Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 132
  1. #91
    Benefactor / Malefactor H-E-D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    3,450

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyvolt2000 View Post
    Then you STOP writing for trades and do stand alone stories like we ALL grew up on in the 70s-80s-90s.
    OK Boomer.

  2. #92
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The issue isn't whether superhero comics today are for kids or not, or that superhero comics. Conway's argument is that continuity issues and serialized storytelling are the cause to blame for driving away readers. There's no evidence for that.

    Just because Conway argued for a genuine problem is no reason to validate everything he says.
    The problem is genuine though, just saying ''Ah nothing needs to change, we can just do the same things we did in the 80s and 90s to appeal to kids'' seems to have no basis to it.

    You may disagree about Conway's solution, but the problem remains, just ignoring it doesn't make it go away.


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The evidence is that serialized continuity and maturity is not the cause for driving readers away or failing to bring in new readers. I am demolishing Conway's argument because he made the claim in his screed. I have also offered evidence in support of my view that doing "starting points" isn't going to bring in new readers.
    But what is the current continuity doing to make Marvel and DC comics appealing to kids today? Also have just alluded to the past, you have outlined an argument for why kids today would fine paying 4 bucks for a single floppy issue that tells part of a story that could be wrapped in a giant crossover event that demands you read 3 other titles to get the full story? Why kids want that when there are a million other entertainment options that are more accessible and cheaper?


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    I don't know what your sentiment is. Are you trying to gauge if I am some gatekeeper who resists change or so on? If anything Conway's argument is in favor of gatekeeping despite sounding on the surface like the opposite. My argument is in favor of stuff like unionization, comic creators getting more benefits. Why do you ignore that? Why is a content issue so much easier to argue and talk about then actually changing the structure of how these companies are run?
    Where did I say anything against unionizing the writers? That would great, even if Marvel and DC will never allow it.

    I just want to ask one question, should the comic book industry cater almost exclusively to older fans or should it make some changes to appeal to kids today, not kids from the past?

    You have a bunch of alt-right people on Youtube and Twitter using canon as an excuse to gatekeep every sci-fi franchise out there, I think continuity porn is not good storytelling and it can come off as gatekeeping after all, that if you do not collect a hundred issues to keep with the convoluted continuity and massive crossovers, you are not a real fan.

    I have seen say Star Trek fanboys use canon as a gatekeeping method, just as much as comic book writers and at a certain point, one has to ask whether canon should just be a tool for writers to write great stories or if it should be some holy text that must be adhered to at all times and becomes a millstone over time:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvPLSk4kGwY

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Because the natural default state of comics do not favor the superhero genre's dominance. The dominance and stranglehold the superhero genre maintained on comics was artificial and engineered by outside political pressure. In the 50s, EC Comics and others were trailblazers and innovators, and the CCA was instituted to cut EC down to size. The superhero genre was best poised to adjust to those changes and that led it to gain monopoly on comics. But once censorship ended, when graphic novels and other stuff came in, things changed.
    Fair enough, but then stuff like the layoffs at DC is inevitable then. The current model cannot sustain itself and if you are okay with that, fair enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The Fox Cartoon made the MJ Spider-Man married into a clone and the real one stranded in some alternate dimension...so? The Fox Spider-Man Cartoon was if anything even more serialized than STAS.
    I think that Spider-Man cartoon lost me when it did that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    You are aware that OMD is guided by the same mentality that Conway is arguing for, right? This entire argument that comics are burdened with continuity and shouldn't change that Conway is arguing for is sub-rosa for the mentality that says characters shouldn't age, change or grow up. Continuity and serialization supports the latter. Conway himself has supported removing Spider-Man's marriage in the past.

    Complaining about OMD and defending Conway is a contradiction in terms. Because ultimately OMD is very much an attempt at a reset and change and one which ultimately didn't work because the stories that came after were as continuity heavy as before.
    I disagree, I think OMD tried to appeal to older fanboys who wanted to reset Peter Parker to his Silver Age status, its nerd nostalgia, it's insular, not inviting. All the alt-right fanboys on Youtube are obsessed with nerd nostalgia.


