What went wrong with Marvel's push of Carol?

[brettc1]

Well, its clear Marvel wants Carol to succeed, so yeah they're pushing her. They're also pushing Gwenpool and the GOTG as solo acts and no matter how many times their books get cancelled Widow and She-Hulk and a few others always end up in a new ongoing. So its not like Carol is the only thing Marvel is trying to elevate.

Honestly, I was having this conversation with the LCS owner last week and at least half of Marvel's so-calle monthly titles should correctly be named "12 issue limited series". I really don't think Marvel cares is these books to do well, they just put them out there with a creative team knowing that the book will get pulled after about a year and they come up with something else for another quick sales boost.

It's fast food comic publishing.

[Stryfe8]

It hasn't been a big as some people want to pretend. They've relaunched her title several times but you could say the same about many characters. Black Widow, She-Hulk, Moon Knight, Punisher, Ghost Rider...yet no one says that Marvel is "pushing" them or trying to "force" them into being popular.

with the exception of the widow and perhaps moon knight, all those characters were popular, and then got their own series, not the the other way around .(widow likely got her series due to her avengers movie popularity which so far hasn't translated into sales)

carol was not a particularly popular character that is getting numerous relaunches, within a short time frame for no other reason it seems then marvel wants to make her popular... honestly i think a lot of the backlash has little to do with the character itself, and more with marvels editorial practices

[Moon Ronin]

I really think she could benefit from having an A-List creative team. What popular character do you know of, that became popular without one?

Squirrel Girl?

I know right, Squirrel Girl only became popular because a little known writer by the name of Dan Slott pulled her out of moth balls 10 years after her one and only appearance.

[Ascended]

Honestly, I was having this conversation with the LCS owner last week and at least half of Marvel's so-calle monthly titles should correctly be named "12 issue limited series". I really don't think Marvel cares is these books to do well, they just put them out there with a creative team knowing that the book will get pulled after about a year and they come up with something else for another quick sales boost.

It's fast food comic publishing.

I think what they're trying to do is emulate the television seasonal model, but they're only putting in a half-assed effort, perhaps for fear of alienating established customers.

Conceptually I think a "seasonal" approach is viable. Granted, we wont hit those big huge issue numbers that some segments of fandom like to see, but seasons would provide a number of benefits including clear jumping-on points, concise stories that have a beginning, middle, and end without actually ending the character's overarching story, and you're more likely to see creative teams remain stable for the duration of the season, with fewer fill-ins. Most importantly, its a narrative structure non-fans are familiar with and doesn't provide a barrier to entry. And those potential new fans are a must-have for the industry; us old bastards cant keep them afloat forever.

The problem is that Marvel's not committing to the idea and are just sort of hanging in a limbo between the traditional publication model and seasons. There's no telling how long a series will last. Some of them have been relaunched after five issues. Others have made it into the 20's. And they change the names of the title, which might make it harder for a casual fan to follow from one "season" to the next; especially if they're trying to get caught up. I mean, look at Aaron's Thor; he's been telling the same story but the book has been called "God of Thunder" and "Mighty" and just plain ass "Thor" and of course there's the Secret Wars Thors mini, which sort of mattered but sorta didn't. And they don't provide an indication of where a story/season falls in the larger view of things. Do you start reading Thor with "GoT" or "Mighty" or what? If they labeled things "God of Thunder Season 1-5" that'd make a lot more sense for what they seem to be trying.

[ed2962]

with the exception of the widow and perhaps moon knight, all those characters were popular, and then got their own series, not the the other way around .(widow likely got her series due to her avengers movie popularity which so far hasn't translated into sales)

carol was not a particularly popular character that is getting numerous relaunches, within a short time frame for no other reason it seems then marvel wants to make her popular... honestly i think a lot of the backlash has little to do with the character itself, and more with marvels editorial practices

You can maybe make a case for Widow and Punisher being known to Marvel fans, but none of those characters were popular before they got they were featured in solos either minis or ongoings.

[Michael Watkins]

I know right, Squirrel Girl only became popular because a little known writer by the name of Dan Slott pulled her out of moth balls 10 years after her one and only appearance.

Slott wasn't popular back then. If anything, she made him.

[Habis]

Well, its clear Marvel wants Carol to succeed, so yeah they're pushing her.

I thought that too, but after reading The Oath, I get the feeling that they have changed plans and are setting her to fall...

Of course, Tony Stark did all that again: Became the oppressor of heroes in CW I, fell hard, was humbled, and came back again, and was more popular than ever... could they be trying to replicate the same scheme with Carol? I don't think that would work... Iron Man's success was due more to the movies than to the comics. I think his popularity would have increased no matter what were the plot in the comics, and that CW I had little to do with it.

