Why "The Avengers" is not the same popular ties with FF, Spidey and X-Mens

[Albert1981]

Interesting idea.



Yeah, we should respect all the fanbases whether we disagree or not.

Thanks for the supportive comments. I respect all fanbases whether I like the franchises or not. The Avengers just captured my imagination like no other. I particularly liked them because they featured characters you couldn't find in any other books. Several of them never got their own titles so if you liked them you were REQUIRED to read the Avengers. The X-Men are somewhat similar, but there were tons of X-titles back in the day, so there were more places where X-related characters could show up. The Fantastic Four were interesting to me for the simple reason that they were connected to my favorite Marvel cosmic character: The Silver Surfer.

[Username taken]

They did so in the 1980s too. The X-Men and Spider-Man were at the top but the 1980s was the most all-round decade with great sales for Daredevil, Simonson's Thor, Stern's Avengers, Byrne's FF too.

Yes but sales collapsed after the speculator boom of the 1990s. Marvel culled more than half its line then.

Ideally the Marvel Universe works best when it's bifurcated into separate universes. The Marvel Shared Universe was always about sales more than creativity and to the benefit of those who couldn't sell their own title than those who could.

I don't agree with this at all. There shouldn't be any barriers to Marvel characters existing in the same universe, it just makes it all less fun. And worse still, top talent just ends up cordoned to certain parts of the universe (which was the case with the X-titles for a very long time), but that's a problem I have with Marvel NOT with the X-franchise.

Well X-Men fans saw their titles reduced a shell of itself on behalf of characters and titles that needed special favor and publication kickbacks (Avengers, Inhumans). It would be one thing if those titles earned it fair and square.

Then they should direct their ire respectfully at Marvel creatives/editorial and not other characters and fandoms.

[Username taken]

Thanks for the supportive comments. I respect all fanbases whether I like the franchises or not. The Avengers just captured my imagination like no other. I particularly liked them because they featured characters you couldn't find in any other books. Several of them never got their own titles so if you liked them you were REQUIRED to read the Avengers. The X-Men are somewhat similar, but there were tons of X-titles back in the day, so there were more places where X-related characters could show up. The Fantastic Four were interesting to me for the simple reason that they were connected to my favorite Marvel cosmic character: The Silver Surfer.

Same here.

I don't actually have any problem with any character or fanbases at all. I just read all the titles I liked back then.

Although I will confess that I don't read as many Marvel comics as I did before. I think it could be my age, I don't enjoy many of them as much as before.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

And worse still, top talent just ends up cordoned to certain parts of the universe (which was the case with the X-titles for a very long time), but that's a problem I have with Marvel NOT with the X-franchise.

I am confused by this statement. When you say "top talent" cordoned to certain parts of the universe you imply that the reason X-Men got to be so big was that it had more star writer/artist than other Marvel titles of the time. I don't think that is true or accurate.

At the outset in the 1970s, Chris Claremont was a nobody. He wasn't Gerry Conway, nor Steve Englehart, nor Len Wein, nor Marv Wolfman, nor Roy Thomas to talk of the most famous young comics writers of that time. He came out of nowhere. Same with John Byrne. And Byrne left in 1970 and Claremont continued for a decade after that.

Sure Claremont's a great writer and so on but when he wrote X-Men, Miller wrote Daredevil, Simonson wrote Thor, Stern did Spider-Man and Avengers, Michelinie did Iron Man and Spider-Man.

So I don't think the other titles and other teams had a problem with lack of talent or anything.

[skyvolt2000]

I am confused by this statement. When you say "top talent" cordoned to certain parts of the universe you imply that the reason X-Men got to be so big was that it had more star writer/artist than other Marvel titles of the time. I don't think that is true or accurate.

I think what they mean is "top" talent gets limited to certain characters and if they should go "lower" it's viewed as being beneath them.

Something we saw with DC's New Age Heroes. Where there were folks saying this book or that book was BENEATH the talent and needed to be boycotted.
In other words it's fine for Jason Aaron or Donnie Cates to do Avengers, Venom, Thor or X-Men.

Yet the line will start to the left if those two did Black Panther or Scarlet Witch or Carol Danvers that will have issue with it.

In other words writers not being allowed to write what they might have interest in. Like it would be QUESTIONABLE if Aaron wanted to do Panther or She Hulk.
Meanwhile Priest and McDuffie could never sniff Spider-Man, Deadpool or Batman as the main writers because SOMEONE would take issue with it.

Never mind their resumes that say they have as much right to top characters than Liefield, Lodbell and others that do get access.

Well X-Men fans saw their titles reduced a shell of itself on behalf of characters and titles that needed special favor and publication kickbacks (Avengers, Inhumans).

Who said it was NOT earned? Since this was over rights pertaining to tv shows and movies OWNED by Marvel not Fox. Marvel was justified but NOT in the stories that they did with that silly cloud.