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    It's a good idea and tactic. Marvel did something similar years back with Sean McKeever's SPIDER-MAN LOVES MARY JANE and that was successful, popular, well-liked, and influential (on Spider-Man Homecoming among others). It didn't require shutting down all existing Spider-Man books.



    Yes, and that doesn't disturb me one jot. The conditions that led to the superhero genre's domination could never have lasted for ever. And even the current movies fixation with superheroes will end in time.



    The Simpsons haven't and they are still pretty popular and widely seen, even the later seasons which people complain about.
    That's an effective argument for me, considering I think the Simpsons should have been canceled after season 9.

  3. #93
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Overlord View Post
    You may disagree about Conway's solution, but the problem remains, just ignoring it doesn't make it go away.
    The fact it's not a problem that's going to solve by changing the content. It's not at heart a content problem. It's a distribution problem and an industry problem.

    But what is the current continuity doing to make Marvel and DC comics appealing to kids today?
    Well in the case of Marvel, they put out Kamala Khan and Miles Morales. Their "Fresh Start" initiative did really well as opposed to ANAD, Hickman's brought back Marvel's most beloved team in comics in a big way and tearing through the charts.

    Why kids want that when there are a million other entertainment options that are more accessible and cheaper?
    Kids would want that for the same reason they want a game that teases out aspects of a story that will be done in a sequel, why they watch a TV show and so on that can take years to come out, and so on and so forth. If the comic is good, well written and drawn, it will hook people in.

    I just want to ask one question, should the comic book industry cater almost exclusively to older fans or should it make some changes to appeal to kids today, not kids from the past?
    They should not cater exclusively to any set of fans. They should do comics that target different demographics, and to be truly successful they need to do a take on the title that is "all things to all people". That was Stan Lee's great gift as EIC, he brought in a really big tent of Marvel fans and that's how it should be. Lee roped in fans who liked DC Comics but he also roped in fans who disliked DC Comics, he roped in fans who read non-superhero comics, he roped in people who never read comics, and tried to get people from outside comics to write comics. Conway's idea isn't doing that. Catering to any set of fans, whether old or young, is self-destructive.

    If you cater to an older set of fans and collectors, you fall in a dead end of irrelevance and insularity. If you cater to younger fans or youth fans, you run into the Sonic the Hedgehog problem or the Ultimate Marvel problem. Sonic the Hedgehog was meant to be an icon that embodied 90s spirit and coolness as opposed to old stodgy timeless Mario. It worked for SEGA but then the early 90s became the mid-90s and late-90s, and a character so rooted in its zeitgeist can't adjust and last outside that. In the case of Ultimate Marvel it captured the zeitgeist of the 21st Century...a first-on-the-ground redo of Marvel characters in a presentation and style that was brand new and looked fresh in the 2000s. Then the mid-2000s and late-2000s came, and they became increasingly irrelevant. Ultimately, Marvel should try and be Mario and not Sonic.

    You have a bunch of alt-right people on Youtube and Twitter using canon as an excuse to gatekeep every sci-fi franchise out there,
    That's true and that's to be condemned. But again, just because alt-right people invoke continuity as an excuse to be racist and sexist, that doesn't mean that continuity and canon is inherently some evil thing. Many of the most left-wing people in comics are in favor of that -- Claremont, Moore, and so on.

    I think continuity porn is not good storytelling and it can come off as gatekeeping after all, that if you do not collect a hundred issues to keep with the convoluted continuity and massive crossovers, you are not a real fan.
    Not my sentiment at all. But again picking up and reading the latest comic without having familiarity with anything that came before is not a hurdle for new readers. The alternative to that, i.e. negative continuity and so on, would not be an improvement.

    Fair enough, but then stuff like the layoffs at DC is inevitable then. The current model cannot sustain itself and if you are okay with that, fair enough.
    The DC Layoffs were a result of WB having a poor set of corporate masters. It wasn't inevitable because that merger shouldn't have been approved to start with (nor Fox's with Disney for that matter).

