|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2017 15:00:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2017 15:59:44 GMT -5
Well I wish Alonso well wherever he ends up. It may well be that a shake up was needed. Cebulski's greatest strength so far has been as a talent scout/recruiter, bringing a lot of talent to Marvel and discovering a lot of talent overseas that have gotten their big break at Marvel. I am hopeful that his tenure will see a wave of new talent (and with it new ideas) that can make Marvel feel fresh and the House of Ideas again instead of recycling the same old same old over and over again catering the the same shrinking niche market. Cebulksi has been their international coordinator for a while and headquartered in Shanghai, so maybe he will have had a chance to look at comics in other markets and bring some fresh strategies on ow to get comics into the hands of potential readers and grow the customer base. I am skeptical the corporate structure will allow much change, but am hopeful something good will come out of this.
-M
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 17, 2017 20:06:13 GMT -5
I wonder whether the Publishing department has any say so on the stories. It seems that when all the Marvel movies made lots of money, it made the comics less important.
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Nov 18, 2017 3:13:50 GMT -5
Very surprising pick with Cebulski. I would not have guessed that.
I figured the next E-i-C would probably be Brevoort, but he's probably seen as too traditional.
I was shocked but pleased when they asked Axel for the position.
I was hopeful of what he could bring in from his prestigeous position as one of Vertigo's best editors, but knew the incredible pressure would be difficult.
Where will Axel go ? Will hey with Marvel ?
Frankly, I could see him going out on his own, or setting up shop much like Karen Berger and Shelly Bond have with their own imprints at other publishers.
Marvel has mostly been dead to me since about 2000. If they could bring back the classic continuity and build on that as sort of a parallel universe, I could jump back in, but between Jemas and Quesada and what's come since, Marvel is a huge clusterfunk that I mostly don't care about. We've gone from Stan Lee-verse to Disney-verse, and I want the Stan-verse back, but I don't think it's going to happen.
Keep the current, cause I know they'll never abandon that, but give us a throwback universe we can enjoy.
I was just thinking today I wish DC would do the same with a separate imprint that carries on like COIE never happened.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2017 11:32:37 GMT -5
It was stated in the article that Axel has left Marvel entirely, so no he won't have a position with them elsewhere in the company. It's not entirely certain he left of his own volition either, but details of the reasons for the change and who initiated the move have not been confirmed nor will they likely be.
-M
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Nov 18, 2017 13:43:51 GMT -5
They wanted Axel gone.
Marvel has been slipping and is largely perceived as not being as good as it used to be. A lot of that is related to its acquisition by Disney IMO.
Overall, I have great respect for Axel but he wasn't a very good fit for Marvel. It always felt strained and awkward. Honestly, Axel doesn't really strike me as a Marvel guy.
C. B. Cebulski fits the Disney profile, and it sounds like he's well liked, but I'm highly skeptical.
Marvel is practically dead to me.
It started with DeFalco and has only come up with Quesada and Palmiotti's Marvel Knights and the early Quesada reinvigoration as E-i-C.
After that Marvel has backslid horribly, bloatedly, out of character and context, with few exceptions like Daredevil or some of their out of continuity projects.
DC is closer to what I've enjoyed, though I'm not as solid on them as I used to be either. There's a lot to like there.
As far as Axel leaving and Bendis leaving, I'm sure there's linkage there.
Pure speculation on my part, but I'm thinking when word was in the air that there would be a new sheriff in town and Bendis wasn't approached, Didio and Lee whispering in his ear suddenly got a lot more real.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2017 13:52:55 GMT -5
A "mutual decision" to leave is normally a euphemisn for "we want you out - if you go quietly, we'll give you a truck of money and not tell anyone you were fired"
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2017 11:47:51 GMT -5
For what it's worth, to get a sense of where Cebulski is coming form, tweeted the following: "To prepare for the future, one must remember the past" and include d a picture of Sean Howe's Marvel the Untold Story in the tweet. No other context, but with his background in talent relations an recruiting and the nature of Howe's book I think a lot of the changes in motion will be behind the scenes stuff that will impact what we see on the pages but not be privy to what those changes actually are. Which is probably how it should be.
