|
Post by freedomfighter on Mar 5, 2010 17:34:16 GMT -5
Wow. I had like totally stopped reading New Avengers with Spider-man, Wolverine, Luke Cage, and Jessica Jones always at the forefront but with these NEW New Avengers - I might just be ready to give it a go. Funny how Bendis is always so eager to make major changes and upset the apple cart when it's someone else's apple cart, but he's stuck with the same main characters longer than any other Avengers writer in history. I didn't think about it but you're absolutely right. This stuff is so right in his wheelhouse. Bendis just seems to like primarily writing the same dozen or so characters. No problem with that, I guess. I just wish they'd stop acting like it's such a revolutionary take on modern comics. I'm tired of complaining. Marvel and now DC have both started upping their prices to 3.99 on many titles and I'm certainly not going to be buying Avengers of any kind so they might as well cater to those who will be buying the titles. I don't think it's a stretch to say those folks who are buying these books aren't bothered by continuity issues or the idea of characters being stretched too thin. Here's something I do find funny tho' Of all of Bendis' pet characters almost none of them ever get removed from the playing field (replaced like Bucky for Cap, or killed like Hawkeye, or exiled like Wanda or changed like Vision or going to the dark side yet again like Quicksilver did up until last year), His characters, his pet favorites seem to be the most static and the most stuck in the mud. I wouldn't count the Sentry and his recent dark turn because him going all dark IS pretty much par for the course. If I'm a reader I'm gonna notice that the writer's faves never seem to have any trouble making it out of most situations unscathed. And thus they're the most boring to see in action...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Mar 3, 2010 19:42:57 GMT -5
Big shocker- Wolverine was just added to the team... I just sort of give up totally. This is like waterboarding. I can't take the torture anymore...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Mar 2, 2010 17:50:58 GMT -5
SPIDER-MAN?? Wasn't he just announced as a member of the "Avengers" team? You know Wolverine is next up. That'll put Logan on what, four or five teams now (I know he's still with the X-Men, he's part of the X-Espionage Squad and now perhaps two Avenger teams.) Awesome...Friggin awesome...If awesome meant extreme hatred.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Mar 2, 2010 10:31:45 GMT -5
This is really quite depressing. Marvel just keeps pushing me further and further from the table in terms of buying their product.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 28, 2010 0:53:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 27, 2010 22:35:39 GMT -5
Yeah, but it expands further than that. If spidey needs access to a supercomputer, he doesn't have to do a crazy break-in at the Baxter Building, he just makes a phone call. If Pete needs a lawyer, he doesn't have to get lucky and get Matt Murdock (because Matt knows his secret i.d.), Stark likely has a crew of the best legal minds on retainer. If he needs to be in Europe, he can just borrow a quinjet. Part of what makes Spidey interesting is he has to be more creative than most of the well connected super heroes. He's not Bruce Wayne, he's not a member of the Justice League. Most of the JLA are not relateable. Flash can get anywhere at lightspeed, Batman's got ten billion dollars worth of toys, Wonder Woman, Superman, et. al. Maybe hangdog loser is too strong a characterization, but average joe may be better and hanging out with folks who've got billions of dollars resources tends to weaken that appeal. Heya FF, my apologies-- I've kept meaning to touch base on this again, and seem to keep skipping over it. Your points about the broader aspects of Spidey's concept (as it were) are quite valid, I think. It would be easy to have him fall into the trap of being "just another superhero." But the flip side of that coin, of course, is that by not having him expand or grow in his role as a . . . professional superhero (for lack of a better word). . . his character then becomes stagnant. Clearly, this is an inherent problem for characters (starting w/ Superman) that weren't created with several decades of ongoing adventures in mind. Unfortunately, maintaining a popular status quo AND having a character experience meaningful growth and change seems to be a mutually-exclusive demand on the writers. Thus we have aunts that die and then come back to life; wives that are killed and then not; clone duplicates that gamely try to take on the mantle, and are rejected wholesale (rightly so) by us fans; babies that are born and then disappear under shady circumstances from the delivery room; teaching positions that are taken up and then discarded (I really miss that development-- liked it a lot, no matter how impractical-); and, ultimately, entire marriages that are wiped from the face of the MU's internal memory. And where does that leave us? With a Pete/Spidey that is effectively in the same stage of life as he was (no kidding) about 30 to 35 years ago. Bleah. But I'm straying a bit--- Ultimately, Pete's responsibility obsession would drive him to work under circumstances where he would be assured of doing the most good (i.e.