Tweet
I agree. Marvel seems to be stuck on killing characters to generate interest and sales. I understand they have to make a profit but this was just disrespectful to the character and the fans. 50 years and 700 issues and they do this to their premier character? The current Marvel only seems to care about the bottom line.
-
I agree. Marvel seems to be stuck on killing characters to generate interest and sales. I understand they have to make a profit but this was just disrespectful to the character and the fans. 50 years and 700 issues and they do this to their premier character? The current Marvel only seems to care about the bottom line.sigpic
"I've seen things you wouldn't believe."
- Roy Batty -
Last edited by Thor; Jan 3, '13, 2:14 PM.sigpic
"I've seen things you wouldn't believe."
- Roy BattyComment
-
Quesada is no longer directly working in an everyday capacity with the comics. His key function is being a liaison between the film division and the comics division of Marvel Entertainment. Axel Alonso, former Spider-Man editor, is now working in Quesada's former capacity.
This is just a storyline. Peter Parker will be back as Spider-Man. His mind is still active and his body is as well at the end of the story. Doc Ock's body is the one that died. No doubt Octavius' mind will eventually be excised from Parker's body. The storyline is reminiscent to ones like Reign of the Supermen or Knightfall or Bucky as Cap or the Clone Saga of the 1990s among others. It will run for a time and then the status quo will return. The storyline is no more of a disrespect to the character or the character's fans than any other storyline, unless you choose to view it that way. Spider-Man is heroic in every instance in the story. In fact, much of the storytelling relies on replaying various memories or scenes from past comics. His costume, core values, personality aren't changed. It's just that Parker and Doc are sharing head space and will be battling for dominance.
If it were a one issue story with a resolution at the end, no one would get upset. Spider-Man is going to end up winning. There's no use in getting upset about it, imo.Comment
-
I believe once stunts like this are needed to generate interest it reflects on the companies/writers/editors ability to come up with original and engaging stories.
In the mid eighties Jim Shooter tried to expand Marvel's appeal by adding child and adult lines outside of the usual regular line. He even went as far as creating a "New Universe" outside regular Marvel continuity. Of course, this failed miserable but he was at least thinking of the need to not rely on their characters as much as they have currently are.
Now that Disney owns Marvel im suprised more work hasnt been done to branched out beyond the Marvel Superheroes toward Movie adaptations and licensed material. I bet a quality Donald Duck comic would be pretty popular in the grocery store magazine area. I've seen some Disney magazines but characters comics would be nice.
Maybe doing that would take some of the burden away from having to generate high sales on their superhero books and they could concentrate more on their quality.Comment
-
>I believe once stunts like this are needed to generate interest it reflects on the companies/writers/editors ability to come up with original and engaging stories.
Well.... this isn't new. I don't think you're wrong; but I don't think it's the result of any individual. It's more a problem of the nature of the books themselves. (It's also why I didn't care so much for superhero comics when I was a kid.) The difference is us; that since the 80's we don't move on after a few years.... meaning the publishers and writers suddenly had to create continuity that'd hold our interests for the long run. Something you really can't do in a perpetual book. (Like how folks would laugh at Peter Parker being a grad student for almost 20 years....) You eventually hit a wall wherein you must either start over, or drastically (and lastingly) change the character. When your readership rotated every 3 to 5 years this wasn't a problem. Hell; every Spiderman story ever; in one form or another happens withing the first 30 or so issues of the comic.
>Of course, this failed miserable but he was at least thinking of the need to not rely on their characters as much as they have currently are
Also true, and the reason they all failed is timing. THey came out during a time when the fans were consolidating. The readers were caught up in the "no! comics is serious!" thing, craving more "depth" and impact. The majority of the BUYERS were speculators; people interested only in the big names 'cos those are the ones that brought the big bucks. Those things together resulted ina dramatic narrowing of comics in general; not just the superheroes. (Note that Gold Key, Harvey, Charltan.... most of the secondary companies disappeared around this time.) That narrowing led to an increasingly diminishing fan base and when the speculatorts were turned off by the 90's gimmicks the WHOLE bottom fell out. Even the readers started leaving 'cos once you'd seen every possible permutation of every Jim Lee ripoff (which didn't take long) there really wasn't anything else out there for you.