    I disagree, I think OMD tried to appeal to older fanboys who wanted to reset Peter Parker to his Silver Age status,
    And who exactly do you think Gerry Conway is? He's very much (in this article at least) an older fanboy who wants to reset Peter Parker. What he describes in this article is essentially his way of saying comics were better before me, but after me it sucked. He's saying that the comics he read was the ideal state and later versions were irrelevant, cluttered and so on. All the arguments for resets, for retcons, for a whole-scale continuity do-over to go back to "How comics were in the '50s and '60s" have never come from the actual creators (Lee, Kirby, Ditko) but by self-annointed fanboys. Whether it's by John Byrne, Mark Waid, Gerry Conway what it amounts to in practise is "Kirby and Lee were great, I alone know Kirby and Lee' intentions, that gives me, self-annointed fanboy, to dismiss and diminish and denigrate the work of everyone that comes afterwards even if in theory they are equal to me".

    That's an effective argument for me, considering I think the Simpsons should have been canceled after season 9.
    Here's the thing there are fans who discovered Simpsons after Season 9 and so on who like the later seasons, or those who discover the current seasons.

    Everyone likes to have this sentiment that the party ended with them, even someone like Gerry Conway can't accept that the party got cooler after he left.
    Last edited by Revolutionary_Jack; 09-27-2020 at 01:08 PM.

  4. #94
    Fantastic Member captchuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    329

    Default

    Comics need to be simplified and sold in spots where humans see them. At $4, the basic price, they should contain a complete story or two. Superheroes and funny-animal characters and funny teenagers should exist alongside each other. There is nothing stopping publishers from collecting these in trades as Disney has been doing for years around the world. Superheroes are not an adult category. They are based on the original Superman and Phantom from the 1930's. Most should be appropriate for a grade-school child. Adult trades should not need to include children's characters from the 1930's and 40's.

  5. #95
    Sarveśām Svastir Bhavatu Devaishwarya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    13,914

    Default

    They publish books for kids.
    They publish books for teens.
    They publish books for adults.
    The problem (one of many) is the Executives expect/demand yearly growth in sales figures from an industry that absolutely cannot support such a demand.
    So, they publish more books that adults will buy because we have the disposable income...and end up separating and cannibalising and splintering this demographic by employing ridiculous marketing gimmicks, multiple unnecessary books, unnecessarily increasing their prices ...and a host of other not so smart decisions...because they need our dollars and they recognise they don't have a large enough younger/growing demographic and it would be very difficult to change and scale back those decisions (less books, lower costs?...hell no!) now because they will lose revenue. And that is an option the Executives don't want and won't accept.

    I can't fix a problem they don't want to fix...
    And in light of that realisation...I will continue to read and buy what I like and what I can afford for as long as I can.
    My Summer rain. My rooftop in Japan. My quiet in the storm. *cries* Al Ewing is GOD...Praise His name! Uplift Him in song! Glorify His works!

  6. #96
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Devaishwarya View Post
    They publish books for kids.
    They publish books for teens.
    They publish books for adults.
    The problem (one of many) is the Executives expect/demand yearly growth in sales figures from an industry that absolutely cannot support such a demand.
    So, they publish more books that adults will buy because we have the disposable income...and end up separating and cannibalising and splintering this demographic by employing ridiculous marketing gimmicks, multiple unnecessary books, unnecessarily increasing their prices ...and a host of other not so smart decisions...because they need our dollars and they recognise they don't have a large enough younger/growing demographic and it would be very difficult to change and scale back those decisions (less books, lower costs?...hell no!) now because they will lose revenue. And that is an option the Executives don't want and won't accept.

    I can't fix a problem they don't want to fix...
    And in light of that realisation...I will continue to read and buy what I like and what I can afford for as long as I can.
    When you are right, you are right.

    This post concisely gets at the issue that mountains of posts (myself included) have argued, in just a few lines.

  7. #97
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    6,864

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drakeon View Post
    Moden day kids dont care about comics. They have video games and cell phones, and web toons and streaming services. Why would they spend $4 to read a comic. Its not really worth their time and money.
    The first claim is not that simple. It is not the reason, it is the problem. Why don't kids care about comics, or more accurately, why don't more kids care about comics, because some do.

