|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 10:28:36 GMT -5
^ such as an original "Crisis on Infinite Earths" tie in, during the original series, being a character looking up and saying "Red Skies?". . then moving on to whatever plot was going on in the comic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 10, 2020 10:53:19 GMT -5
Tie-ins have been a thing since both Crisis and Secret Wars (1984). In fact I just read an interview with Alan Moore where he was grousing about having to work Crisis into Swamp Thing.
None of this is particularly new. We're now over thirty years into this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:02:18 GMT -5
It isn't, but it was more subtle then, right?
Secret Wars II. which was reprinted in full in the UK, seems to have really set the complexity ball rolling. I felt like I was missing out when I read those issues (which reprinted the main series). You couldn't even read Secret Wars II now as a newcomer, it's too tied up in 80s continuity to make much sense on its own.
Crisis and Secret Wars were simplicity itself (relatively speaking) as far as tie ins are concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:05:54 GMT -5
I read a web page last night about "War of the Realms". "Road to War of the Realms" is in 44 different comics. "The World at War" is in 35 different comics. "Reclaim The Realms" is in 19 different comics. "Midgard's Last Stand" is in 6 different comics. "War of the Realms Aftermath" is in 54 different comics! Buying every issue at full price would have cost near to £630 here in Britain! To have bought 1984's Secret Wars in its entirety (12 issues) would have cost £5.70. Now, I know prices rise. I get that. Milk costs more than it did in 1984. Same with petrol, beer, bread, furniture, etc. I know the £1 I was given as a kid would have bought two US comics (40p each) and probably a chocolate bar too. I know that in 2019, £1 will barely get me a can of Coca-Cola. So I do get that. I don't want to compare apples with oranges. It's a futile exercise. I would never compare, say, beer today with beer from 1984. But to a certain extent, comparisons can be made. A completist wishing to buy all of the "War of the Realms" stories, from build up to conclusion would have to buy 158 comics. Of course, no-one has to buy everything. I bought the Onslaught issues of X-Men back in the day without buying tie-in issues for Punisher, Spider-Man, etc. I don't want to exaggerate, 158 comics is necessary only for the most ardent completist. I think it's silly, though. And I don't like how events can take over and intrude upon regular books. "The World at War" portion of "War of the Realms" was featured in Venom #13-15. So if you're a Venom reader, you better either like it/lump it - or just skip those three issues. That aside, I don't like the idea of regular books being at the whims of events. If I was a writer on those books, I'd be frustrated. And I think some writers have been. I can't swear to it, but I'm sure John Byrne mentioned something about an event intruding on his regular book. I could be wrong, though, it might have been someone other than JB. I don't want to put words in his mouth, so to speak. Someone said it, though. Secret Wars had an aftermath and consequences. I first read the issues in reprints 4 or more years after the event. I don't know how much those reprints cost. But pricing aside, unlike Secret Wars II, it was a self-contained maxi-series. I'm engaging in futility here, I know. I may as well stand face-to-face with a shark in the oceans and tell it off. But I think events intruding on regular books is rude. For the readers of the regular books and those working on them. If I was writing, say, an Iron Fist book, I'd be pissed off if I suddenly had to accommodate "War Of The Crisis Armageddon Multiverse Realms" for several issues. Less is more. Take the price issue out of the equation. Does any event need lots of issues and countless tie-in issues? Put aside the business realities that mrp and others post about (and they are important to a discussion), but from a purely creative level, what's the point? Well since the storyline of the "Marvel Universe" has been taking place in just about every comic Marvel has published since FF #1 (if it is all one shared universe with a shared continuity telling one big story) how many comics do you have to buy to get the complete story then? Sounds like getting just the War of the Realms is a bargain by comparison. Fans (continuously over the years): We want it to all be one big interconnected universe with a shared continuity where everything connects and crosses over...(and proceed to buy crossovers and guest appearances in higher numbers than regular issues) Marvel: here you go... Fans: but, but, but... that's too much I just want to be able to read one title without having to buy too many comics... moral of the story: Be careful what you wish for and the message your buying habits send. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:10:49 GMT -5
Yes, but "War of the Realms" certainly represents an extreme. Which seems to get worse. I thought "The Clone Saga" was convoluted, but I am not sure if it tied into any (or many) non-Spidey books.
An interconnected universe is fine. We all love that. But I don't need to buy the early FF comics to be aware of what is going on in modern issues of X-Men or The Defenders. Sure, "Easter Eggs" are nice. I'm sure an "Easter Egg" in a modern FF comic, which links back to FF #1, is gonna be fun for those who were there at the beginning. And a certain cohesion, with references over time, is good. I mean, I read the modern-day The Champions = and I enjoyed a little nod towards the 1975 incarnation - but I didn't need to know much to enjoy it.