[butterflykyss]

I don't think there is anything wrong with their push. She has been featured more in media such as cartoons, games, and soon to be movie. Of course there is the constant reboot of the lackluster selling solo series as well. This approach I think would work for more interesting characters. However, I think that as much as they want her to click she just is not that. I attempted to watch the Avengers cartoon that comes on DisneyXD and she was featured in episode I watched. Beside the show being incredibly boring (I don't think I have seen a Marvel cartoon be able to capture the adult-themed storytelling and blend it with fun and humor as well as Xmen TAS was able to do so many years ago) she was incredibly boring. Nothing made me want to know about the character or continue to watch the show for that matter. Not sure if that is more the writers fault or just the character is just not great, but overall I think Marvel is supporting the wrong character.

[Moon Ronin]

Slott wasn't popular back then. If anything, she made him.

By the time he started the GLA book he was a well know name in comic books both with DC and Marvel. Also she did really hit the radar until her interaction with Deadpool in Deadpool/GLI Summer Fun Spectacular that was co written by Fabian Nicieza.

But its a moot point because she has a poor selling book at the moment and is really only popular among a small following... Like Moon Knight.

[4sake Baned]

I think what they're trying to do is emulate the television seasonal model, but they're only putting in a half-assed effort, perhaps for fear of alienating established customers.

Conceptually I think a "seasonal" approach is viable. Granted, we wont hit those big huge issue numbers that some segments of fandom like to see, but seasons would provide a number of benefits including clear jumping-on points, concise stories that have a beginning, middle, and end without actually ending the character's overarching story, and you're more likely to see creative teams remain stable for the duration of the season, with fewer fill-ins. Most importantly, its a narrative structure non-fans are familiar with and doesn't provide a barrier to entry. And those potential new fans are a must-have for the industry; us old bastards cant keep them afloat forever.

The problem is that Marvel's not committing to the idea and are just sort of hanging in a limbo between the traditional publication model and seasons. There's no telling how long a series will last. Some of them have been relaunched after five issues. Others have made it into the 20's. And they change the names of the title, which might make it harder for a casual fan to follow from one "season" to the next; especially if they're trying to get caught up. I mean, look at Aaron's Thor; he's been telling the same story but the book has been called "God of Thunder" and "Mighty" and just plain ass "Thor" and of course there's the Secret Wars Thors mini, which sort of mattered but sorta didn't. And they don't provide an indication of where a story/season falls in the larger view of things. Do you start reading Thor with "GoT" or "Mighty" or what? If they labeled things "God of Thunder Season 1-5" that'd make a lot more sense for what they seem to be trying.

with the exception of the widow and perhaps moon knight, all those characters were popular, and then got their own series, not the the other way around .(widow likely got her series due to her avengers movie popularity which so far hasn't translated into sales)

carol was not a particularly popular character that is getting numerous relaunches, within a short time frame for no other reason it seems then marvel wants to make her popular... honestly i think a lot of the backlash has little to do with the character itself, and more with marvels editorial practices

Great points...

[Ascended]

I thought that too, but after reading The Oath, I get the feeling that they have changed plans and are setting her to fall...

Of course, Tony Stark did all that again: Became the oppressor of heroes in CW I, fell hard, was humbled, and came back again, and was more popular than ever... could they be trying to replicate the same scheme with Carol? I don't think that would work... Iron Man's success was due more to the movies than to the comics. I think his popularity would have increased no matter what were the plot in the comics, and that CW I had little to do with it.

Eh, dragging the heroes through the mud is what Marvel does.

Captain America is a Hydra agent. Tony's in a coma. Bruce Banner is dead. Thor's unworthy, Logan is (sorta) dead, Cyclops is dead, blah blah blah. Carol being sh*t on by Marvel is almost a compliment.

If the movie fails, then I'd expect Marvel to move on and let Carol slip back down into supporting background Avenger status. But until then? Its the Carol show.

If Marvel wanted her to fall, they'd have done it in CWII.

[heiro5]

US Women's Ski Team

[Stryfe8]

You can maybe make a case for Widow and Punisher being known to Marvel fans, but none of those characters were popular before they got they were featured in solos either minis or ongoings.

in the case of the punisher , he was popular, thats why he got his first mini

[ed2962]

in the case of the punisher , he was popular, thats why he got his first mini

He was an occasional Spider Man character. Frank Miller used him in a few DD stories and a well received Spidey Annual and newer readers took note. The first mini by Steve Grant and Mike Zeck did extremely well and Punisher took off. But he wasn't a household name before then.

[Chishu ryu]

A few years ago, who'd have thought The Guardians of the freaking Galaxy would rival Spider-Man in fan popularity? With Marvel, now being run by Disney, it's all about the movies. I have a real good feeling about that Brie Larson, in her talent and personality. Carol Danvers' story is still being written. Historically, her character has been through the wringer so I really hope Marvel knocks her movie out of the park. She kind of deserves it. Succeed at the movie, and the rest will follow. Have faith true believers