Diversity is the key; which is why the rampant nerd rage of the current era frightens me. Folks rage over the smallest thing, and calmour for the old days.... what's already been done. New fans aren't gonna care so much for that. Not that there isn't a lot of fun to be had.... and a lot to be learned from the past eras; but for the books to truly thrive they have to be allowed to find their own voice. Yeah; you're not gonna like a lot of it. Sometimes experiments don't produce positive results. Sometimes it's you.
>im suprised more work hasnt been done to branched out beyond the Marvel Superheroes toward Movie adaptations and licensed material.
I'm betting that's 'cos the comics themselves don't generate enough income for Disney to care. That's the problem with each new level of corporate conglomeration: the decision makers become further removed from the product, so they care less. Especially if the numbers are low. Back in the day the comics mattered to the folks producing them because the comics THEMSELVES were the producers of income. Not just for the folks in the trenches, but for the higher up decison makers, who weren't more than a few steps away from said trenches.
>I bet a quality Donald Duck comic would be pretty popular in the grocery store magazine area.
It might, but when you look at it the main Disney characters have been relegated to WAY juvenile fare these days and a comic might not sell so well to the percieved 5 and under audience. The magazines are cheap to make: some house art and a few pics of the tweenybopper stars Disney owns and Bob's yer uncle!
Don C.Comment
-
As far the book itself, I actually liked the beginning with PP on the "other side" seeing Gwen, Capt Stacy. etc. All downhill from there though.Comment
-
I've tried to read this thing 3 times now. Ugh.
Here's how I see Superior Spider-man going: He does all the same things we've seen Spidey do over the years but now we'll have captions like " Fools! They see Peter Parker eating this bowl of Captain Crunch but it is really I! Doctor Otto Octavious! hahahaha!" and this will go on for 6 months till everyone is sick of it and readership dies off and they bring back the real Parker.Comment
-
Good call. I didnt consider that. '85-'86 was also the period when alot of changes were going into effect. Gimmicky things like Fall of the Mutants and Secret Wars 2 were becoming more common place. DC had just went thru a really big change as well with DKR and a reboot. Marvel had great variety during this period though but this may have been during its tail-end. Epic was a really good imprint, sorry that it didnt last.Also true, and the reason they all failed is timing. THey came out during a time when the fans were consolidating. The readers were caught up in the "no! comics is serious!" thing, craving more "depth" and impact. The majority of the BUYERS were speculators; people interested only in the big names 'cos those are the ones that brought the big bucks. Those things together resulted ina dramatic narrowing of comics in general; not just the superheroes. (Note that Gold Key, Harvey, Charltan.... most of the secondary companies disappeared around this time.) That narrowing led to an increasingly diminishing fan base and when the speculatorts were turned off by the 90's gimmicks the WHOLE bottom fell out. Even the readers started leaving 'cos once you'd seen every possible permutation of every Jim Lee ripoff (which didn't take long) there really wasn't anything else out there for you.Comment
-
>He does all the same things we've seen Spidey do over the years but now we'll have captions like " Fools! They see Peter Parker eating this bowl of Captain Crunch but it is really I! Doctor Otto Octavious! hahahaha!"
*snerk* I would read the hell out of that!
>'85-'86 was also the period when alot of changes were going into effect.
Yeah. The biggest conflagration was the B&W collapse. Comic shops originally came about (as a big thing) 'cos they were the only place to get the underground and independent books. Those books catered to older audiences. For a while. Eventually EVERYONE with a pen saw 'em as a way to make a couple bucks, the market got flooded, the distributors and shops couldn't keep up.... or tell what was gonna sell, what didn't blow, etc; and the bottom fell out. Marvel and DC had been trying to make inroads into the shops with limited results since the patrons of the time didn't care for superheroes so much. When the bottom fell out of the B&W stuff, the shops stocked more Marvel and DC.... sure sellers, reliable publishing schedules, etc. Marvel and DC jumped on this, and that's when you got stuff like "Elektra: Assassin," "Watchmen," the beginnigs of the "NO! Comics is serious!" wave.... It came about 'cos Marvel and DC now had acces to a more mature audience (kinda like in the early 70's) which allowd and REQUIRED different kinds of stories.
....and like the 70's it couldn't be sustained. You can't do "mature" books where nothing ultimately happens, and you can't have anything actually happen in a book where time can't pass....
>Gimmicky things like Fall of the Mutants and Secret Wars 2 were becoming more common place.
Hell; Secret Wars 1 is what I consider the first non-event. "We'll team all our really popular, important characters together.... plus Spider Woman (ZING!) introduce an all-powerful godlike being and the only result will be new longjohns for Spidey!" The gimmicks became common out of desperation once the bottom started falling out again.
