Mike S. Miller, a trash bag of a comics artist who is a Comicsgater somehow found a new Avenue of trash to explore
He owned a Mark Wieringo Spider-Man cover rough sketch
And decided to draw over it with his shitty MAGA original character, copy Ringo's signature and is now going to run the cover with a credit to the deceased Wieringo, selling it as his "last cover"
I don’t mind re-numbering per se but Marvel seem determined to do it the most obnoxious way possible. Like if every couple trades’ worth of books are now gonna be their own run, just give the run it’s own subtitle so it’s easy to find. “Ms. Marvel: Curse of the Purple Monkey #1” and so forth.
Rather than the current status quo, which is the various runs really only being differentiated by the author and date
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
DC has been doing an experiment with Deathstroke for a few months now where the ongoing is still numbered, like, issue 35 or whatever, but each story arc is given its own title treatment and treated as a standalone story
So, like, issue 30-36 was parts 1-6 of Deathstroke vs. Batman and 37-43 is Deathstroke: Arkham and so one
It seems like a good way to let long runs happen but also present the stories in a pretty easily followed format
+13
Options
Andy JoeWe claim the land for the highlord!The AdirondacksRegistered Userregular
DC has been doing an experiment with Deathstroke for a few months now where the ongoing is still numbered, like, issue 35 or whatever, but each story arc is given its own title treatment and treated as a standalone story
So, like, issue 30-36 was parts 1-6 of Deathstroke vs. Batman and 37-43 is Deathstroke: Arkham and so one
It seems like a good way to let long runs happen but also present the stories in a pretty easily followed format
Isn't that just moving from an implicit writing for trade to explicit? Not that that's bad (Frankly, I think it's where comics should go), just asking.
Priest is still telling long, overarching stories with Deathstroke that go across multiple arcs. It is just making each storyline itself as accessible as possible.
Which more comics should do, really. Constant relaunches aren't a permanent solution, but making books that you can jump onto 3 or 4 story arcs in and will still be around 3 or 4 arcs later are closer to a genuine fix.
It is how DC has been operating since Rebirth, really. They didn't even relaunch Wonder Woman when G. WILLOW WILSON, probably the biggest woman in comics writing nowadays, took over the title and that was 60 issues in!
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Priest is still telling long, overarching stories with Deathstroke that go across multiple arcs. It is just making each storyline itself as accessible as possible.
Which more comics should do, really. Constant relaunches aren't a permanent solution, but making books that you can jump onto 3 or 4 story arcs in and will still be around 3 or 4 arcs later are closer to a genuine fix.
It is how DC has been operating since Rebirth, really. They didn't even relaunch Wonder Woman when G. WILLOW WILSON, probably the biggest woman in comics writing nowadays, took over the title and that was 60 issues in!
Oh, I thought you meant they were actually standalone stories. I have not been following Deathstroke.
Yeah, it sounds kinda like what they did in the 90s.
it just reminds me of nineties comics, where they would tell you the name of the arc and what part of what it was on the cover.
UXM did this into the early 2010s afaik; it’d deal with one handful of characters for a six issue arc that had its own little subhead. Avengers used to do it too but seems to have stopped much earlier. A nice thing is that it also provides a nice framework for events and crossovers, since they can get their little subhead in the same way.
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
0
Options
MaddocI'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mother?Registered Userregular
Constant relaunches aren't even a good temporary solution
They burn up good will for increasingly smaller and smaller short term influxes of sales
I think they were good for a very short window, back in the early Marvel Now days
Those complete line-wide "fuck it, we are relaunching basically everything and starting fresh" moves can be really helpful but they can't happen literally every year
As that Spacetwinks thread showed, DC hasn't done any of those sweeping resets since Rebirth launched (having only done them for situations like the Justice League revamp and Bendis taking over Superman, and those were after 50 issue runs) and sales have remained pretty consistent and healthy across the board
If a big slate cleaning happened every 5 years or so, then that's not too bad, but once or sometimes even twice a year is BANANAS
Marvel takes all the wrong lessons whenever they have a success. Their recent past is littered with concepts that are basically "Well this worked once, so let's keep doing it over and over again." and then when they run it into the ground, they have no clue why it suddenly stopped working.