    The second claim is nothing new. When I was a kid in the 80s I had just as many things competing for my attention but I chose comics and it is not like it was comics over those other things, it was comics and those other things.

    The third/fourth claim is it. Should have just wrote that. That is kind of a sticking point for most demographics except the ones who think this is a stock market.

  8. #98
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    15,235

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H-E-D View Post
    OK Boomer.
    Whatever.

    You are trying to get new readers.

    6 part epic or that mess Coates did in Black Panther is not getting them.

    One issue story or a 2 part is not the end of the world.


    I just want to ask one question, should the comic book industry cater almost exclusively to older fans or should it make some changes to appeal to kids today, not kids from the past?
    You don't cater to either. You offer balance.

    The issue we have been seeing is ONE group wants to fight against that mainly at DC & Marvel.

    Boom Studios is not having an issue going after kids.

    Fence, Goldie Vance, Backstagers & Lumberjanes are still being made OUTSIDE the direct market.



    Fair enough, but then stuff like the layoffs at DC is inevitable then.
    What happen at DC is a result of AT & T spending too much MONEY on stuff like the Snyder cut.

  9. #99
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skyvolt2000 View Post
    What happen at DC is a result of AT & T spending too much MONEY on stuff like the Snyder cut.
    The money spent on the Snyder Cut is not an issue. If it was an issue, AT and T would never have been in the telecomm business leave alone the IP business.

    AT and T is a company with a lot of debt, and their acquisition of WB was largely a means to using the latter's assets as a way to rebuild investor confidence and find a way to pay pre-existing debts. Only catch is that their merger/acquisition of WB hasn't turned a profit yet and won't be likely any time soon, so what they do is downsize, adjust, cook the books, cut the corners so as to pay debts.

    Disney doesn't have that. They make vastly more money from theme parks and they have a monopoly on theme parks whereas AT and T don't have monopoly on telecomm. So for them, they can sponsor Marvel Comics as some boutique thing that they, generally, don't have to justify to investors about "why are we still funding comics". At least that's how it's been for some time now. Marvel Comics being the market leader justifies that.

  10. #100
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The fact it's not a problem that's going to solve by changing the content. It's not at heart a content problem. It's a distribution problem and an industry problem.
    Its both.


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Well in the case of Marvel, they put out Kamala Khan and Miles Morales. Their "Fresh Start" initiative did really well as opposed to ANAD, Hickman's brought back Marvel's most beloved team in comics in a big way and tearing through the charts.
    And how many new readers did Hickman's FF bring in? Tearing through the charts for whom, new younger readers or same collection of older readers?


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Kids would want that for the same reason they want a game that teases out aspects of a story that will be done in a sequel, why they watch a TV show and so on that can take years to come out, and so on and so forth. If the comic is good, well written and drawn, it will hook people in.
    Watching an unboxing video on Youtube would be free for kids, it wouldn't cost 4 dollars and just be part of a convoluted universe.

    The fact is Marvel and DC have gotten more convoluted, not less in recent years, if a kid picks up a book that is part of a giant crossover that ties into other books, that kid will be lost, Manga, TV, YA novels, etc don't do that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    They should not cater exclusively to any set of fans. They should do comics that target different demographics, and to be truly successful they need to do a take on the title that is "all things to all people". That was Stan Lee's great gift as EIC, he brought in a really big tent of Marvel fans and that's how it should be. Lee roped in fans who liked DC Comics but he also roped in fans who disliked DC Comics, he roped in fans who read non-superhero comics, he roped in people who never read comics, and tried to get people from outside comics to write comics. Conway's idea isn't doing that. Catering to any set of fans, whether old or young, is self-destructive.