- in a team environment). . . w/out having to compromise a) his principles and/or integrity, or b) his secret identity. Now, I can completely see where a revamped, sanctioned Avengers squad could cause Pete to chafe at aspects of A) and be outright at odds w/ B)-- and maybe that's where a common ground is to be had. Maybe there's an official "Associate" level of membership to be had, as opposed to the old Reserve or Provisional memberships. Basically a "field operative" member that doesn't officially have access to computers, quinjets, labs, security clearances, etc that Full Members do. In return, he retains his secret identity, and is freed up from a lot of the official, internal duties of the team (do they still do monitor duty?). In fact, I think this situation could make for a very telling story thread in the book. It doesn't sound pretty. And, if nothing else, it could truly settle the question of whether Spidey will or will not work in the Avengers. You know-- what he needs is for the old Defenders to really re-unite-- that group was much more his style, although I'm not if the interpersonal chemistry is there. Hoo-boy, another long one- HB I get your points and they would be valid except... Every Spider Man comic is somebody's first. Some twelve year old kid is buying Spidey for the first time (sadly fewer and fewer as years go on). How fair is it to them that since we grew up with Spidey he has to now grow up with us? It is repetitive to have him go through the same problems ad infinitum, but having him go through them in a several year cycle does seem about right. It gives a group of readers a chance to get a strong story arc, several years of good stories and then someone else retells them in a fresher fashion. It does seem unfair to give some new kid Spider Man and his amazing mortgage payment and sport utility van instead of the young and more relatable Peter Parker. It's a tightwire act, I give you that one hundred percent, but I think you should always err on bringing new blood to the comic reading fold. And the completely accomplished and polished Spidey is not my idea of how to grab that audience. But again, I do think you're right that for longtime readers, he should experience some personal growth. However I don't think it preserves the legacy of the legend as much.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 24, 2010 13:46:56 GMT -5
I don't know if retailers get cashback anymore for unsold issues ... It may strike us as sleazy, or underhanded, or even humorous, but Marvel (or DC or any comic book company) has the right to set forth the terms of its sale to a distributor; and the distributor is expected to enforce the terms of that sale (to the retailer). Here Marvel is offering a variant issue as the premium (instead of a refund or discount. At least the "offer" is optional. Before the advent of the direct make/comic book retail stores, the accepted practice was that retailers could return unsold copies (by sending back the covers) and receive a discount or refund. Why return just the cover? The idea was that a "defaced" comic book could not be sold. Well, back in the day I bought many a coverless comic book from my neighborhood mom&pop candy store! These comics were a few pennies less than the new issues (at least, at the store I frequented) and usually just a few months older than the current issue on sale for a given title. I loved coming upon these comics; I relished the opportunity to collect "backwards." Anyway, this ancient "return covers for a refund" practice is largely a thing of the past, as for the last few decades Marvel/DC usually sells comics outright (at a discount) to the distributor with no return clause. In turn--and in accordance with the comic company's directions--the distributor sell the discounted comics to the retailers--again, with no return clause. Well that's the reason I didn't outright condemn Marvel for the move. However just because something is allowable, should it be done? One example I have is a friend owned a domain name. A person wanted the domain name and didn't want to pay a lot for it. The person decided to buy a bunch of similar domain names and said he would fill them with hardcore pornography, making it seem the original domain name would be too and thus people would be less inclined to visit the original site owned by my friend. The person never made a threat or specifically said I'm doing this to ruin your site to my friend, but the intent was clear. Marvel's intent was to have some retailers pull the 1st printing of a bunch of DC Comics that are part of a crossover story that is selling quite well (In Blackest Night, although to be honest I think the storyline is pure junk, maybe even worse than Marvel Zombies and that's saying something...) thus disrupting the enjoyment of DC readers and avid collectors who like the chase of 1st print runs. And this is something of a negative move. Imagine buying all the tickets to the new Harry Potter movie and forcing fans to wait a day or two to see the movie, after spoilers may be hitting the web. It's just obnoxious and says more about those who would such a thing. And wasn't the old buyback system was intended for issues past their saleability and not for fully viable issues that were still on sale?
