At what point should comic publishers like DC and Marvel cancel a series that isn't as financially viable as was hoped? A few weeks ago, DC announced a few young comics were being cancelled early, including Green Lanter: Lost Army and Omega Men (which has been allowed to run for the original 12 issues), which was met with fairly universal backlash. Many people agree that cancelling issues after seeing sales figures for only a few issues and before even all of the issues that will be included in the trade paper back is unfair to the consumer and to a point the artist. But these publishers are companies with financial obligations, meaning that if a comic series is doing poorly, they should dump it and replace it with something that will be commercially successful.
Marvel's also got it's really drawn out reboot thing going on NOW! started in October 2012 and started, dropped, and changed up a bunch of titles off and on until they finally bit the reboot bullet in May with Secret Wars. This is another element in the early cancellation of titles that could be contrasted with the financial aspect. – Max9 years ago
Marvel Comics have been a staple in the industry since 1961 (arguably earlier). And, since that time, stories have come and gone and everything has changed forever more times than it reasonably should have. But, compared to those early, formative years from 1961~1970, today's major Marvel publications feel processed. By that I mean that the true Marvel Universe proper seemed to creatively end in 2003's Avengers: Disassembled storyline. After this came the rise of stagnant storytelling in that, compared to the 90's (the last true era where creators actually tried to make some sort of permanent change to characters) (to what effect is another story)) the 2000's were defined by nostalgia and an unwillingness to change that is still happening. It was far better to revive dead heroes and keep everything light enough that old and new readers could enjoy the stories without upsetting anyone.
Today's Marvel Comics feels as if each new title was sent through a machine and published with a shiny new finish that says "NEW" or "#1." Nothing seems to have as much substance as it used to. The tightness and community that early Marvel had seems to be gone. There are next to no letters pages anymore, a place people could go to share a community that has been lost to the forums where people are more inclined to say hurtful things and bully instead of celebrate their shared hobby. And the comic's insistence on mirroring their popular movie counterparts has lead to many changes and stories that only seem to be there because Marvel is chasing their own popularity. The whole universe just feels like one big cookie cutter comic book. And, while DC isn't doing any better, their problems are markedly different than Marvel's. Basically, it'd be interesting to compare and contrast the early Marvel Universe to the All-New, All-Different Marvel Universe of today and explore just what has made this once-great line feel so plastic.
I think this is a great topic. Consider investigating Marvel's financial history as well for more answers; when they went public in 1991 for example. The repercussions are still being felt, both in comics and film. Also, a great deal of cultural shifting was happening in the 1960's as opposed to this last decade; where going to war on two fronts is considered a normal thing. Quite different from a nation dealing with the mandatory draft! Marvel has always laid claim to being in touch with what the culture is participating in; this topic could explore that for answers on Marvel's storytelling quality. – Shaheen9 years ago
I agree with a lot of that. That's a really interesting observation. However, I have seen a few recent titles (including Ms. Marvel) with the letters pages. It's something they should keep up with to help cultivate the community. – SomeOtherAmazon9 years ago
Comics have been done a better job with representation than most other mediums; however even though we see more sexualities, genders, and races, many of them are still being produced by cis caucasian writers. Do people who are not affected by the oppressive manners of a nation able to tell an honest story or are we taking opportunity away from the writers who can?
(ex. Strange Fruit is a comic made by a white creative team on the topic of racism in the American south for instance, so it's more a question of authority and credibility. Can people who do not have a glass ceiling over their heads have the ability to write about people who do without bias interfering?)
For the first sentence, the comma after the word "mediums" should be changed to a semi-colon. Then, the word "and" between "story" and "we" in the second sentence should be rewritten as "or" instead. – dsoumilas9 years ago
I believe they can but they'd have to be really, really careful about how they approach their subject matter, and if you side with me, then it'd be great to bring up specific examples. For example, "Saga" is written by a cis white male writer, and it's a fantastic and very diverse comic. On the other hand (for something more realistic), "Incognegro" is written by a mix-race male, and I don't think that type of comic could have been written correctly by a cis white male author. So yeah, fun stuff. – CaptainSwift9 years ago
I think that people are able to accurately tell a story from a perspective of a cultural group other than their own, but that it requires research and more thought than when writing through your own personal culture. No matter who writes, there will be bias and stereotypes, even about your own culture, that you include. – nsnow9 years ago
I worry lately that some of the diversity they're adding is sloppily done for PR purposes. This is an interesting topic. – SomeOtherAmazon9 years ago
Brenden Fletcher, Annie Wu, Babs Tarr. How do you feel the series is coming along and how do you like it. You can think about questions such as, do you think it lives up to the Black Canary name? You can tie it into the 'Arrow' Black Canary and compare it to how it lives up to that as well! Similarities and differences, etc.