    If you cater to an older set of fans and collectors, you fall in a dead end of irrelevance and insularity. If you cater to younger fans or youth fans, you run into the Sonic the Hedgehog problem or the Ultimate Marvel problem. Sonic the Hedgehog was meant to be an icon that embodied 90s spirit and coolness as opposed to old stodgy timeless Mario. It worked for SEGA but then the early 90s became the mid-90s and late-90s, and a character so rooted in its zeitgeist can't adjust and last outside that. In the case of Ultimate Marvel it captured the zeitgeist of the 21st Century...a first-on-the-ground redo of Marvel characters in a presentation and style that was brand new and looked fresh in the 2000s. Then the mid-2000s and late-2000s came, and they became increasingly irrelevant. Ultimately, Marvel should try and be Mario and not Sonic.
    I can make another comparison, that Marvel and DC can be like Blockbuster Video, a company that refused to innovate and got crushed by the end for not keeping up with the times.

    Are you insisting that nothing should change? Should they try to innovate with the times? What if their business model is outdated, your arguments that marvel or DC made profits in the past can be applied to Blockbuster, that past profits for Blockbuster can be used as an excuse to not change when they should have. Blockbuster making bank in the 80s and 90s meant nothing by 2013. Marvel and DC's old tactics working in the past, may mean nothing now if they cannot innovate.

    You keep on bringing up Stan Lee as EIC, but that is long since past, using past success to justify staying static can lead to a business's downfall. There was no internet when Stan Lee was EIC.


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    That's true and that's to be condemned. But again, just because alt-right people invoke continuity as an excuse to be racist and sexist, that doesn't mean that continuity and canon is inherently some evil thing. Many of the most left-wing people in comics are in favor of that -- Claremont, Moore, and so on.
    But if people are using canon to try and gatekeep, should we still put canon on a pedestal?

    Is canon just a tool for the writer or a sacred text that must be obeyed at all times?


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Not my sentiment at all. But again picking up and reading the latest comic without having familiarity with anything that came before is not a hurdle for new readers. The alternative to that, i.e. negative continuity and so on, would not be an improvement.
    If a kid picks up a book in the title of a giant crossover event that ties into a ton of other titles, that passing familiarity means nothing in that case.


    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The DC Layoffs were a result of WB having a poor set of corporate masters. It wasn't inevitable because that merger shouldn't have been approved to start with (nor Fox's with Disney for that matter).



    And who exactly do you think Gerry Conway is? He's very much (in this article at least) an older fanboy who wants to reset Peter Parker. What he describes in this article is essentially his way of saying comics were better before me, but after me it sucked. He's saying that the comics he read was the ideal state and later versions were irrelevant, cluttered and so on. All the arguments for resets, for retcons, for a whole-scale continuity do-over to go back to "How comics were in the '50s and '60s" have never come from the actual creators (Lee, Kirby, Ditko) but by self-annointed fanboys. Whether it's by John Byrne, Mark Waid, Gerry Conway what it amounts to in practise is "Kirby and Lee were great, I alone know Kirby and Lee' intentions, that gives me, self-annointed fanboy, to dismiss and diminish and denigrate the work of everyone that comes afterwards even if in theory they are equal to me".
    I think you are assuming things about Conway, regardless my point stands about DC and Marvel continuity being a total mess and stuff like the 90s Clone Saga making continuity a hassle rather than something that improves the story.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Here's the thing there are fans who discovered Simpsons after Season 9 and so on who like the later seasons, or those who discover the current seasons.

    Everyone likes to have this sentiment that the party ended with them, even someone like Gerry Conway can't accept that the party got cooler after he left.
    How many funny episodes of the Simpsons were past season 9? I can only think of one. Sometimes keeping things on forever does not make a great product long term.

    Quote Originally Posted by captchuck View Post
    Comics need to be simplified and sold in spots where humans see them. At $4, the basic price, they should contain a complete story or two. Superheroes and funny-animal characters and funny teenagers should exist alongside each other. There is nothing stopping publishers from collecting these in trades as Disney has been doing for years around the world. Superheroes are not an adult category. They are based on the original Superman and Phantom from the 1930's. Most should be appropriate for a grade-school child. Adult trades should not need to include children's characters from the 1930's and 40's.
    I think 4 bucks for a single comic is an insane price point, I don't care how many stories or heroes are in it, if its 4 bucks for 26 pages, it's too pricey.

