The Energon Pub

News Credits: 1082 · by **Tigertrack** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:51 am

Artist Casey Coller pays tribute to the legendary John Romita again, with another variant that he created based on the classic Spider-Man #50 cover.

The first variant cover that he did featured "Megatron No More!" and was an Apocalypse Comics Exclusive. It took inspiration from a classic John Romita Spider-Man cover.

Casey has now revealed a second even more exclusive cover set up in the very same manner, but featuring Galvatron as the full body instead of another Megatron picture.

Confused by what I mean?

Check it out below, and see what Casey has to say about the cover here.

Behold... Galvatron! And behold the exclusive print I'll have available at the 2009 London Film and Comic-Con. It is of course a variant of the Apocalypse Comics exclusive cover for All Hail Megatron #12 (and of course it is an homage to the classic cover to the Amazing Spider-Man #50 by legend John Romita).

This print is limited to only 50 copies. I'm also considering only offering it if you also buy Apocalypse's exclusive cover for AHM #12, as I don't want this to take away from Apocalypse's sales. I have a feeling these are going to go fast...

All Hail Megatron #12 was released to comic book retailers last week.

by **Monty Prime** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:03 am

John Romita Sr. drew that Spider-Man cover (It was issue #50). The only published pieces of Spider-Man art by Kirby were a Toys for Tots ad and the cover of Amazing Fantasy #15.

News Credits: 7 · by **waaaaghlord** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:18 am

Only 50? Wow. I do have a mate going to the con so I might have to see what she can do for me on this one.

by **Jetstorm92210** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:23 am

This is so cool yet so confusing! 8-}

News Credits: 1082 · by **Tigertrack** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:28 am

Monty Prime wrote:John Romita Sr. drew that Spider-Man cover (It was issue #50). The only published pieces of Spider-Man art by Kirby were a Toys for Tots ad and the cover of Amazing Fantasy #15.

Oh c'mon, small mistake. It's 2AM here! Sorry, but thanks for bringing it to my attention. Fixed.

News Credits: 1082 · by **Tigertrack** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:30 am

Jetstorm9221 wrote:This is so cool yet so confusing!

I think I edited out the confusion.

I'd like one too Waaaaghlord.

by **Dclone Soundwave** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:11 am

I get how this would work if Megaton got reformatted into Galvatron & no longer be Megatron, but as I understand it, Megatron & Galvatron are two seperate characters in the IDW Universe.

by **Monty Prime** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:31 am

tigertracks 24 wrote:
Monty Prime wrote:John Romita Sr. drew that Spider-Man cover (It was issue #50). The only published pieces of Spider-Man art by Kirby were a Toys for Tots ad and the cover of Amazing Fantasy #15.

Oh c'mon, small mistake. It's 2AM here! Sorry, but thanks for bringing it to my attention. Fixed.

I'm a classic Spidey buff, and JR Sr. is my idol, so yeah. Plus, that's my all time favorite comic cover. Glad I could help though.

News Credits: 7 · by **Chaoslock** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:29 am

Decepticlone Soundwave wrote:I get how this would work if Megaton got reformatted into Galvatron & no longer be Megatron, but as I understand it, Megatron & Galvatron are two seperate characters in the IDW Universe.

This is a cover to All Hail Megatron, the series that retconned the whole IDW universe, I don't think that a small retconning like rebuilding the backstory of Galvatron would be so big

Seriously, I like this cover better than the original.

News Credits: 156 · by **WhiteRabbit** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:14 am

Uh, guys, it clearly states the Galvatron piece is a print, not a cover. You're gonna have people searching for a comic that doesn't exist.

News Credits: 34 · by **Supreme Convoy** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:39 am

Classy, I like it! :CON:

News Credits: 1082 · by **Tigertrack** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:50 am

WhiteRabbit wrote:Uh, guys, it clearly states the Galvatron piece is a print, not a cover. You're gonna have people searching for a comic that doesn't exist.

It's misleading to say the least. A print can be considered a run of comics, as well as, a singular picture.