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 17, 2010 10:40:25 GMT -5
I don't disagree that Spidey is a team player. The problem is it takes away from that hangdog loser element that makes him so easy to relate to. Wasn't he able to stay in Avengers tower when things went bad for him? It gets harder to relate to Spidey when he's got friends who can put him up in a million dollar penthouse... Wellllll, except if he's maintaining a secret identity (and the whole fiasco of his "outing" during Civil War does seem to confirm why that's very important. . . although that, like, didn't happen now, so it's hard to tell if the lesson was learned. . . ), then living at Avengers Tower/Mansion/Penthouse isn't really an option. And maybe that's a condition of getting the stipend? Who knows. The hangdog/loser aspect of Spidey tends to be more a bi-product of his trying to juggle a normal life w/ that of an extremely busy superhero. Since we're not all hangdog losers, as it were, the more relatable aspects are just the ones where normal, everyday annoyances intrude upon what he's doing as a superhero. But, to my mind, his not being in the Avengers goes against the logic of the MU, and against the natural tendencies of good story-telling. It long ago got to the point where contrivances were being made in order to have him not fully join. And granted, I think that was in deference to his Sad Sack mystique-- but at that point it's forcing an unnatural path, and is just silly. It would take a clever writer, yes, but I am sure it's possible for him to stay with the group, and not have them serve as a deus ex machina for every personal bump he has in the road. In fact, his discovery of that fact could prove a worthy storyline on its own. HB Yeah, but it expands further than that. If spidey needs access to a supercomputer, he doesn't have to do a crazy break-in at the Baxter Building, he just makes a phone call. If Pete needs a lawyer, he doesn't have to get lucky and get Matt Murdock (because Matt knows his secret i.d.), Stark likely has a crew of the best legal minds on retainer. If he needs to be in Europe, he can just borrow a quinjet. Part of what makes Spidey interesting is he has to be more creative than most of the well connected super heroes. He's not Bruce Wayne, he's not a member of the Justice League. Most of the JLA are not relateable. Flash can get anywhere at lightspeed, Batman's got ten billion dollars worth of toys, Wonder Woman, Superman, et. al. Maybe hangdog loser is too strong a characterization, but average joe may be better and hanging out with folks who've got billions of dollars resources tends to weaken that appeal.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 16, 2010 18:10:22 GMT -5
Good observation. Someone at my LCS said that ending all the titles and starting over with Bendis was just new recipes with the same old cook. That seemed right to me till I read what you wrote here. Now I realize it's more like - same old recipes, same old cook - new menu calling all the dishes by a different name. So in fact it's pretty much Bendis' whole "Pet Team", isn't it? With Luke traded out & Thor brought in. Again, an appalling lack of powerful female members, which I should be surprised at, but then I find that, I guess, I'm not. I'll keep my subscription going, because someday- SOMEDAY- this status quo will come to an end. Sales trends will change. Remember, the X-Men were once the overwhelming tsunami of the entire industry, and even their dominance seems to have waned (although I should check sales figures to see if I'm correct about that). Although Spidey stopped being Spidey for me after BND, I do still maintain that I've always liked him being in the Avengers. Every few months I go off on a wheeze here about how he's the quintessential team player, and that the Avengers is really an ideal situation for him, etc.---- but I'm sure you've all heard it from me before. . . HB I don't disagree that Spidey is a team player. The problem is it takes away from that hangdog loser element that makes him so easy to relate to. Wasn't he able to stay in Avengers tower when things went bad for him? It gets harder to relate to Spidey when he's got friends who can put him up in a million dollar penthouse... How come Marvel can put out 64 page book for the same price as much of their current, regular size line?
