|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 21, 2012 10:34:32 GMT -5
Below is a link I found very interesting. It talks about how a show like The Sopranos may have done harm to the TV experience by taking away the concept of episodes and making it a long form storytelling device. I find a LOT of parallels, especially to current Marvel philosophy. I find far too many issues where stories are just prelude and don't really tell a story themselves. I am not advocating a return to one and done storytelling issues, but rather that each issue feel like you got twenty odd pages of drama/excitement/human interest. The problem with approaching comics like you would a novel is that the reader controls the novel experience in terms of how much they want to digest, and doesn't control the comic experience in the same terms. In any case, found it interesting, decided to share... www.avclub.com/articles/did-the-sopranos-do-more-harm-than-good-hbo-and-th,69596/
|
|
|
Post by pulpcitizen on Feb 21, 2012 11:35:03 GMT -5
I don't think it is just Marvel, or just the big two; many comic books seem packaged and aimed towards long-term reading.
Taking TV examples, and tastes will vary, I like the episodic approach, with over-arching spine approach.
For example, the lightweight (but fun for me and the wife!) Mentalist takes such an approach; for the most part you can watch any episode as your theoretical first, but watch a few episodes and the pay-off is a backdrop that adds some extra weight of motivations and compulsion for the lead characters.
In the 60's and more so in the 70's Marvel (maybe more than DC?) did this with sub-plots. The main plot would be resolved in the core story (sometimes over 2 or 3 issues), and sub-plots would build until they mostly yielded a main plot (or occasionally went nowhere for whatever reasons).
However, the difference between serial, regularly published comics and serial TV drama, is that the latter will tend to build around a season. So for my money each season is effectively like one or maybe two collected editions worth of comics as an analogy - The Ultimates and the Ultimates 2 being classic examples of pretty much that very thing. However. most ongoings do not end up being strung out in that way 9it was simply an artefact of delays with Ultimates that caused this situation, wasn't it?).
But, and here is the thing, once that novel-like TV show is in motion, things are a little like a juggernaut I guess. Comics have greater opportunity to be light-footed and responsive to change. Whether or not publishers build on their available strengths or play to potential weakness in adapting the model of other media is another matter.
I'd like to see more done in ones, maybe like the old days, but with some modern sensibilities.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Feb 21, 2012 12:25:23 GMT -5
My wife and I started watching The Firm, and we've commented each week how there is no jumping on point. Even with the flashbacks, there are 4-5 layers in each episode. If you think of Byrne's writing when he has all of the teasers and subplots going on, then you'll have a feel for what this show is like. Not new-user friendly at all. So we're glad we got on board with the pilot, as we do enjoy the program.
Doug
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Feb 21, 2012 13:30:54 GMT -5
Most manga are like that as well, you can really only join at the beginning, but the problem is less noticeable because they are self-contained. More in general, to me it's a case of comic books becoming, by all intents and purposes, graphic novels.
I can't say that I mind, I quite like collecting back issues or searching Wikipedia. What annoys me is when you have 22 pages where *nothing* happens and it feels like a waste of money.
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Feb 21, 2012 23:03:17 GMT -5
Well Japan is a different culture, plus most manga have a beginning and end plotted out so they are far more like graphic novels in that sense. You know in two, five or ten years the story will be over. That's kind of what killed Lost for me. I got the impression that they never truly understood their endgame; they just kind of plotted around it to be clever and I still hate that ending today... Most American comics are plotted with no endgame in sight, so this deliberate storytelling style seems almost at odds with the overall plan of making these characters viable for thirty, forty, fifty years and longer as money making properties. For example, in World War Hulk the Hulk just went batsh*t crazy, fought the world, forced the evacuation of New York and pretty much destroyed Manhattan and somehow isn't the biggest terrorist in the world? How, pray tell? It would have been an interesting story if it had been his endgame, his final chapter. But it's not. And it leaves the character completely with little or no viability which is why the original green Hulk is still somewhat obscured especially with the Red Hulk taking on so many of his previous spots in MU books and crossovers. Also I singled out Marvel because writer Paul Jenkins made note of how Marvel was really gearing his work to write "for the trade." If you read this interview you'll see where he says he feels he has a chance to do more of the stories he likes at DC www.newsarama.com/comics/paul-jenkins-stormwatch-new-52-111220.htmlIn any case, no one denies that despite a huge several year period where comic book movies have become a linchpin of movie studios boxoffice plans, the source material, that is the comics they sprang from continually fade into obscurity. I think the density of the storylines and the brusque way comics treat anyone looking for an entry would make the four year old version of me (whose first comic was a Lee/Steranko Captain America, mind you) feel like an unwelcome intruder.
|
|
|
Post by pulpcitizen on Feb 22, 2012 4:30:18 GMT -5
I think I feel similarly, but coming from the 'other side of street' as you freedomfighter.
My first comic book was Brave and the Bold 153. A done in one story that captivated my attention. It was a story that could be read safely by a 6 year old, and I still believe that. few if any mainstream (I.e. not 'kids' lines) books from the big two meet that criteria let alone the done in one angle.
The last comic that did for me was probably...Brave and the Bold by JMS. Just goes to show you I guess.
But on topic, the open-ended nature of a continuing comic book drives against finite story-telling. With the regular reset to total numbering (including various volumes) for many marquee titles, I think the US comic book market is just not geared up to long-term stories with a defined end. There are exceptions like Cerebus, but how many of those exceptions are from the big two (maybe Starman under Robinson; what else that runs fror several years with a fairly defined end-point?). So events occurring within story are continually cranked up to the point that any internal plausibility has long gone into the distance; unfortunately the only way to communicate increasing threat is escalation of effect which is what stretches credibility I think. I don't see that changing.
That is not to say It can't change, but a massive culture shift would have to occur across the big two in terms of story-telling ethos.
|
|