|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 15, 2018 18:14:47 GMT -5
I think the 1970's, overall, was a return to greatness for Batman. I'm currently rereading the excellent Englehart/Rogers run in Detective Comics and I think I'm enjoying it even more the second time. That said, the one significant problem I have with this era is the rather nonsensical decision to put Wayne Manor/The Batcave in moth balls and move Batman to a penthouse. The original thought process was to...modernize Bruce Wayne by putting him in the heart of the city? Seeing that he spent most of his time as Batman prowling the streets anyway, and also seeing that Lucius Fox will soon be introduced, I think this move was rather pointless. It's also interesting how rarely Batman utilizes the Batmobile, his utility belt and personal aircraft in this era. It's hilarious to me how Bob Haney (or was it Aparo?) always had Batman renting a WWII bomber to make long distance flights in The Brave & the Bold. I assume that the editors and creators wanted to distance Batman a bit from his gadgets and vehicles because of their overuse in the 60? Pretty much the latter. Part of the inspiration was to move the whole thing to the center of Gotham and have it fully inhabit an urban environment. Denny O'Neil moved Gotham into being even more the darker parts of New York City and it made sense to have Bruce Wayne live in a million dollar penthouse, much as the super-rich did in New York. It made abit more sense than having to run in from the outskirts of the city. Wayne Manor mostly disappeared, with a few rare revisits. Like most changes in comics, it was undone when later folks wanted to revisit the past and put Bruce back in Wayne Manor and the penthouse went away. The Batcave made more sense in the rural environment; but, i don't think anyone every really explored the idea of an urban Bat-base, which would touch upon other urban structures, which means someone would likely discover a connection, at some point. I loved the Batman-as-James Bond stories of the early to mid-70s and much of that holds up well, as does the later Englehart/Rogers material and the O'Neil/Don Newton stuff, from Detective, not to mention the excellent stories from Allan Brennert. There's a ton of good Bronze Age material, though it is peppered here and there, just like in the Silver and Golden Ages.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 15, 2018 18:20:44 GMT -5
When they first 'modernized' Batman, the 'Wayne Foundation'was a charity that invited people to come in and ask for assistance...which Wayne was able to provide, usually, but not always, with Batman getting involved. (This is similar to what happened to the Batman newspaper strip, after the TV show ended...the syndicate didn't have the rights to Batman, but nobody ever said they couldn't make Bruce Wayne the main character, so Bruce and Dick helped people, a bit like a more active version of an advice columnist! But, like Superman being depowered, the process of 'interviewing clients' was dropped fairly quickly, around 1971. I never actually read Engelhart and Rogers on 'Detective', but the 'Bat-gadgets' returned with a vengeance shortly afterwards, with Len Wein's arrival on the Batman title. Bob Haney...well, he didn't give a damn what anybody else did, he just did his thing, and DC let him, at least til Murray Boltinoff stopped editing the book. Horrors! Get that fixed ASAP.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Aug 15, 2018 23:30:06 GMT -5
Those things they did with Marvel Now were not the same.. they were the beginning of a storyline, not a BEGINNING.
I'm not arguing... Marvel and everyone else should do what they can to make the most money. I was just suggesting something new, and wondering if it would have worked.
It's very true that #1s and events dominate sales, so that's what we get. There was a time the opposite happened, where new books were randomly tacked on to previous volumes because they thought higher numbers sold better.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2018 23:36:44 GMT -5
Those things they did with Marvel Now were not the same.. they were the beginning of a storyline, not a BEGINNING. I'm not arguing... Marvel and everyone else should do what they can to make the most money. I was just suggesting something new, and wondering if it would have worked. It's very true that #1s and events dominate sales, so that's what we get. There was a time the opposite happened, where new books were randomly tacked on to previous volumes because they thought higher numbers sold better. It had little to nothing to do with sales, it was about postal regulations and qualifying periodicals for certain classes of postage that saved the company a lot of money on subscriptions. Periodicals had to run so many issues before they could qualify for the lower rate, so starting a new series at #1 cost the company more to produce and you could cheat by starting the numbering from a cancelled or defunct book. Once mail subscriptions stopped being a consideration in the revenue stream and once the post office changed requirements, this was no longer a consideration. -M
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Aug 15, 2018 23:42:34 GMT -5
I know I've read somewhere that way back higher numbers were consider more 'stable' and desireable, but I admit I don't remember where, so maybe it was just a single person's opinion.
|
|
|
Post by comicsandwho on Aug 16, 2018 0:54:54 GMT -5
When they first 'modernized' Batman, the 'Wayne Foundation'was a charity that invited people to come in and ask for assistance...which Wayne was able to provide, usually, but not always, with Batman getting involved. (This is similar to what happened to the Batman newspaper strip, after the TV show ended...the syndicate didn't have the rights to Batman, but nobody ever said they couldn't make Bruce Wayne the main character, so Bruce and Dick helped people, a bit like a more active version of an advice columnist! But, like Superman being depowered, the process of 'interviewing clients' was dropped fairly quickly, around 1971. I never actually read Engelhart and Rogers on 'Detective', but the 'Bat-gadgets' returned with a vengeance shortly afterwards, with Len Wein's arrival on the Batman title. Bob Haney...well, he didn't give a damn what anybody else did, he just did his thing, and DC let him, at least til Murray Boltinoff stopped editing the book. Horrors! Get that fixed ASAP. I know, I know. But my 'Bat-Time-stopping-stopwatch' is still in the shop.
|
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,946
|
Post by Crimebuster on Aug 16, 2018 8:15:08 GMT -5
I know I've read somewhere that way back higher numbers were consider more 'stable' and desireable, but I admit I don't remember where, so maybe it was just a single person's opinion. My understanding is that this was the belief back in the day. it is most obvious at DC, where for a period in the 50's and early 60's, they didn't put any issue number at all on first issues, because they didn't want fans to see the #1 and skip buying it. The series would only get numbering on the cover starting with #2. Talk about a different mindset!