Because if we are going to go by this-It would be one thing if those titles earned it fair and square.
Every Marvel character that is the LEAD of a tv show or movie should have a book ongoing or novel right now. Wanda, Falcon, Winter Solider, Moon Girl, Ms Marvel, Riri and Loki are OWED books.

10 X-Men titles ended in 2015 before ANADM. Most were solo books.

2015-started with 2
2016-5
2017-5
That is 12 books. They got 2 more.

Inhumans
2 before ANAD.
2015-4
2016-1
2017-2
7 books. Excluding Karnak-everyone else made past issue 6.
Those X-books were not replacing Inhumans-they were replacing Deadpool Merch's spinoffs, Black Panther spinoffs, Starbrand and Red Wolf. 12 books.

Then they should direct their ire respectfully at Marvel creatives/editorial and not other characters and fandoms.

Say it again for the folks in the back...

[Albert1981]

Same here.

I don't actually have any problem with any character or fanbases at all. I just read all the titles I liked back then.

Although I will confess that I don't read as many Marvel comics as I did before. I think it could be my age, I don't enjoy many of them as much as before.

You put it better than I did. I actually don't have a problem with characters and fanbases either. I love their passion and enthusiasm to tell you the truth. My opinions about characters and teams could change RADICALLY depending on who wrote them. I was more of a "casual reader" in the 90s. If I liked the artwork, I'd buy the book. Didn't have a "pull-list". I was into the Avengers, Spider-Man, Ghost Rider, Daredevil and Silver Surfer the most though.

[ARkadelphia]

I mostly agree but on the other hand, 2 of the four are severely undeveloped which is inexcusable for such a small team that's been around for 60 years. If they're not diversifying the team then I expect all members to complex characters. Not just Reed.

This concern is completely independent of the diversity concern in my mind. More development for Sue would be my number one priority if I were a writer or editor.

[BroHomo]

Then they should direct their ire respectfully at Marvel creatives/editorial and not other characters and fandoms.

Say it again for the folks in the back...

Errr it wasnt just the X-Fans spitting vitriol

[LAWtoyoto 432]

Hence the whole movement when many spiderman and xmen fans did not appreciate the over use of their characters in Avengers books. I remember the Uncanny Avengers run, X-Fans were not amused that Rogue was in that book for years.

Avengers has always been dependent on flashiness of using characters like Spiderman and Wolverine than actual story substance. Wolverine should never be Avenger and Spiderman works better as a lone hero. Avengers concept works only amazing well with ensemble D list marvel IPs. I think that is their charm.

I also agree on that statement, sometimes you need a break from giving too much spotlight on the A-listed heroes because some fans will grow extreme annoying if they keep seeing these heroes everywhere which at the same time will not help the saleswise.

[Force de Phenix]

The Avengers didn't get a cartoon until they were canceling the other Marvel cartoons because of Pokemon's popularity. This cartoons did wonders for the popularity of the X-Men, Fantastic Four, and to some extent Spider-Man and the Hulk (who already had iconic shows before). The cartoons were just 25 minute long commercials. I think GI Joe, Masters of the Universe, and Jem and the Holograms were made as commercials too, and this became a pattern to sell toys and comic books. Maybe they didn't make an Avengers commercial/show until later because the X-Men occupied the team dynamic like how the Avengers occupy the team dynamic of this generation as opposed to the X-Men.

All properties are worthy of time and money. And other franchises like the X-Men got tons of money, marketing and publicity poured into it. If they didn't get cartoons, made for tv movie, video games or action figure lines that cemented childhood memories/nostalgia into a generation's head, I guarantee they wouldn't be as popular because comics would be the only place you'd find them. The Fantastic Four was popular since the 60's. No one talks about the movie made for Ghost Rider and the Punisher.

It's not shocking to see how much money and marketing help the Avengers like any other franchise. They are a household name now, especially with Disney Plus. Mind you, they were still making X-Men movies and tv shows during this whole time and it didn't diminish anyone. If anything Deadpool became more popular during the time the Avengers movies were being pumped out.

To see the Avengers get this treatment and think it isn't deserved or fair is ridiculous.

[CosmiComic]

The Avengers didn't get a cartoon until they were canceling the other Marvel cartoons because of Pokemon's popularity. This cartoons did wonders for the popularity of the X-Men, Fantastic Four, and to some extent Spider-Man and the Hulk (who already had iconic shows before). The cartoons were just 25 minute long commercials. I think GI Joe, Masters of the Universe, and Jem and the Holograms were made as commercials too, and this became a pattern to sell toys and comic books. Maybe they didn't make an Avengers commercial/show until later because the X-Men occupied the team dynamic like how the Avengers occupy the team dynamic of this generation as opposed to the X-Men.