One of the biggest problems they kept running into is the specific titles they chose to launch
They would launch, like, 20-30 new books over the course of 3 months and expect titles like PROWLER and STARBRAND & NIGHTMASK and SOLO to somehow get an audience in an incredibly crowded marketplace when they have to compete against the dozen plus other, bigger, books out that month
And when they didn't immediately take off in a big way, they would cancel them before they even got a trade out
A complete mess of a strategy that never had any chance of working
One of the biggest problems they kept running into is the specific titles they chose to launch
They would launch, like, 20-30 new books over the course of 3 months and expect titles like PROWLER and STARBRAND & NIGHTMASK and SOLO to somehow get an audience in an incredibly crowded marketplace when they have to compete against the dozen plus other, bigger, books out that month
And when they didn't immediately take off in a big way, they would cancel them before they even got a trade out
A complete mess of a strategy that never had any chance of working
I feel like whenever they did a book like that, they were hoping for a new Matt Fraction Hawkeye, and when they got nowhere near close, they canceled them to try and do another set. Just throwing shit at the wall in the hopes of a mega success and not giving a damn about anything less. It's the same "everything or nothing" mentality that's pervading a LOT of large media corporations these days, from videogames to movies.
Undead Scottsman on
+4
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
Even Matt Fraction Hawkeye had a built-in reader base from Matt Fraction Iron Fist, so it still doesn't make sense
Even Matt Fraction Hawkeye had a built-in reader base from Matt Fraction Iron Fist, so it still doesn't make sense
Marvel be duuuumb
I mean, that was just my take on this. Like I have any clue what's actually going on behind the scenes.
0
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
I get that! Just wanted to point out that even an unheralded project like Hawkeye wasn't as much of an out-of-nowhere success as you might think. Fraction and Aja earned that good will with a run that was given Brubaker's name on it to help sell it in the first place
Or my favorite recent example, Sina Grace’s Iceman, which had a decent but not great following, so was killed before the first trade came out. Then it and the second trade did really well, so they brought it back, but only for a five issue mini-series.
+1
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
I wonder if Marvel even has to care anymore.
With Disney & Marvel Studios, aren't they effectively protected from any serious misfortune as they're just IP factories?
I've heard people saying after the Disney purchase that once Disney took a look at Marvel's finances and lack of any real success they'd be in trouble. But that doesn't seem to have happened. I think Disney genuinely does not care about Marvel Comics, they only care about Marvel Studios.
+6
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
I've heard people saying after the Disney purchase that once Disney took a look at Marvel's finances and lack of any real success they'd be in trouble. But that doesn't seem to have happened. I think Disney genuinely does not care about Marvel Comics, they only care about Marvel Studios.
Marvel Comics is probably fairly self sufficient (as in the money they bring in offsets their operating costs) and so, unlike movies where shareholders can make the case of "Well, this movie was only a moderate success, so let's focus our money on something than can be a blockbuster instead", ending Marvel Comics wouldn't suddenly give them money to allocate elsewhere, so there really isn't a reason to shut them down.
I actually figure it’s the opposite of that? The only reason I can imagine marvel making all of these terrible long-term calls is corporate culture. I know you can’t blame it all on one guy but it feels like marvels decision making got a lit worse when Pearlmutter got kicked out of Marvels movie Studios.
DC has been doing an experiment with Deathstroke for a few months now where the ongoing is still numbered, like, issue 35 or whatever, but each story arc is given its own title treatment and treated as a standalone story
So, like, issue 30-36 was parts 1-6 of Deathstroke vs. Batman and 37-43 is Deathstroke: Arkham and so one
It seems like a good way to let long runs happen but also present the stories in a pretty easily followed format
Super annoying BTW that 30-36 took place before issue 29 and 37-43 continues from the cliffhanger in 29.
Marvel seemed to have a lot of years of really strong editorial direction, which I tend to think would help marginal titles survive even if their sales/response were lackluster. Even the most recent Marvel NOW stuff could be kinda scattershot but still had a sort of unity of tone/feel/theme to it.
It seems like after secret wars they've just lost that and are kinda flailing; they obviously wanted civil war 2 and secret empire to be line-defining efforts and unfortunately they both just sucked.
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Taika Waititi recently said at an event that he wants to make another movie with Marvel Studios but said he has no interest in directing GotG 3 as he views them as James Gunn's movies and would feel uncomfortable taking over.