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 15, 2010 11:23:56 GMT -5
I knew most of you wouldn't be happy about it. Bendis said that the roster wouldn't be limited to Five characters Marvel wouldn't comment when they were asked if this was the final roster for the Avengers team. If I find out anything else I will post the link. well now in fairness, this is mostly a sandbox bendis has already played in. spider man, logan, iron man, cap (other cap, i know...) and spider woman were in his original lineup. he's been messing with hawkeye for years now. the only new wrinkle is thor... nobody wants to see echo/ronin again, but a more eclectic lineup wouldn't have hurt, would it?
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 12, 2010 19:59:49 GMT -5
This is only tangentially related, but I didn't see any mention of this; not sure how it slipped through the cracks. But earlier this week, Marvel announced that Luke Cage will be leading a new team of Thunderbolts after the reboot: www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=24771Consisting of Moonstone, Crossbones, Ghost, Juggernaut and Man-Thing. So it looks as though Cage won't be on the Avengers after the relaunch, unless he's doing the magic Wolverine double duty. Actually I mentioned it somewhere around midway of this thread. Feeling quite invisible now...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 10, 2010 22:09:12 GMT -5
Well I just read how Brubaker envisions this to be an espionage book, so I'm already losing any interest I had in the title. To me, his Cap is a dull plodding mess. I'm also envisioning a lot "grittier" and lesser known characters, likely villains to be assorted in this cast. Hope he proves me wrong on all counts... i would like to enjoy an Avengers title for the next few years. www.newsarama.com/comics/secret-avengers-ed-brubaker-100209.html
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 10, 2010 0:47:25 GMT -5
www.newsarama.com/comics/siege-3-dc-variant-100122.htmlHmm...good business or cutthroat kind of sleazy move by Marvel? the only way you can get this book is by sending in covers from 1st printings of 50 books. Doesn't that give the retailer incentive to short stock his 1st printings and put out 2nd printings? Second printings will likely still move and the distributor will still get a variant. I don't know if retailers get cashback anymore for unsold issues and I'm sure many keep them for their back issue bins and thanks to this move these issues won't be there. If it's a success it could lead to more of these moves, which overall would likely be bad for the industry. I dunno...Anybody have a really strong grasp on how distribution works these days? I know from a few years back and can't say that I'm completely current on how/if returns work these days.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 10, 2010 0:36:56 GMT -5
The folks at comics alliance seem to think they might be breaking up Agents of Atlas and Gorilla Man might be getting the nod to sign on to Secret Avengers. Also it appears that Luke Cage will be leading the Thunderbolts now, so if it's a group of reformed villains and heroes in Secret Avengers it's pretty much gonna be an overdone theme, to me anyway... www.comicsalliance.com/2010/02/09/luke-cage-leads-a-new-crop-of-thunderbolts-this-may/
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 10, 2010 0:07:10 GMT -5
Yeesh. This was kinda bad for me. The special effects were terrible and Hawkman's helmet was a little too 1980's "Flash Gordon" and the chest plate made him look pretty out of shape. (some images here: www.comicsalliance.com/2010/02/08/absolute-justice-more-like-absolute-just-shut-up-already/Johns would've been far smarter to use JSA'ers who didn't need so much fx to look interesting. And I know he's got a personal reason for throwing Stargirl into everything, but man she was the low point by far. Well except that Icicle suddenly became a major threat through a very convoluted twist. hurm... The story just sorta came together and didn't flow in any real way. I love the JSA and really wanted to like it. Have a feeling Roy Thomas had written it, it would've been a lot better. And in case any one is looking for it online it's called Absolute Justice, not secret justice. Not trying to nitpick, it'll just make it easier in case anyone is looking for it on some streaming site or whatever the kids do these days...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 9, 2010 19:36:04 GMT -5
(quick- name fifteen excellent Avengers villains, and it should exclude Loki who's really just a Thor villain that gets ambitious...) The Zodiac (12), Ultron, Doom, Nefaria ;D I didn't know about the Shroud posing as crime boss, it could be him then, but there is something in the borders of that cape that makes me think to Taskmaster (and someone on Newsarama pointed out that the first teaser could be Constrictor). Then again, it all depends on who's drawing. I'm kind of hoping he will die in Siege, but you are right that it's certainly a possibility, although with a change in costume as this picture seems to have a hood together with the cape. Going down the "new costume" route, Penance is also possible I suppose. I should've seen that coming... ;D Throw in the Masters of Evil and you're over two dozen. I would really prefer to not see yet another villainous Avenger team after Dark Avengers, although since I'm not the biggest Brubaker fan I probably won't be buying it unless it knocks my socks off anyway.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 9, 2010 17:20:17 GMT -5
I would so rather it was the Shroud. The Avengers have so few good villains (quick- name fifteen excellent Avengers villains, and it should exclude Loki who's really just a Thor villain that gets ambitious...) it really would be nice to keep Taskmaster on that side of the fence. Shroud is an incredibly interesting character who's been posing as a crime boss for years. Maybe he wants to clean up his name?