-M
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Nov 19, 2017 23:11:30 GMT -5
I have no idea what he means by that
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 20, 2017 23:58:30 GMT -5
I wonder whether the Publishing department has any say so on the stories. It seems that when all the Marvel movies made lots of money, it made the comics less important. Disney has never set great store in publishing, which is why they have been happy to hand it over to others, for many years. They purchased Marvel for intellectual property that appealed to adolescent males, pure and simple. They wanted that property for other media. Publishing is just a way to keep trademarks active and maybe provide some material for use elsewhere. It doesn't earn huge profits (hasn't in generations). What they are concerned with is that it brings in enough revenue to cover their costs and stays in step with their other initiatives. Actually, having it failing, providing it ddoesn't drag down other divisions (movies and tv especially), works in their favor, on the balance sheet.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 21, 2017 4:30:54 GMT -5
Obviously, and as always, I disagree with Simon. I've been really digging Marvel over the past couple years and I'm buying more Marvel books than I ever have in my life. Basically it seems like there's a concentrated push to engage an audience beyond the typical "I (heart) violence/I (heart) continuity" fanboy demographic with a strong stable of creator driven, anti-grim 'n gritty, just plain fun comics. (Ms. Marvel, Squirrel Girl, Silver Surfer, Moon Girl...) My comic shop guy says my tastes are the same as an 18 year old "Tumblr Girl" but there seems to be - for the first time since the '70s - room for idiosyncratic, innovative titles that are both aimed at a non-traditional audience and are... um... .good. (Why does nobody ever talk about Street Poet Ray?) Also hooray for the outright rejection of '90s "Punisher/Ghost Rider: MurderDeath vs. KillBloodSatanMurder" style crap. So with the editorial regime I'll probably go back to not caring about Marvel. No big loss... it's not like I can't find plenty of good comics to read.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Nov 21, 2017 15:22:48 GMT -5
Obviously, and as always, I disagree with Simon. I've been really digging Marvel over the past couple years and I'm buying more Marvel books than I ever have in my life. Basically it seems like there's a concentrated push to engage an audience beyond the typical "I (heart) violence/I (heart) continuity" fanboy demographic with a strong stable of creator driven, anti-grim 'n gritty, just plain fun comics. (Ms. Marvel, Squirrel Girl, Silver Surfer, Moon Girl...) My comic shop guy says my tastes are the same as an 18 year old "Tumblr Girl" but there seems to be - for the first time since the '70s - room for idiosyncratic, innovative titles that are both aimed at a non-traditional audience and are... um... .good. (Why does nobody ever talk about Street Poet Ray?) Also hooray for the outright rejection of '90s "Punisher/Ghost Rider: MurderDeath vs. KillBloodSatanMurder" style crap. So with the editorial regime I'll probably go back to not caring about Marvel. No big loss... it's not like I can't find plenty of good comics to read. I think the problem is that while some of those Marvel titles are good (I enjoyed what I've read of Silver Surfer) what they're trying to do (stand-alone, idiosyncratic, innovative) is being done far better at Image. I suppose I was psychologically shaped as a reader by how I got into Marvel comics. When I started reading in the mid-80's, I got heavily into the Handbooks and the shared universe concept was almost as important to me as the characters and stories. Divorced of continuity, I don't think I would have cared as much. It was all an illusion, of course, but the idea of a giant overarching story (The Marvel Universe) was enthralling to my young mind. I agree that Marvel creators should be given a lot of freedom as long as they don't go too far off model, but what I've sampled in recent years (like Aaron's Doctor Strange) is simply bad characterization masquerading as innovation. That is, if you have even a basic understanding of Doctor Strange. He's literally written like movie Tony Stark. Even in a perfect scenario where all your readers are brand new and know nothing about the character or his history, you're doing them a disservice.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2017 18:46:48 GMT -5
Obviously, and as always, I disagree with Simon. I actually don't totally disagree with you - I think it's great that Marvel put out a few more idiosyncratic books, that maybe appeal to a different audience. Those ones you listed didn't do much for me, but that's a good thing - there should be elements of the line that appeal to younger TumbleChatBook kids or people with different skin colour or sexual orientation than the usual pale, straight, old fanboys, and not to me. And they did manage to land a few books (She Hulk, Vision, Ultimates, Old Man Logan to some extent) that were more ambitious in different ways. But, it's the rest of the line that the problem - for Marvel to put out umpteen hundred books a year and only about 20 or 30 of them to be worth reading, and absolutely none of their core titles, is absolutely pitiful
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 21, 2017 21:09:17 GMT -5
Yeah, yeah, I forgot Vision. That was as good as anything Marvel has put out ever, IMO. (Also really dug everything Warren Ellis did, and quite a bit of Jason Aaron' stuff.)
See, I think twenty or thirty books out of a hundred is a GOOD average. I'd say 5 is a good average. (And, again, reminiscent of the '70s where Spidey, the Fantastic Four, and Thor were kind of Ok at best.) "Flagship" books are kind of by-there-very-nature the least interesting parts of Marvel and DC's line.
If a company can produce a handful of comics that I'm excited about at any given time - And it has never been more than a handful since I was 10 and really liked Secret Wars 2 - they're doing very well.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2017 21:14:02 GMT -5
Twenty to thirty books out of one hundred is three times what you normally get according to Sturgeon's Law.
What Marvel needs is to trim their line but they won't because it's about market share, taking up shelf space to prevent competitors getting the shelf space, and keeping trademarks in use not about quality of product.
-M
|
|