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Taika Waititi recently said at an event that he wants to make another movie with Marvel Studios but said he has no interest in directing GotG 3 as he views them as James Gunn's movies and would feel uncomfortable taking over.
Posts
Mike S. Miller, a trash bag of a comics artist who is a Comicsgater somehow found a new Avenue of trash to explore
He owned a Mark Wieringo Spider-Man cover rough sketch
And decided to draw over it with his shitty MAGA original character, copy Ringo's signature and is now going to run the cover with a credit to the deceased Wieringo, selling it as his "last cover"
What a fucking ghoul
Rather than the current status quo, which is the various runs really only being differentiated by the author and date
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
So, like, issue 30-36 was parts 1-6 of Deathstroke vs. Batman and 37-43 is Deathstroke: Arkham and so one
It seems like a good way to let long runs happen but also present the stories in a pretty easily followed format
Would you say you're really feeling it?
Isn't that just moving from an implicit writing for trade to explicit? Not that that's bad (Frankly, I think it's where comics should go), just asking.
Priest is still telling long, overarching stories with Deathstroke that go across multiple arcs. It is just making each storyline itself as accessible as possible.
Which more comics should do, really. Constant relaunches aren't a permanent solution, but making books that you can jump onto 3 or 4 story arcs in and will still be around 3 or 4 arcs later are closer to a genuine fix.
It is how DC has been operating since Rebirth, really. They didn't even relaunch Wonder Woman when G. WILLOW WILSON, probably the biggest woman in comics writing nowadays, took over the title and that was 60 issues in!
Oh, I thought you meant they were actually standalone stories. I have not been following Deathstroke.
Yeah, it sounds kinda like what they did in the 90s.
UXM did this into the early 2010s afaik; it’d deal with one handful of characters for a six issue arc that had its own little subhead. Avengers used to do it too but seems to have stopped much earlier. A nice thing is that it also provides a nice framework for events and crossovers, since they can get their little subhead in the same way.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
They burn up good will for increasingly smaller and smaller short term influxes of sales
Those complete line-wide "fuck it, we are relaunching basically everything and starting fresh" moves can be really helpful but they can't happen literally every year
As that Spacetwinks thread showed, DC hasn't done any of those sweeping resets since Rebirth launched (having only done them for situations like the Justice League revamp and Bendis taking over Superman, and those were after 50 issue runs) and sales have remained pretty consistent and healthy across the board
If a big slate cleaning happened every 5 years or so, then that's not too bad, but once or sometimes even twice a year is BANANAS
They would launch, like, 20-30 new books over the course of 3 months and expect titles like PROWLER and STARBRAND & NIGHTMASK and SOLO to somehow get an audience in an incredibly crowded marketplace when they have to compete against the dozen plus other, bigger, books out that month
And when they didn't immediately take off in a big way, they would cancel them before they even got a trade out
A complete mess of a strategy that never had any chance of working
I feel like whenever they did a book like that, they were hoping for a new Matt Fraction Hawkeye, and when they got nowhere near close, they canceled them to try and do another set. Just throwing shit at the wall in the hopes of a mega success and not giving a damn about anything less. It's the same "everything or nothing" mentality that's pervading a LOT of large media corporations these days, from videogames to movies.
Marvel be duuuumb
I mean, that was just my take on this. Like I have any clue what's actually going on behind the scenes.
With Disney & Marvel Studios, aren't they effectively protected from any serious misfortune as they're just IP factories?
What is their incentive to be better?
One thing I noticed
Hoo lawd
Marvel Comics is probably fairly self sufficient (as in the money they bring in offsets their operating costs) and so, unlike movies where shareholders can make the case of "Well, this movie was only a moderate success, so let's focus our money on something than can be a blockbuster instead", ending Marvel Comics wouldn't suddenly give them money to allocate elsewhere, so there really isn't a reason to shut them down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCoPycawxUk
Steam
It's good when the companies do care about the comics they put out, but they don't necessarily need to anymore.
Super annoying BTW that 30-36 took place before issue 29 and 37-43 continues from the cliffhanger in 29.
It seems like after secret wars they've just lost that and are kinda flailing; they obviously wanted civil war 2 and secret empire to be line-defining efforts and unfortunately they both just sucked.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Just give him Thor 4!
But give him Valkyrie 1