    I think superhero comics could be comparable to Manga or YA graphic novels, they do not have to talk down to kids, but they do not need some of the over the top violence I have seen in some comics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devaishwarya View Post
    They publish books for kids.
    They publish books for teens.
    They publish books for adults.
    The problem (one of many) is the Executives expect/demand yearly growth in sales figures from an industry that absolutely cannot support such a demand.
    So, they publish more books that adults will buy because we have the disposable income...and end up separating and cannibalising and splintering this demographic by employing ridiculous marketing gimmicks, multiple unnecessary books, unnecessarily increasing their prices ...and a host of other not so smart decisions...because they need our dollars and they recognise they don't have a large enough younger/growing demographic and it would be very difficult to change and scale back those decisions (less books, lower costs?...hell no!) now because they will lose revenue. And that is an option the Executives don't want and won't accept.

    I can't fix a problem they don't want to fix...
    And in light of that realisation...I will continue to read and buy what I like and what I can afford for as long as I can.
    At that point, you are saying that American capitalism is the problem, fair enough, but the whole ''grow or die'' mantra every business adheres to will be applied to Marvel and DC.

    All that you are saying is correct, but pretty much every industry will attempt to increase customer growth and market share. I do not like that personally, but its the reality of the economic system for the moment.
    Last edited by The Overlord; 09-27-2020 at 07:29 PM.

  11. #101
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Overlord View Post
    And how many new readers did Hickman's FF bring in?
    Quite a few I think. His run on Fantastic Four did pretty well I recall.

    Tearing through the charts for whom, new younger readers or same collection of older readers?
    I do not have access to the mind and sentiments of every single reader of comics. We're also forgetting the elephant in the room: piracy. When we think of comics readers and measuring reach, we are only considering legal readers but in terms of eyeballs, these comics tend to be pirated a lot and maybe have a bigger audience than one assumes. Piracy is a rampant problem with comics. Digital piracy is a problem for movies, music and games too...but those industries had deep pockets to claw back to some extent, comics on the other hand don't.

    I can make another comparsion, that Marvel and DC can be like Blockbuster Video, a company that refused to inovate and got crushed by the end for not keeping up with the times.
    Comics' history is full of Blockbuster Videos = Fawcett Comics (which in the '40s outsold Superman), Charlton Comics, Quality Comics, Malibu Comics, Milestone Comics, Wildstorm. Marvel and DC have survived and swallowed the rest.

    Are you insisting that nothing should change?
    I'm insisting that Conway's ideas and proposals are poorly reasoned and premised. That's all. I have nothing against the concept of change, or the choice of change. I have nothing against people saying that the comics' industry is in a bad strait, because it is. The thing is in a crisis, there are those who try and fix it, those who try and look ahead, and those who use the crisis to settle scores, who pick up cudgels and use it to justify and vilify and scapegoat. Conway's screed in targeting some arbitrary field of decline is in the latter camp.

    Should they try to innovate with the times?
    Again just because one should try to innovate that doesn't mean every proposal has to be validated or considered justified for the same reasons.

    But if people are using canon to try and gatekeep, should we still put canon on a pestial?
    Not putting someone on a pedestal doesn't mean you try and ignore it altogether. Life isn't black-and-white, just because racists misuse and misinterpret canon doesn't mean canon is inherently worthless.

    Is canon just a tool for the writer or a sacred text that must be obeyed at all times?
    It's a tool and a good one yeah. Canon provides value to the character and injects value and emotional richness to the story one tells.

    Just because some people take canon as dogma doesn't mean we just put into apocrypha either.

    How many funny epsiodes of the Simpsons were past season 9? I can only think of one.
    According to you. But there are others who find the show pretty funny after that. I still drop in now and then to check out Simpsons and there's still a lot of laughs to be found.

  12. #102
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    345

    Default

    Conway is absolutely right. My god have you tried reading the X-men books? Can you imagine a child trying to read them? It’s crazy! 15 books all being written for grown men. They are the definition of the problem Conway is talking about! They sell a lot to collectors and their base but that’s it nobody is reading Hickmans run as a kid

  13. #103
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Quite a few I think. His run on Fantastic Four did pretty well I recall.