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,069
|
Post by Confessor on Aug 16, 2018 11:19:59 GMT -5
I know I've read somewhere that way back higher numbers were consider more 'stable' and desireable, but I admit I don't remember where, so maybe it was just a single person's opinion. My understanding is that this was the belief back in the day. it is most obvious at DC, where for a period in the 50's and early 60's, they didn't put any issue number at all on first issues, because they didn't want fans to see the #1 and skip buying it. The series would only get numbering on the cover starting with #2. Talk about a different mindset! For what it's worth, as a comic buying kid in the late '70s or early '80s, the fact that a particular issue might have a high number had absolutely no bearing on whether I'd buy it or not. The characters featured in the comic or the cover artwork were much bigger deciding factors for me. In the case of a series like Amazing Spider-Man, which was in the mid-200s when I began regularly buying it, I was actually kind of excited by the existence of 250 odd issues of back story and character developement behind the issue I was picking up. And in the case of something like Commando comics, where the issue number was already in the thousands and each issue featured stand alone stories anyway, I simply didn't care what number a comic was. That said, seeing an issue #1 in the news agent's shelf, and being able to get on board on the ground floor of a comic series, was a definite draw. For example, I remember picking up Atari Force #1, Justice League #1 and the first issue of the New Universe title Justice simply because I wanted to be there at the start of a potentially great series.
|
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,946
|
Post by Crimebuster on Aug 16, 2018 11:47:45 GMT -5
As a kid, I gravitated towards books with higher numbers. I was excited to learn all the back story, and the mythology, it just felt so rich. At Marvel, anyway. DC was such a cluster at the point I started that it just was incredibly confusing - titles like Teen Titans and LSH became reprint books a couple months into my reading, and I did not understand what was happening, only that the story suddenly veered off into nowhere with seemingly no explanation. That was a situation where continuing the numbering just confused me. DC's handling of everyting surrounding Crisis was such a mess, I'm sure I wasn't the only potential new reader who gave up on DC as a result.
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Aug 16, 2018 13:10:19 GMT -5
When I was a kid the issue number meant nothing more than a way of tracking the series and meant little to nothing for me. 1st issues were cool enough and if the series was something I liked or could find then I might follow it. Off the racks at the time it was always hap hazard finding new series. You might see issue #1 and then usually not #2 and then depending on distribution you may find #3 on up. Once the LCS was a thing in the early 80's and shops had to predict 3-4 months ahead of sales dates you could find #1's on the shelf but never #2 as that issue was usually something which was under ordered by the LCS owners pending seeing how sales went on the #1's.
|
|
|
Post by Paste Pot Paul on Aug 16, 2018 18:33:24 GMT -5
I think we also need to accept that the market, and especially the spending habits of the millennial generation, are very fluid. It may be hot to read comics, print or digital, for a period, but they quickly move to other forms of viral media. So the idea of looking at issue 800 of Spider-Man may seem so much more daunting than jumping on the first issue of a run(or direction change which doesnt have years of baggage). I dont mind the renumbering when it has the legacy number there too, looking after the needs of the old and the casual buyer.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Aug 16, 2018 22:11:32 GMT -5
That said, seeing an issue #1 in the news agent's shelf, and being able to get on board on the ground floor of a comic series, was a definite draw. For example, I remember picking up Atari Force #1, Justice League #1 and the first issue of the New Universe title Justice simply because I wanted to be there at the start of a potentially great series. For me there was Rom #1, She-Hulk #1, Ka-Zar The Savage #1, and All-Star Squadron #1. First Avengers #189, first Spider-Man #198, first Fantastic Four #213, first Iron Man #130, first Daredevil #163, first X-Men #131 (in that order). All pretty high numbers, just randomly come across, and it was the art and then the story that got me hooked. I probably did think it must be successful/good to have lasted this long. I didn't think less of Star Wars, Spider-Woman, Micronauts or The New Teen Titans for having lower numbers, I bought them every month too.
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Aug 16, 2018 22:13:44 GMT -5
In the case of a series like Amazing Spider-Man, which was in the mid-200s when I began regularly buying it, I was actually kind of excited by the existence of 250 odd issues of back story and character development behind the issue I was picking up. Yes! There was so much to discover! I loved being immersed in that.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 17, 2018 5:35:54 GMT -5
I think we also need to accept that the market, and especially the spending habits of the millennial generation, are very fluid. It may be hot to read comics, print or digital, for a period, but they quickly move to other forms of viral media. So the idea of looking at issue 800 of Spider-Man may seem so much more daunting than jumping on the first issue of a run(or direction change which doesnt have years of baggage). I dont mind the renumbering when it has the legacy number there too, looking after the needs of the old and the casual buyer. I just picked this up from my LCS and it's nice to see that they are keeping both numbers.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Aug 20, 2018 0:19:30 GMT -5
Q: Is Clark Kent or Superman the true identity?
A: Yes.
|
|