All properties are worthy of time and money. And other franchises like the X-Men got tons of money, marketing and publicity poured into it. If they didn't get cartoons, made for tv movie, video games or action figure lines that cemented childhood memories/nostalgia into a generation's head, I guarantee they wouldn't be as popular because comics would be the only place you'd find them. The Fantastic Four was popular since the 60's. No one talks about the movie made for Ghost Rider and the Punisher.

It's not shocking to see how much money and marketing help the Avengers like any other franchise. They are a household name now, especially with Disney Plus. Mind you, they were still making X-Men movies and tv shows during this whole time and it didn't diminish anyone. If anything Deadpool became more popular during the time the Avengers movies were being pumped out.

To see the Avengers get this treatment and think it isn't deserved or fair is ridiculous.

Exactly. Although the Avengers had sort of a cartoon back in the 60s too. But your point is right. Of course, we should recognize how Marvel poorly treated the X-Men during the 2000s/2010s as a whole. Although several individual Avengers didn't get great treatment either. But acting like the Avengers being popular hurts others like the X-Men isn't accurate. All these guys get fame and support by being promoted and adapted, so it's not zero sum. Of course Marvel itself acted like this and I think as fans we should condemn that idea, not appropriate it for ourselves. I think the main thing is to judge the quality of each comic and see whether it gets the right attention.

I apologize if I sound incoherent here.

[skyvolt2000]

The Avengers didn't get a cartoon until they were canceling the other Marvel cartoons because of Pokemon's popularity. This cartoons did wonders for the popularity of the X-Men, Fantastic Four, and to some extent Spider-Man and the Hulk (who already had iconic shows before). The cartoons were just 25 minute long commercials. Maybe they didn't make an Avengers commercial/show until later because the X-Men occupied the team dynamic like how the Avengers occupy the team dynamic of this generation as opposed to the X-Men.

Marvel's money issues at the time derailed a lot of shows like Silver Surfer-that was expected to see season 2. I also think getting an actual network to show the shows was an issue too.

Depending on where you lived-those shows did not air. I can list a bunch of cartoons that I NEVER saw in my city. Yet they aired is other cities WAY smaller than Dallas-Fort Worth Area.
Alvin & The Chipmunks season 7, Kid N Play, Hammerman, New Kids and the final season of Muppet Babies never aired here. Nor did 90s Fantastic Four.

I think GI Joe, Masters of the Universe, and Jem and the Holograms were made as commercials too, and this became a pattern to sell toys and comic books.

They were made to sell toys more than comics. Because GI JOE did NOT follow the cartoon. Because the comics killed off quite a few GI Joes including Doc & Quick Kick.
Same with Transformers.
Wheeled Warriors did NOT match the cartoon show. That is why the toys failed.

Errr it wasnt just the X-Fans spitting vitriol

I don't CARE who started it. The point is it never should have happened. Confront MANAGEMENT.

If you don't like the story do not BUY it. Sooner or later the comic book store will get the HINT and lower orders.

Yet we got folks who can't stop going off if a book shows up with certain demographics as leads.

Doomsday Clock, Civil War, Cry for Justice, Heroes in Crisis and their like are the books that pack bins. That lead to more horrible stories.

[Agent Z]

Errr it wasnt just the X-Fans spitting vitriol

The X-fans did it far more than most.

[Zero Hunter]

I think the biggest factor is the changing roster. Spider Man was always Peter. The FF were almost always the same four (with subs coming in but it was still usually at least 3 of the main 4). The X-Men for the longest time had a pretty stable roster with new characters being added here and there. The Avengers was a totally different beast. Characters were always coming and going even the mainstays like Cap, Thor, and Iron Man would come and go depending on what was going on in their own series. Marvel would use the Avengers book to try and raise the profiles of some of their B and C listers a lot. If a character made it onto the Avengers that meant Marvel saw potential in them to maybe one day carry their own book or at least be a bigger player in the Marvel U. A lot of fans get stuck in their heads on certain characters and only want to see those characters so they are much less open to a book where the roster changes often.

[CosmiComic]

I think the biggest factor is the changing roster. Spider Man was always Peter. The FF were almost always the same four (with subs coming in but it was still usually at least 3 of the main 4). The X-Men for the longest time had a pretty stable roster with new characters being added here and there. The Avengers was a totally different beast. Characters were always coming and going even the mainstays like Cap, Thor, and Iron Man would come and go depending on what was going on in their own series. Marvel would use the Avengers book to try and raise the profiles of some of their B and C listers a lot. If a character made it onto the Avengers that meant Marvel saw potential in them to maybe one day carry their own book or at least be a bigger player in the Marvel U. A lot of fans get stuck in their heads on certain characters and only want to see those characters so they are much less open to a book where the roster changes often.

I think the changing roster is a benefit if one gets weary of the static, unchanging characters from 50 years ago. The problem is Marvel has, in some ways, gone backwards with the Avengers roster to being mainly A-listers