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 6, 2010 13:11:05 GMT -5
Is it just me or does Thor's new garb pretty much look like the Black Knight? Oh and back on the Ares thing, don't forget that most of the Gods have been portrayed as anywhere from minor league jerks to major league baddies by the writers at Marvel. Pluto, Aphrodite, Zeus have all been pretty mean and nasty. Venus is looking pretty mean in the latest Agents of Atlas series and Athena seems fairly manipulative in Hercules these days. Don't forget the Gods do sort of look at mortals like pets in a way, so meddling in their affairs seems divine right. It really doesn't seem out of character to me that when it comes to favored sons like Hercules that they act like jerks. Given Ares' naturally aggressive bent, it seems in line he would care little for people who exist for the length of a heartbeat in his mind. I suppose the Norse Gods do get better treatment but that's to be expected with the size of their cast. However, there are almost as many bad Gods as their are good ones. For every Thor, there's a Loki, for every Balder, a Tyr, for Sif an Enchantress, etc... I think when you've already got Thor and Hercules and to a lesser extent, Valkyrie adding more Gods to teams somewhat diffuses the awe factor of having a "God" on the roster.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 3, 2010 22:29:47 GMT -5
I checked out this link, thanks-- and you know, it's not like me to say this, but this really does sound like solidly thought-out growth of character to me (as opposed to just making up convenient characterization on the fly). I've not noticed any particular depth with Bendis' handling of Ares, but his overall recent character arc is extremely compelling. Like, I may go and pick up that mini-series. I must submit that I always felt Ares was really poorly handled in his Avengers appearances over the years. For a God of War, which should supposedly carry a mantle of honor, courage, determination & sacrifice along with it, he rarely failed to turn to bluster, dishonor, treachery, and deceit to achieve his ends. It's tricky, 'cause these "gods" have to be real people as well as the archetypes they represent-- but there's no getting around that they must to some degree embody the traits of what they're the "god" of. I mean, would there be a Poseidon that was afraid of water? An Apollo that had a problem with heights? A Dionysus that was a strict tee-totaler? Really, over the years Ares seemed to be generally written like every other one-dimensional, bitter megalomaniac-- and it was left at that. I do think this is much better. Boy, and my favorite exchange ever: ARES: No one calls me broom-head and lives to speak of it!! HULK: Broom-HEAD!!! HB The inherent problem with a God of War is that he's not a God of warriors, but of the act of war itself. And think about how many wars are actually started over noble motives. Not warriors themselves, who are often noble, but actual wars. Most are fought over land, money and other resources. War is actually due to most base human actions. One can probably bring up allies during WW2 and U.S. during the Revolutionary war, but those were defensive actions. The wars themselves were actually started by megalomaniacs seeking power and money. I think it's perfectly in line for Ares to embody a lot of base human emotions. War is essentially the inability to settle a conflict without violence.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 2, 2010 10:13:49 GMT -5
Marvel has just opened my budget a bit. Between the new price hike and seeing that Bucky/Cap will still be in the Avengers, I'm done with the title and with no Mighty Avengers I won't feel the need to follow the legacy at all. I've had several years of Bendis and not one issue has ever risen above "ehhh" for me. And this may be a bit nitpicky, but why the hell does Bucky carry what looks like a modified German Luger? It's certainly not the best gun available and given his history fighting the Nazis, he probably wouldn't want to carry their weapon of choice. Just one of those things that Marvel does that makes no sense to me...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 31, 2010 17:44:46 GMT -5
I'm also annoyed that I wrote "Marvels" instead of "Marvel" In any case, I've tried to buy issues because I fear waiting for the trades leaves sales in a precarious position, and I don't do subscriptions because I never know if I'm gonna like a book month to month. I'll drop a book in a heartbeat these days. I often just wait for comic cons so I can haggle down the price on a collection of books. I hate to do it on books I like- I try and support those but Marvel has just made it incredibly difficult...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 30, 2010 1:31:16 GMT -5
Many of marvel's regular books are now 3.99. A buck increase. Nobody noticed? Nobody cared? Stopped buying? Sadly I am dropping a bunch of books. Just gave Incredible Hercules a run but at four bucks a pop, a year's worth of issues is a great dinner out that I won't eat if I keep buying it. As if I needed further incentive not to buy Marvel books...