I think a lot of Canary's recent popularity stems from the success of Arrow. She's so often lumped in with Green Arrow because of their on and off romance. But what Arrow did which was cool was have two people take up the identity, which really sells her as an important character. – Cagney9 years ago
I like Canary better than Batgirl of Burnside, but I still feel that there's something bland and almost childish about it. The layer of her being in a band just feels inauthentic and stupid to me. – SomeOtherAmazon9 years ago
I'm taking a course on race in pop culture and was recently assigned to read Truth: Red, White, and Black. This alternate mythos of the Captain America story suggests that before Steve Rogers and Sam Wilson there was another Captain America- a black man named Isaiah Bradley. Bradley (and many other African American men) are unwillingly forced into government experimentation to perfect the super serum that will later make Rogers a hero. However, many of these early test subjects died on the table, or suffered from complications later on. Isaiah is the only survivor, and dawns the Captain America costume on a suicide mission behind enemy lines. Though he survives, Isaiah is ultimately mistreated by the American government until Steve Rogers finds out about him and demands a form of justice. Including this title, there have now been two black men do wear the Captain America persona. Should this be getting more attention? Does the popularity of Steve Rogers (as much as I love him) above Sam Wilson and Isaiah Bradley say something about the way we accept our superheroes; especially one as symbolically loaded as Captain America?
I see it as a nod to change. Historically there have been a lot of white men as superheros due to racial pregudice and societal norms. Now thst its changing and theres a growing acceptance for different races, sexualities and religions; comic writers are looking to show that they believe in the changes society has made. – Cojo9 years ago
You raise a good question. There is something essentially American about Steve Rogers, but it is important that the mantle of Captain America represent more than one man or one race. Several other white men have worn the costume as well, including John Walker (U.S. Agent) and Bucky Barnes. It might be more telling that the black cultural experience appears twice, whereas there are no iterations of the character that are Hispanic, Asian, or (native) Indian (unless alternate Universes count). Does the black American experience validate American symbolism in a way that is different from white versions? Questions like this are why I thoroughly enjoyed the real world Sikh Captain (http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30941638). – KingSheep9 years ago
As someone who has not heard of Sam Wilson and Isaiah Bradley I find this an interesting topic to raise. This of course emphasizes the good nature of Rogers while raising political issues about the racism of the American government. If there was a movie centered the character of Wilson or Bradley instead of Rogers their popularity might be raised. – melimangoes9 years ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you called this an "alternate mythos", meaning someone came up with a different background for the Captain America character. As an author, I strongly dislike when people do this simply to satisfy the current culture's hot topics (In this case, racism). There's so much complaint about whitewashing, and rightfully so because whitewashing can be very damaging, but I have an issue with taking a story and changing its 'white' origin to one of 'ethnic' to satisfy pop culture. – Qiao ChengHua9 years ago
As someone who has not had much exposure to comics, I can see why this alternate story is an interesting way to point towards the "obvious" stereotyping of super heroes. I would disagree with Qiao's argument that the story is being changed from a "white" origin to satisfy pop-culture. I think it is a rightful hypothesis that points to the fact that during WWII the African American soldiers were forced to endure deadly and painful experimentation - for the sake of enhancing the survival rate of their white counterparts. (Just look for an Article recently released by NPR called "Secret World War II Chemical Experiments Tested Troops By Race"). I would argue that the alternate story takes "reality" into effect and tells the story of how it would really be, if during those experimentation's one of the African Americans became "super powerful" and how, or if, Americans would have accepted him as a hero. After all, when Jesse Owens won the Olympic medals in 1936 - he became a test subject. Somehow I think it is important to notice the ease with which we suspend our believe of a white soldier being experimented on and becoming a hero vs. the criticism and reservations we have thinking that a black soldier could ever become a super hero - even though they were actually experimented on and even though they have proven their exemplary abilities time and time again. – pmaschke9 years ago
There’s a steady mix of both praise and outrage at the idea of a black Captain America; but the real issue is not a question of Steve Rogers or Sam Wilson. It’s a question of what diversity means to different fans and what solutions can be reached to ensure the inclusion of everyone invested in comic book culture. Does changing the race of a well known character help this process? Would it be more effective to just create new characters?
