What do indie publishers bring to the superhero genre that can't be found at the big two?

[mathew101281]

I get most of my Superhero fix from DC, but when I do venture in to indie Superhero books (Firebreather, Faith etc) I usually look for characters that are unique hand don't have a direct parallel in at Marvel and DC. Nothing annoys me more then a character that is just a knock off. Superman knock offs are the biggest offender. It's almost like creators don't want to be bothered coming up with an interesting power set (which in my opinion is the fun part) and instead just give their hero the standard power set.

[Dark-Flux]

The usual perks of creative freedom that comes with creator owned work.
Invincible and Savage Dragon could never happen at the big 2 cos their respective creators wouldnt be allowed to get away with half the crazy stuff they do.
Plus theyd be replaced with a new team when the book is renumbered after a year or two.

[ksbord]

I'd say indie superhero universes are willing to take greater risks with their characters than the Big 2. Properties like Spider-Man or Batman are ultimately going to remain unchanged as the franchise is to valuable to the company. Even any attempt at a major shift in the status quo (I.e. The character dying, or a different person assuming the role) are going to revert back to the original formula rather than risk any damage to the brand. No shock that Steve Rogers is Captain America again, nor will it be a shock when Bruce Banner will be back as the Hulk and Thor will Be a man again.

[Inhuman X]

I would say that the indie publishers are not so beholden to one overused formula per character for success in stories, are more creative with crossover or event opportunities, are capable of shaking up the status quo without alienating long term readership, and manage to keep an ongoing continuity without needing reboots so frequently.

[Lee Stone]

Y'know that age of Marvel from 1961 to 1968, before 'Marvel Time' started and licensing deals were made for cartoons?

That age of DC when stories were more important than whether or not a certain continuity did or didn't exist?

That.

[AdamFTF]

Endings.

No, really. At least if it's creator-owned. Big Two superhero comics go on forever. But if an independent creator wants to write a superhero comic series that has a beginning, middle and end, then they can. Sometimes you see that from Marvel or DC (like Starman) but it's the exception rather than the rule.

[TheFerg714]

Quite a few things actually...
Tighter continuity
Emphasis on story, rather than status quo shifts
Creative freedom
Less history to deal with
Less events
Less relaunches
Less corporate oversight
Less movie/TV audience pandering
Less pandering in general
A sense of starting from the beginning of the universe
Not having to worry about reboots or relaunches
An emphasis on quality over quantity (Valiant = 8-10 books a month, Marvel = 75)

Honestly, give me a few more hours and I could probably think of a bunch more reasons for you, but think this'll work for now.

[WeirdSpace]

As many has mentioned, it is a matter of creative freedom and doing stories that Marvel and DC can't or won't do. Even the perceived knockoffs of Superman allows for new stories, e.g. the original Supreme who was a real bastard or Samaritan growing older because Astro City takes place in real time. Also the stories are not as repetitive, even for long runs. Spawn and Savage Dragon have been running for 23 years without having the equivalent to Infinity Gauntlet/Secret war/Civil War/reboot for the third or fourth time.

[Carbon Based Stickler]

Well, that's just it. They have to bring something different to the table. Obviously, you're gonna get less of everything from a publisher like Valiant, so if that's all you need, you're all set. At the least I'm looking for a fresh or interesting twist on the familiar. I don't expect anyone's gonna reinvent the wheel at this point. Even analogues can be interesting like in the previously mentioned Astro City, Millar's Jupiter's Circle or the more satirical Paybacks.

On a side note, I don't think Spawn and Savage Dragon are exactly best examples to use for longevity. Those books have a unique situation. Any other publisher (not owned by McFarlane or Larsen) would have canceled them many years ago.

[ed2962]

I think with analogue /"knock off" characters, sometimes it's clearly a case of the writer wishing he could write Superman or whoever, but not currently working for DC so he just does a obvious rip-off hero. I think other times it's the writer wanting to play with those archetypes in a way that DC/Marvel can't.

Other people have mentioned Astro City...hero age and deal with issues related to that which you seldom see in Marvel/DC.

I think Supreme is another interesting case. The first version was just a violent rip off of Superman. Moore turned it into a tribute to the silver age while commenting on modern comics. Warren Ellis turned that concept on it's head by making it a Phillip K Dick type story.

[WeirdSpace]

On a side note, I don't think Spawn and Savage Dragon are exactly best examples to use for longevity. Those books have a unique situation. Any other publisher (not owned by McFarlane or Larsen) would have canceled them many years ago.

Not necessarily. Hellblazer had the same low sales figures for many years. Some series do well enough as trades to keep the series going.

[HaveAtThee]

Many things but the main thing is continuous storytelling. Valiant is a great example of characters and plots evolving with some type of timeline.

[Carbon Based Stickler]

Not necessarily. Hellblazer had the same low sales figures for many years. Some series do well enough as trades to keep the series going.

Which neither do. Ignore the obvious if you like.

[WeirdSpace]

Which neither do. Ignore the obvious if you like.

Not ignoring anything. Small publishers can make a profit by smaller print runs than Marvel and DC. How do you know how much Savage Dragon and Spawn needs to sell to make a profit? It's not the kind of information I have access to.

[codystarbuck]

Generally, it is the freedom to explore areas that DC and Marvel won't or can't, without making a mess out of other books (oh, wait, they already do that...) Most aren't that radically different, from my experience. The Image crowd pretty much rehashed what they were doing at Marvel, with less polished writing. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. Savage Dragon was more unique than most of the rest. I never saw the attraction to Spawn; but, then again I could say that about a lot of things. Vive le differance!

The better ones, for me, were the ones that explored things beyond standard superhero battles. The Hero Alliance, a series from the late 80s/early90s, explored things between battles, in a serious manner. Characters had foibles and interesting takes on superpowers and problems they brought. Justice Machine was a dystopian sci-fi take on superheroes. Of the Ultraverse line, The Strangers was the only book I really enjoyed, where a group of people who were at the same event ground zero gained super powers. it explored how they were affected. It was far from perfect; but, it was at least interesting. Prime captured some of the elements that made Captain Marvel great.

Some were pastiches that got to do things the regular books didn't. Battle Humn was conceived as an Invaders story; but, Marvel passed. It was rejiggered into an interesting and darker take on the idea of wartime superheroes.

Valiant took the path of setting their heroes in a more realistic world and many have swiped from them since (especially the Heroes tv series, which bears more than a passing resemblance to Harbinger, with some Solar, thrown in).