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 23, 2010 19:01:00 GMT -5
There are sources. Diamond usually lists the top selling titles. www.diamondcomics.com/public/default.asp?t=1&m=1&c=3&s=5&ai=90648Problem is I believe numbers are based on how many copies are shipped and not sold. For example, the local comic shop may order 100 issues of New Avengers but only sell 50. Then they may order 40 issues of Incredible Hercules and sell all of them. So realistically they only sold ten more copies of New Avengers but they ordered twice as many. I don't think comic shops get to do returns anymore and so they're left with those fifty copies. of course whenever Marvel does a new event, the New Avengers are usually tied into it, thus they can't reduce the order because then if it sells well, the comic shop is left holding the bag because people want the tie in issues to the event, so new Avengers does sell well often enough to warrant continually ordering high numbers. But I think it's an artificial sales inflation and the same sales tactic that Marvel used to do with X-Men. Funny how they flipped that switch, right? They used to say it was the X-Men were just a better seller and more tied into the audience, yet we've seen if you put the same sort of emphasis on Avengers titles you get the same results. This is just proof to me that if you put yourself solidly behind a title with marketing and effort it sells well. Thanks, FF. And you did anticipate a couple of questions I was going to have. Which end of the transaction sales figures were being drawn from was a specific one. You know, even though it was also confusing & hard to read, that old annual Declaration of Distribution rectangle-thingy we used to see was quite full of enlightening info once you figured out how to look at the numbers and what they represented. As always, I could be mis-remembering, but wasn't there a time where selling 75K to 100k copies of a title a month was the low-ish expected norm? And that if a title dropped below that, it was seriously considered for cancellation? Granted, it was all advertising-driven, then, so reliance on high circulation made much more sense. I think there was a point in the late 70's or early 80's where Iron Man had dropped below 50K, and I had a buddy who was loudly sounding the death knell for that book. I also remember 'WAAAAY back when Daredevil kept getting bounced to bi-monthly status until he could get his numbers up. (Boy, remember when bi-monthly books were common? Like, the first 15 or so issues of the New X-Men? What with decompression, no title could survive that storytelling pace, at this point.) HB Oh yeah, I think the sell thru point was much higher, but that was the case with most magazines. And I believe newsstands, candy stores, etc. could send back what didn't sell. That's why covers were usually so bombastic. Each issue had to move! So yeah I can imagine many books of the day needed to sell at least sixty thousand to be considered successful. People used to read more. I walked by the local Starbucks the other day and everyone had their head buried in some electronic device. like twenty five people. Even people sitting together. Print is simply not much of a diversion for people any more. I hold little hope for the continuation of print publications.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 23, 2010 15:05:10 GMT -5
[quote author I doubt it. If they want to do an Avengers movie comic, they'll just do one. Marvel has already opened up the door to alternate versions with the Ultimates and they don't mind having several different Avengers teams. If all the Avengers titles were still selling well it would make no sense to cancel a bunch of moneymakers for a single book tied into a movie as I've yet to see interest in a comic spur from a film release. I always see tons of New Avengers, Dark Avengers, etc. in my LCS going several issues back. The print runs may be high, but I wonder if comic shops are getting stuck with all those issues. I think Marvel simply realizes comics sell cyclically and bringing back the originals in a new number one will make money for several years. Boy, wasn't it just a few short months ago on these boards that there was a discussion about the fact that New Avengers was the top-selling comic in the industry? Is it possible that there's been such a dramatic drop-off in sales? (I'm sure the economy isn't helping matters) Is there a website or link somewhere that gives accurate monthly sales counts for each title in the industry? I have a sense some folks are able to use it as a reference. . . HB There are sources. Diamond usually lists the top selling titles. www.diamondcomics.com/public/default.asp?t=1&m=1&c=3&s=5&ai=90648Problem is I believe numbers are based on how many copies are shipped and not sold. For example, the local comic shop may order 100 