>Marvel had great variety during this period though but this may have been during its tail-end.
They did, but they didn't, but they did.... The problem was the same thing we saw in the 90's (which seems to come around every decade or so) where EVERYONE would do whatever the successful thing was. Hence EVERYBODY going all dark and gritty. Marvel saw the benefit of branching out.... especially into the kiddie stuff (no doubt the influence/income of the Marvel/Sunbow coupling) but even THAT went by the wayside when they discovered their new wunderkind.... who would later on create Image. (The 90's version of the 80's boom.)
What we're seeing now is a Marvel and DC trapped by those two decades. They NEED to get out, but they can't 'cos they consolidated so much of their ideals and actual production infrastructure into those templates. They're still catering to the (long gone) speculators and (obsessive, never happy, ever diminishing) comic shop crowds. They have no choice. Think what would happen if they went with cheaper production methods.... like cheaper paper. The hue and cry about how they were pulling a fast one on the readers would be deafening. Or if they paid less for talent, or took a chance on some genuinely different stuff. "This is just soap opera, Twilight-pandering BS! Where are my 20 different Spiderman books!!!!"
On the weird side, Marvel and DC editing themselves out of the mainstream continuity like that ("NOT a dream! NOT an imaginary tale!") was amazingly GOOD for N. American comics. We have acces to so much now.... mostly 'cos comics came out of the comic shops and into the bookstores where normal people could get at them. Whole new audience. Bigger market too.
There's a lot of good, pertinent ideas in McCloud's book "Reinventing Comics," if anyone's interested.
>Epic was a really good imprint, sorry that it didnt last.
Epic was another one of them things that suffered from unfortunate timing. It was an attempt at a more grownup kind of comic, but it borrowed a lot from the 70's comic magazine template (which was already fading when the Epic line started) and coming from Marvel it was associated with superheroes by the burgeoning independent fan base.
Don C.Comment
-
With print in danger of becoming obsolete the change may be coming whether they like it or not. (I just dont see print going away entirely) Maybe then we will see Marvel and DC try to branch out.What we're seeing now is a Marvel and DC trapped by those two decades. They NEED to get out, but they can't 'cos they consolidated so much of their ideals and actual production infrastructure into those templates. They're still catering to the (long gone) speculators and (obsessive, never happy, ever diminishing) comic shop crowds. They have no choice. Think what would happen if they went with cheaper production methods.... like cheaper paper. The hue and cry about how they were pulling a fast one on the readers would be deafening. Or if they paid less for talent, or took a chance on some genuinely different stuff. "This is just soap opera, Twilight-pandering BS! Where are my 20 different Spiderman books!!!!"
I know a little about comics (or at least use to, kinda rusty now) but you got a good handle on it.
Scotts Understanding Comics was a good read. I wouldnt mind reading that one to.Last edited by Figuremod73; Jan 5, '13, 8:23 PM.Comment
-
Could this all be to suck readers in to only reveal.......... This peter was the clone after all?
Marvel couldn't be that dumb, could they?Looking for Infinite Heroes Robin and Catwoman
And Super Powers BatmanComment
-
>With print in danger of becoming obsolete the change may be coming whether they like it or not.
That's what blows my mind about Marvel and DC: they're wasting such a great opportunity to become THE big publishers of funnybooks again! New format, new audience, new ideology. Plus; downloads are super-cheap compared to print (no distribution, no warehousing, no print shop) they should be FLOODING to internets with all sorts of weird stuff! It's a fantastic way to experiment. And so far, nobody's cornered the market on the whole digital thing. Makes it easier to break ground.... or at least LOOK like you are. The problem is; they charge WAY too much for them (almost as much as a print book) and they use 'em as extensions of the print books that nobody's buying.
Don C.Comment
-
I've stopped buying new comics. Because they suck.
And you know what?
I'm so relieved!.
.
.
"When things are at their darkest, it's a brave man that can kick back and party."Comment
-
Superior Spider-man wasn't so bad I guess. It's the first Marvel book I've bought since...I can't remember. I don't like how it's coming out twice a month though. That seems a bit much. I downloaded that Marvel AR app on my ipad. I was expecting more from that. I was amused by the one video that came up where the writer was basically calling everyone who criticized him an idiot. That was gutsy. lolComment
Comment