|
|
Post by Graphic Autist on May 21, 2019 21:35:21 GMT -5
This is why I loved alternate universe/imaginary stories as a kid. They always seemed to have a beginning and end to them. And yeah, a lot kind of sucked, but there were some good stories to be told if you don’t need to worry about ruining a character’s canonical street-cred in the process.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on May 21, 2019 21:37:20 GMT -5
The superhero ending that was so good that I cannot take seriously any Silver Surfer story published since:  ...which is exactly why no character ever gets a permanent ending. Even Dave Sim brought back Cerebus when the bank account balance started to look concerning.  |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 23, 2019 23:25:54 GMT -5
That's a thing I've never understood... why does having an ending mean you can't write more stories? There's always 'lost episodes' or 'untold tales' or whatever that can be fun adventures after the ending, but that just doesn't seem to be how Superhero comics roll. (We do the lost tales, just not because the story ended.. just because)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2019 23:41:34 GMT -5
I can understand the never-ending story in comics when periodicals were the only format available for comics, and the only way to monetize comics was to keep selling issues, because once the story was published, they never made money from it again (unless it was a reprint in another periodical). Unlike a book publisher who could keep selling Lord of the Rings to generation after generation, a comic story only has a one month window to make the publisher money, so they had to keep pumping out stories month after month to keep making money. However, that's not the case any more. A really well done complete comic story can keep selling to new audiences without needing new stories with those characters, think, something like Bone. Jeff Smith can keep making money by selling Bone to readers now without ever making another new Bone story if he doesn't want to. If Marvel wanted to do the definitive Spider-Man saga (or DC the definitive Batman story, etc.), starting at the beginning and telling his whole story and coming to a definitive end (say like they did with Ultimate Peter Parker), they could still monetize that story without having to continuously produce new monthly stories now, if they would embrace the changes in format and audience of the market and not focus on periodical sales to the direct market.
The only thing forcing comics to keep stories never ending is their refusal to adapt their publishing model and move away from the direct market periodical market. They are locked in to that stagnant structure which requires the constant production of new content to keep in monetized instead of producing evergreen content they can keep selling. It's another example of the comics industry trying to succeed with a 20th century business model in a 21st century market.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 23, 2019 23:49:16 GMT -5
I think time will tell if that really works, though. I mean manga works that way, and you'd be hard pressed to find classics in the book store with a couple exceptions like Astro Boy and Lone Wolf and Cub (and even Lone Wolf and Cub has had spinoffs and such to keep it in the public eye). I've no idea if stuff like Evangelion or Golgo 13 is still readily available and selling in Japan, or the European markets where manga is more popular than here.
I almost feel like you have to pick between a good 'classic' story with a good ending and creating a 'franchise' or a 'property' that requires constant churning of ideas and plots.
The other thing is the 'I must have the whole thing' mentality which is much more pervasive than it used to be. I get WHY Marvel and DC have various different editions of the same classic material, but from a long term standpoint, the result is if someone really wanted to read 'the whole thing' for a major superhero character, you simply can't. For manga, even ridiculously long running series like One Piece and Case Closed have all the volumes readily available, and in the same format. Sure, now they're starting to do 'omnibus' editions where they slap 3 'regular' books in one, and some of the popular animes get 'Anime editions' or color ones, but it's far less extreme and confusing that Marvel going from random trades, to Masterworks, to Essentials, back to Masterworks, to Epics. Or DC doing Archives, then Omnibus, with the Showcases in between.. never mind the short lived 'Chronicles' trade dress.
For instance, what if, instead of producing 2 or 3 random 'epic' volumes a month, Marvel started say, when the first Avengers Movie came out, alternating between Avengers, Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America.. still the same 2 a month, but only those titles, alternating, and in order. Maybe add a 3rd some months to cover the short run characters (Black Panther would take, what, 2 or 3 for the old stuff, then maybe 4 for Priest.. one or two for Black Widow?) By the time Endgame came out, they could have a display of 'the whole thing' for each series... whatever 20+ volumes that'd be. I could even see commericals for it. would that work to get some of the movie watchers to try actual comics?
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on May 24, 2019 4:17:07 GMT -5
At some point, though, superhero stories do have a soft ending - or at least the characters are changed beyond recognition. Like the tone, storytelling style, even the genre of the Batman books did a complete 180 between 1960 and 1965, then again between 1965 and 1972, and then a slightly softer reboot when all the Marvel guys came to DC in the late '70s, then again when Dark Knight Returns hit.
And everyone who writes Captain America ignores all past versions and creates a completely new character who acts with a completely different worldview and outlook than every other version of Captain America, and this has been true since the mid '70s. It's practically tradition!
You can only pretend that it is the same story set in the same "world" for so long before it just gets ridiculous.
|
|