issues of New Avengers but only sell 50. Then they may order 40 issues of Incredible Hercules and sell all of them. So realistically they only sold ten more copies of New Avengers but they ordered twice as many. I don't think comic shops get to do returns anymore and so they're left with those fifty copies. of course whenever Marvel does a new event, the New Avengers are usually tied into it, thus they can't reduce the order because then if it sells well, the comic shop is left holding the bag because people want the tie in issues to the event, so new Avengers does sell well often enough to warrant continually ordering high numbers. But I think it's an artificial sales inflation and the same sales tactic that Marvel used to do with X-Men. Funny how they flipped that switch, right? They used to say it was the X-Men were just a better seller and more tied into the audience, yet we've seen if you put the same sort of emphasis on Avengers titles you get the same results. This is just proof to me that if you put yourself solidly behind a title with marketing and effort it sells well.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 22, 2010 18:22:03 GMT -5
What if all Marvel is doing is really clearing the decks in anticipation of the Avengers movie? Laying the foundation for a title which will be in place and operating by the time the movie hits? That's a thought. Trying to get the comic line a little more in synch w/ the movie line? That way marketing benefits them both? Makes business sense, sure. If I didn't so hate the status quo, I'd probably be offended by this possibility. Hmm. Could Disney's hand be somehow evident, here? A bit of a "soft" corporate mandate from the new bosses to take the Marvel Universe back in a direction that they were probably more familiar with? I know it's a crazy notion, but I feel like Disney could not have possibly been clued in to the up-to-the-moment state of the MU. comic book line. Or, like, even the past five years or so. Could the deal have been based entirely on the movie opportunities and sort of a vague memory of what Marvel Comics were like? Oh, surely not. . . HB I doubt it. If they want to do an Avengers movie comic, they'll just do one. Marvel has already opened up the door to alternate versions with the Ultimates and they don't mind having several different Avengers teams. If all the Avengers titles were still selling well it would make no sense to cancel a bunch of moneymakers for a single book tied into a movie as I've yet to see interest in a comic spur from a film release. I always see tons of New Avengers, Dark Avengers, etc. in my LCS going several issues back. The print runs may be high, but I wonder if comic shops are getting stuck with all those issues. I think Marvel simply realizes comics sell cyclically and bringing back the originals in a new number one will make money for several years.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 20, 2010 12:44:50 GMT -5
I don't expect Marvel to bring back the same roster they've been using for years. I'm interested about this, actually. I'm betting we'll see the return of a more "iconic" line-up of Avengers under a big name writer -- and I'm betting it won't be Bendis. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I want Bendis to take his little gang of Avengers (Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Sentry, etc) and put them in a new Defenders book or something. The up-coming Heroic Age might just usher in what I dream of every time I read Cap: Ed Brubaker on Avengers. He's gotten a lot of awards for his work and I guess I've liked some of his crime stuff, but I'm not a fan of Brubaker on hero comics. He wrote Captain America by pretty much making Bucky his focus and didn't he write Daredevil with Iron Fist in the costume? All he's shown me on Cap is that he knows how to take a sidekick and retcon him into an assassin and then gritty up the legacy of Captain America, while making Steve Rogers superfluous in his own book. And the "time bullet" story in Cap Reborn may have been as bad as anything Bendis every came up with. (I'm not the only one. This blog made me laugh...) mightygodking.com/index.php/2009/12/30/worst-comics-ideas-of-2009/I read the issue of New Avengers guest starring Hank Pym and Bendis actually followed what Slott has done with the character and I didn't hate it, just found it uninspiring. I think Bendis and Bru are both somewhat dull decompressionists, so for me it would be a lateral move to have Brubaker on the book.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 19, 2010 11:30:45 GMT -5