    I do not have access to the mind and sentiments of every single reader of comics. We're also forgetting the elephant in the room: piracy. When we think of comics readers and measuring reach, we are only considering legal readers but in terms of eyeballs, these comics tend to be pirated a lot and maybe have a bigger audience than one assumes. Piracy is a rampant problem with comics. Digital piracy is a problem for movies, music and games too...but those industries had deep pockets to claw back to some extent, comics on the other hand don't.



    Comics' history is full of Blockbuster Videos = Fawcett Comics (which in the '40s outsold Superman), Charlton Comics, Quality Comics, Malibu Comics, Milestone Comics, Wildstorm. Marvel and DC have survived and swallowed the rest.



    I'm insisting that Conway's ideas and proposals are poorly reasoned and premised. That's all. I have nothing against the concept of change, or the choice of change. I have nothing against people saying that the comics' industry is in a bad strait, because it is. The thing is in a crisis, there are those who try and fix it, those who try and look ahead, and those who use the crisis to settle scores, who pick up cudgels and use it to justify and vilify and scapegoat. Conway's screed in targeting some arbitrary field of decline is in the latter camp.



    Again just because one should try to innovate that doesn't mean every proposal has to be validated or considered justified for the same reasons.



    Not putting someone on a pedestal doesn't mean you try and ignore it altogether. Life isn't black-and-white, just because racists misuse and misinterpret canon doesn't mean canon is inherently worthless.



    It's a tool and a good one yeah. Canon provides value to the character and injects value and emotional richness to the story one tells.

    Just because some people take canon as dogma doesn't mean we just put into apocrypha either.



    According to you. But there are others who find the show pretty funny after that. I still drop in now and then to check out Simpsons and there's still a lot of laughs to be found.
    Hickmans ff run did sell well but it didn’t bring in new readers just lapsed readers just like the X-men are now. The audience is not growing. It’s shrinking year after year with sales propped up by deals or promotions. DC is right to cut most of their books and focus on YA trades. Marvel exists solely now to generate new Disney ip for park attractions it’s not about comic sales

  14. #104
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantor View Post
    Hickmans ff run did sell well but it didn’t bring in new readers
    A) How can you possibly know that?

    B) Hickman's FF run, owing to his lack of familiarity with FF growing up, charts its own course with little references and nostalgia pieces to previous FF issues. It brought FF to the 21st Century in a way titles before it (and with Slott, after it) hadn't.

    DC is right to cut most of their books and focus on YA trades.
    DC isn't doing some bold creative thing, it's doing panic-stricken downsizing. Just because a direction agrees with your prejudice does not mean that this direction is ultimately the best one.

    The fact that a huge chunk of people got fired indicates that this wasn't some bold new enterprise.

    Marvel exists solely now to generate new Disney ip for park attractions it’s not about comic sales
    DC exists for AT and T to pay off its pre-merger debts. AT and T treats DC the way the current Prez treats everyone. Make a mess and get others to pay up to clean it.

  15. #105
    Astonishing Member Zelena's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    4,523

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captchuck View Post
    Comics need to be simplified and sold in spots where humans see them. At $4, the basic price, they should contain a complete story or two. Superheroes and funny-animal characters and funny teenagers should exist alongside each other. There is nothing stopping publishers from collecting these in trades as Disney has been doing for years around the world. Superheroes are not an adult category. They are based on the original Superman and Phantom from the 1930's. Most should be appropriate for a grade-school child. Adult trades should not need to include children's characters from the 1930's and 40's.
    I wholeheartedly agree with this: when I was a child, with one comic about Spider-man or the X-men, I read a complex and compelling story. It was action-packed, with moments of emotions, reflexions, humour… The drawing was simple, there were no shadings, almost never big panels, there weren’t unnecessary panels (authors used ellipses) but more text…

    Now, the comics look like showcases for artists… I read them in five minutes. Why spending so much money for such a short-lived pleasure (if there’s any)…
    “Strength is the lot of but a few privileged men; but austere perseverance, harsh and continuous, may be employed by the smallest of us and rarely fails of its purpose, for its silent power grows irresistibly greater with time.” Goethe

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •