makes sense
i dont like maverick as a bad guy anyway
also deadpool did die at end of weapon X series but if you kept reading his stories
which u should cause they are amazing, you find out that thanos brings him back to life
why?
read and find out :) its a great story line as always full of jokes
cheers
bluesummers
03/06/2003, 03:02
Wow, quite the little battle we got going on here.
First off, let me just say that Rob Liefield is a pompous jerk. Anyone who reads his latest article in Wizard is bound to agree. The guy basically calls everyone else he ever worked with 'talentless'. This from a guy who was caught practically tracing over Kirby's page layouts. He'll never relinquish his rights to the characters.
I think Ironman is mostly right on this issue (though watch yourself in how biting your defense is, man, you sound really full of yourself. Text can be decieving.) Let's all not forget that Copyright and Trademark are a little different, and Liefield, having created Deadpool, Cable, and X-Force has the copyright and gets money from their use. However, since they appeared in a Marvel book, marvel can still use them.
Deadpool and X-Force were changed so that they did not have to pay Liefield. I don't care what their press release says, that's the reason. Lets not forget, the man got sued just a few years ago for making his own captain america, and bashes Marvel whenever he gets the chance, even though every character he's ever made looks like Cable or Wolverine.
So those names and teams were changed totally. Cable is another story though. Liefield didn't create Nathan Summers, I believe Claremont did, and after Liefield left, Cable stillhad no origin, and was just a guy with huge shoulders and a big gun, so they merged him with Nathan Summers. So, Marvel now owned Cable's character, but not his original image or name...er, the copyright, anyhow. So now he's Soldier X, and they can do whatever the hell they want without paying Liefield...#### they're tricky.
Oh, and they won't make Maverick into a click cuz he's lame. He's a dumb character from the dark ages of Marvel that lead them into bankruptsy, you know, the time when comics didn't have any stories, just 13 covers. He's a dude with a gun and powers that resemble Strong Guy's. I hope they keep him dead, cuz he sure wasnt moving the story along.
bluesummers
03/06/2003, 03:09
Not necessarilly. When DC sued Marvel over Captain Marvel's resemblance to Superman, DC won the rights to the character's likeness
--Spinebreaker
Umm, Captain Marvel doesn't belong to Marvel. Well, there is a Captain Marvel who does, but it isn't the one in question.
The one Marvel owns is the one with the cosmic powerbands, formerly a dude of Kree decent.
You're thinking of Captain Marvel that used to be in Whiz Comics, not owned by Marvel, and who is commonly referred to as Shazam, which is what he yells to power up. There was no confusion in names at the time because back then Marvel Comics was actually called Timely Press.
DC actually also lost that case, as you'll recall, but years later, Whiz sold the rights to ol' Shazzy to DC, cuz they were folding, and that's why we still see Captain Marvel in DC comics, even in the really cool Kingdom Come book that Ross and Waid did. That's the last time I saw him, but I'm not really a DC buff.
Maverick has more depth then you think, his powers are more similiar to bishops then strong guys since strong guy turned kinetic energy into strength and maverick channels it back explosively just like bishop, he is an espionage agent like sabertooth and wolverine, he used to be able to alter luck like scarlet witch and black cat, he had the legacy virus and lived and above all else his costume is cool.
bluesummers
03/07/2003, 03:59
Well, maybe. But I still doubt that he has any real use as a character. I mean, when the guy was made, sure he looked kinda cool, but back in X-Men 5 or whatever, he didn't really exhibit any powers, he was just one of the many Cable clones.
Despite the fact that he does have powers similar to a Guido/Bishop combo, I don't think that determines his having depth. I think he's just another guy playing off of the popularity of Wolverine and Sabertooth who has a malleable personality and set of goals. He's a poorly written wannabe who shows up to look neat once in a while...IMO.
xanubisx
03/07/2003, 04:41
Originally posted by Muddge13
If i remember right Venom was McFarlands idea or his style. When he left Marv he drew an copy of Ven and change his story. Spawn can do what Ven can do but my point is Marv own everything they put in thier comics besides the adds.
um... can you say micronauts?
Rogueslaw
03/08/2003, 03:21
Originally posted by xanubisx
um... can you say micronauts?
if u are trying to prove this statement wrong by pointing out micronauts then I have to say that they were orignally licensed to Marvel. This was a common practie at that time just lok at Star Wars, GI Joe, and Transformers. The only difference with Micronaughts is that Marvel still owns a lot of the peope made in that series while Mrvel had the license.
As for the whole Mavrick thing I agree that he is just a spinoff of that whole wolvie/ sabertooth craze. The thing is EVERYTHING is a spinoff of something, there is no such thing as a orignal charcter. I personally like maverick and I think they haven't flushed his persona yet. They did a little with his series but, that was to short lived.
ManWithoutFear
03/10/2003, 22:13
Can't we all just get along? Sheesh - O - Matic!
Rogueslaw
03/12/2003, 03:56
Who said we aren't getting along? I have nothng but, loe fr people on this board or at least till it is game time an then well u know how the saying goes. All fair in love and war. Besides if we didn't have any lively debates then all we would be doing is sitting her talking about how broken Firelord i or how someone used him to beat u in a torney.
billthomason
03/12/2003, 04:37
Ok, this is how it is. I was collecting comics avidly during the beginning of Image when all the whiney RICH artists left marvel. The whole point of starting Image was so they COULD own their own material. Marvel owns everything published before hand. Marvel owns the rights to Cable, not Liefeld. If you want proof, just take a look at the many of issues of "Cable" that were published after Image was formed. Also, Marvel continued to use the Venom name and made many more series starring him after McFarlane left and created Spawn. These guys don't own their Marvel characters, that's why Image was created. That, and its a more violent, less story driven, Ace Ventura fan, mindless drivel line of comics.
The whole point? Cable could be a marvel heroclix. That would rock. I mean come on, why not give the X-Men another kickbutt guy and screw over every other team?
Rogueslaw
03/12/2003, 04:51
just to point out yes marve wns cable lock, stock, and barrel. They do have to pay lefield some royaltis for creating said properties but, only if a certain sale quota is made. Yes they ca make said properties into clix though I doubt they will because Marvel doesn't want to promto charcters to possible new readers since Marvel as of now won't be putting out a book based on those names for a while.
As for the image thing u are right. Though I feel though the line has gotten better in the last few years. And I like the fact that is will give anyone a chance to create a decent book. I personally think the Powers and Red Star are 2 of the best books out right now. Though I do wish they were Marvel because then Red Star would be out on a regular timetable.
Real fast back to Mavric he could not change luck longshot could (Which by the way he would rock as a clix come on we have Mojo and Spiral!) what mav could do is see into the imediate future and ther by divert stuff from happing by taking another path. It is a really chesse mutant power but not as chesse as gambits mutant power of prusasion/charm!? (Now that is real G@Y!).
scissors
03/14/2003, 18:55
Though I do wish they were Marvel because then Red Star would be out on a regular timetable.
-------------
You mean like Ultimates?
Basil Elks
03/14/2003, 18:58
:mad: :mad: :mad: I've been saying he's back for about a month or so & you guys just ignore me!! Bah I say, bah! ;)
Rogueslaw
03/14/2003, 19:14
Yes Ultimates is late but, I think that had more to do wit th whole Ultimate war and Ultimate X-men thing. They had to come out with certain issuses of X-men before Ultimate war came out and as a result the Ultimates gt delayed.
Iron Man 49
03/15/2003, 00:20
You add up the months behind schedule the Ultimates are its about a year. Dont get me started. Maybe if Millar didnt stop writing every five seconds to bash America...
:mad:
Rogueslaw
03/17/2003, 02:58
That is very true an trust me I hate when my books come late. I collect like 5 other books that are always late and one of my fav books Battle Chasers ended up being anned because everyone lost interest in it because if we were lucky we would get 2 books on year.
scissors
03/17/2003, 21:20
I don't think Ultimates is late because of Ultimate war etc. as Ultimates is behind that series in that Wasp isn't healthy in the main book and Quicksilver isn't maimed. It seems like they should have hammered more books through to catch up. I think it is more likely that for whatever reason Bryan Hitch has fallen behind and they aren't willing to use fill in artists to help him catch up. But what do i know.
As far as Battlechasers I think what hurt that book as much as lost fan base was the fact that Joe Mad buggered off to do videogames...
And people wonder why the market is less supportive of creator owned books right now...
Rogueslaw
03/18/2003, 03:09
I read in a interview that Joe went to videogames because he didn't want to work for DC anymore then oce he got the title back under image no one wanted him anmore because at tht time it had been close to a year since the last issuse
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.