Um, about that...sorry? Franklin Richards wants Peyton Manning to win and Franklin created his own universe once, so that's probably the way it's gonna shake out. Ooooooooohhhhh, I daresay that Franklin's allegiance is MUCH more likely placed with the New York Football Jets, really. Eh? Don'tcha think? I mean, he does live in New York, & all. And Reed & Sue strike me as more of an AFC kinda couple (whereas I'm SURE ol' Ben has GIANTS memorabilia adorning much of his room!). I mean, actual, obvious, indiscrete altering of reality is pretty much the only reasonable explanation for Nate Kaeding missing three field goals. . . (Mostly, us folks in the DC Metro area were just glad to see the Cowboys take a shellacking by Minnesota. . . ) Please forgive the off-topic tangent, friends. . . ! HB Actually I was cheering for the Vikes too, mainly because it's nice to see an old man QB'ing a team to a win over the young turk. As for Franklin, hmm, could be a Jet fan bit they haven't been very good for a long time. I could see the clean cut Manning being his fave, but yes Ben is probably a Giants fan. I actually see Reed as more of a college football guy, if at all. Exploring the Negative Zone every other second probably doesn't allow one to read stats often.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 18, 2010 0:47:51 GMT -5
I guess we should be prepared for some more giant events in marvel storytelling as there's still quite a few mutants and others who have probability altering powers which Marvel now defines as the power to change reality... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_characters_who_can_alter_probabilityI myself think of it as nothing more than changing the odds, which everyone can do anyway (If you carry a lightning rod during a thunderstorm, your chances of getting hit go up pretty high. I guess I can now control the universe because I altered probability...) Cool, FF! I'll take a San Diego Chargers Super Bowl win... Um, about that...sorry? Franklin Richards wants Peyton Manning to win and Franklin created his own universe once, so that's probably the way it's gonna shake out.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Jan 12, 2010 2:06:40 GMT -5
I guess we should be prepared for some more giant events in marvel storytelling as there's still quite a few mutants and others who have probability altering powers which Marvel now defines as the power to change reality... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fictional_characters_who_can_alter_probabilityI myself think of it as nothing more than changing the odds, which everyone can do anyway (If you carry a lightning rod during a thunderstorm, your chances of getting hit go up pretty high. I guess I can now control the universe because I altered probability...)
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Dec 21, 2009 13:10:24 GMT -5
[quote author=freedomfighter board=general thread=2754 post=32395 time=1261260312 I will say that if you look long enough, you will find many examples of writers who have duplicated stories and taken them in different directions. Mark Waid did a secret Skrull invasion storyline in Captain America that involved many of the same details as the recent secret invasion, but that storyline is really just a variation on what Roy Thomas did as a prelude to Kree-Skrull war. I must say that, of the examples BRBill cited, the only one that hadn't occured to me was the Sentry/Molecule Man parallel. That one doesn't seem quite as overt to me-- although there are elements of circumstance that would tend to make it feel similar. And perhaps even begin "writing itself" that way. Haven't followed Sentry closely at all, so I'm probably not a great judge. But, hey, what about that recent "Solve Everything" storyline in FF? Your point is sound, FF. This was nothing more than a "good guy" iteration of the Council of Cross-time Kangs (or some such alliterative title)! It was so heartily NOT a new concept, that I kept waiting for the Kang reference to crop up somewhere. Just as an acknowledgment. I guess borrowing is a hallowed, time-honored tradition. HB[/quote] I hated that storyline. In addition to the Cross Time Kang Council, it also reminded me of the last issue of Final Crisis when all the Supermans from various dimensions came together. To me it's a bad Pandora's box to open. Since there are an infinite number of parallel dimensions you never run out of assistance when things get rough. It's too easy a plot device. Why didn't the Reed Richardses just go get a bunch more Reeds with different perspectives when things fell apart (I gave up on the storyline so if they explained why they couldn't, fine but I tend to think the explanation won't hold water anyway...). But yeah there's little new under the sun. I find a good story has far more to do with the personality a writer imbues the characters with than the situations the heroes and villains find themselves in... That's why I can't usually fault Bendis plotwise. Even if he's swiping, he's usually taking good stuff. He tends to write the same three characters archetypes over and over again, though...
|
|