Fascinating topic! The most important questions to consider are probably: Does it make a positive impact to move Sam Wilson, a black character, to the forefront by giving him the identity of a more prominent, well known superhero? What kind of implications are there when Sam Wilson abandons his own superhero identity as Falcon in order to take on the persona of a white superhero? Are there negative connotations about the way we value one race of superhero over another? Would a better solution be giving Falcon a more prominent place in comics, with promotion, more issues, etc? Or is this a strategic move to use the large audience that Captain America has in order to depict diversity to a larger audience? – KTPopielarz9 years ago
I think it would absolutely have been better for Sam to stay Falconear and just accumulate more publicity under that persona. That way he wouldn't be tied to a white identity at all – SomeOtherAmazon9 years ago
It's interesting to examine how comic book fans--who have traditionally felt they resided outside of the realm of the mainstream--are adjusting to the new, wider audiences comics are gathering. Also interesting to think about: what are the main goals of the big publishers? Are they trying to gather a more diverse audience? Are they attempting to reflect the diverse audience they already have more accurately? Are they motivated by the bump in sales generated by the buzz and controversy? – allisonparker19 years ago
I really do worry that some of these race and gender changes are just a publicity grab from the publishers. If we don't have solid storytelling to back these characters up then nothing good will actually come of it. Like personally I thought Batgirl of burnside was not good, but it's supposed to be this beacon of social justice in the comic world. It felt like a money grab to me- the villains were lame. We don't get the sense that Barbra is fighting for something bigger like we did in Gail Simone's title. I'm afraid it's the same way with a lot of these race swaps- all flash and no substance. – SomeOtherAmazon9 years ago
Love this topic! I really really would like to see new characters personally, because it would give them a chance to make an entire new backstory and interpret the struggles of African Americans if they wanted, as opposed to, going from a caucasian character to an African American one, it doesn't get a chance to get that backstory if that makes sense. I can't wait to see what happens with this one! – scole9 years ago
It's a shame that the world has to become so PC that we have to change beloved comic book heroes who have been around for decades need to be tweaked because it doesn't coincides with today society. It's like comic book creators cannot come up with original characters or that if they did create new characters, they wouldn't stack up to the tried and true characters of the past. – JustJohn9 years ago
While some of us love superheroes and villains, are having movies based on them becoming too much? Is it better for them to just remain as comic books and not a live-action movie? You can touch on earlier comic book movies and see how well they did in the past compared to now. Also, how well their sequels did at the box office.
You can possibly note too as to why we have so much of that. Given that some of the past were successful, some hit and miss, and some are quite infamously bad. It almost seems like in a way, they're trying to give the public what they want to give better comic hero representation. But in doing so, the marketing took advantage of the popularity and might've given us too much of a good thing. But in the end, it could be that we're the ones responsible for letting that happen since we demanded that. – Ryan Walsh9 years ago
You're going to want to mention the terms of licensing rights. Studios must produce a film of an IP every so often, which means companies like Sony who own certain franchises (most notoriously, Fantastic 4) are required to push out something, good or bad, in order to keep their IPs. – Austin9 years ago
Understanding popularity and how far the industry is willing to go to beat a dead horse is key. Pure laziness in the desire for cheap ways to make money is what drives Hollywood to invest so much in a type of movie of any kind, the thinking being if they pump out more movies on superheroes (everyone gets a movie!) more and more people who liked the original good ones will keep paying until the trend starts to fall. When they get dangerously close to losing money then they'll pick up on the next thing. In essence, taking a look at past examples of trends in movies (and other area like videogames - do we really need another Call of Duty every year?) can help illustrate what "too much" means to an audience that's been investing for years in Hollywood's gimmicks. – smartstooge9 years ago
I really like what you've done here, keep it going! :) – scoleman9 years ago
I'm curious as to what comparisons you could draw from other industries. Are there other noteworthy cases of "too much of a good thing?"
Also, do you think the comic book fan base might help the sub-genre stay alive? Comic fans are used to new and semi-frequent installments about their favorite characters. We're even used to identity (cast) changes. Maybe that makes us more likely to hold on to superhero movies than other popular genres. – JakeNoseIt9 years ago
Using current Marvel Studios movies as a template, one reason why current superhero movies are successful is that, while they deliver copious amounts of fan service through cameos and Easter eggs, the development of a semi-original plot line creates a sense of anticipation; instead of simply being a regurgitation of pre-existing stories (which can be extremely satisfying), these movies construct a new continuum with the characters in a new environment, as if a comic book is being constructed on the big screen for the audience to witness. – EmeryAF06249 years ago
Under capitalism, the-more-the-better is the path to go. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Oftentimes comic book historians will talk about the variety of eras in comic book history. For example the Silver Age is said to have taken place from 1950s to the 1970s. In this era comics began to turn into hardcore science fiction stories. Stan Lee starting creating comics during this period and many of his creations, like the Hulk and Fantastic Four, are scientifically based. What were the conditions (socially and culturally) that led to the creation of this era? Both Marvel and DC should be discussed.
This is a topic that includes so many aspects that it could lead to some interesting discussions. I think one important reason for the use of science was the end of WWII going into the Vietnam War. People in a short amount of time saw the use of science to destroy the world. People felt the real trauma and pain that could be caused through experimentation. Art tends to blossom after tragedy because people need to understand it in some form. This plays a critical point in the focus on science in comics. There are many interviews with Stan Lee where he discusses this is exact point that are easily found. The world had seen the use of an atomic weapon. These comics struggled with the idea that we could create our own demise and what do we do with that information?
– Celeste Reeb9 years ago
This could be a really interesting topic. I mean the science in most silver age comics is fairly inaccurate but the intent was great. Most comics were for children so introducing them to science and thinking about how the world around them works (even through pseudo-science) is really great. – Edward Haynes9 years ago