"War of the Realms" is Santa Claus on steroids!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:17:10 GMT -5
Yes, but "War of the Realms" certainly represents an extreme. Which seems to get worse. I thought "The Clone Saga" was convoluted, but I am not sure if it tied into any (or many) non-Spidey books. An interconnected universe is fine. We all love that. But I don't need to buy the early FF comics to be aware of what is going on in modern issues of X-Men or The Defenders. Sure, "Easter Eggs" are nice. I'm sure an "Easter Egg" in a modern FF comic, which links back to FF #1, is gonna be fun for those who were there at the beginning. And a certain cohesion, with references over time, is good. I mean, I read the modern-day The Champions = and I enjoyed a little nod towards the 1975 incarnation - but I didn't need to know much to enjoy it. "War of the Realms" is Santa Claus on steroids! Some, not everyone. I only like an interconnected universe (and think it only works) when there is a singular guiding hand overseeing it all and it has a finite lifespan. When those two things are not in place, they tend to get bloated and unwieldy and inconsistent. The Marvel Universe being a prime example of that. (Examples that mostly work-Thieves World guided by Abbey & Aspirin, Wild Cards guided by George RR Martin, most tv shows with multiple writers but one show runner and series bible such as Babylon 5; examples that don't work-the Marvel U, the DCU etc.) But again, it's a case of be careful what you wish for. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:22:27 GMT -5
You don't have to take every comment of mine literally.  On the rare occasion I drink alcohol, I might say "Everyone loves this beer, it's great." It doesn't mean I think every alcohol-drinking citizen of the world likes it. "We all love..." isn't a literal comment, I am sure, erm, we all know that. ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:25:22 GMT -5
For all the complaints about Marvel. there is one major reason you shouldn't expect change on their part.
They are the primary beneficiary of the current status quo of the comic industry. They are the top dog. Those on top of the status quo are rarely (if ever) the ones to look to to be the agents of change. Could things be better for Marvel if there way change? Maybe. But if there is no change we remain on top, so why risk it?
When Marvel was the innovative force, there were the young upstarts and not on top of the status quo. Once they achieved the top spot and were outselling DC, most of that risk and innovation stopped replaced by do more of the same since it is selling.
DC was not a great innovator when they were on top of the status quo. The DC Renaissance of the 80s that people point to as their great period of experimentation and innovation occurred when they were not the top dog and trying to increase their position, i.e. change the status quo. Marvel was then the top dog and trying not to rock the boat.
When Image exploded on the scene and upset the status quo briefly, both Marvel and DC were reactive, but not really innovative. Both flooded the market with more of the same to regain market share.
When Marvel was struggling with bankruptcy and the status quo was a shambles, Quesada and company began experimenting and innovating, once their place on top and financial situation was settled the innovation and experimentation once again ceased.
Those who benefit from the status quo are agents of the status quo, not agents of change. Marvel currently benefits the most form the status quo. They will not change until something outside Marvel causes a significant change in the status quo.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 11:28:38 GMT -5
I totally agree on that! Swap Marvel Comics for WWE in your post - and I feel the same about wrestling.
Wouldn't the fact they sell fewer copies than decades ago be at least a little disconcerting to them? Not disconcerting in a "Head for the bankruptcy courts!" way. I know their merchandise sales are solid. Same with the films. And maybe the comics are to them what some of Richard Branson's loss-making companies were to his main Virgin brand. But it's still not a good look.
Yes, the merchandise and cinema receipts will probably do nicely for some time to come. But even though the comic sales may be small potatoes to them, I really don't think it's a good look to be selling fewer copies than you did in the past (even if times have changed).
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jan 10, 2020 11:29:48 GMT -5
Those who benefit from the status quo are agents of the status quo, not agents of change. Marvel currently benefits the most form the status quo. They will not change until something outside Marvel causes a significant change in the status quo. This is why the recent Marvel books I've enjoyed have been outside the status quo. Squirrel Girl. Ms. Marvel. The Vision. X-Club. Not just heroes punching villains, or bemoaning the curse of their powers. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 15:21:12 GMT -5
So those Marvel books that are outside the status quo are the comic equivalent of WWE SmackDown, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 15:41:04 GMT -5
I totally agree on that! Swap Marvel Comics for WWE in your post - and I feel the same about wrestling. Wouldn't the fact they sell fewer copies than decades ago be at least a little disconcerting to them? Not disconcerting in a "Head for the bankruptcy courts!" way. I know their merchandise sales are solid. Same with the films. And maybe the comics are to them what some of Richard Branson's loss-making companies were to his main Virgin brand. But it's still not a good look. Yes, the merchandise and cinema receipts will probably do nicely for some time to come. But even though the comic sales may be small potatoes to them, I really don't think it's a good look to be selling fewer copies than you did in the past (even if times have changed). You have to remember the current comic industry is a zero sum game and has been going on 3 decades now. New customers just aren't going to come in. Any gain in sales (i.e. a win) for one book or publisher is likely resulting in a loss of sales for another book or publisher. Maybe existing customers stretch their budgets and spend more but you are not going to get people spending who are not already customers. That is the economic reality of the market and nothing that has been done for the past 3 decades has changed that (it's 20 years after that first X-Men movie now and we're still waiting for that influx of customers to the comics market from the films, hasn't happened yet, not going to happen). It doesn't help that there is no existing infrastructure to expand periodical comics outside the direct market and not enough growth potential in that market to make a capital investment in such an infrastructure worthwhile, so the periodical market is just not going to grow. So the pie is not going to get any bigger and no changes you make are going to make the pie bigger. You already have the largest slice of pie if you are Marvel, why would you risk re-slicing the pie? You can only lose if the pie is redistributed. Yes the pie os not as big as it used to be, but there is nothing you can do to make it bigger, you just have to maximize how much of the remaining pie you get. That is Marvel's strategy as they double down on the direct market and produce things like War of the Realms. They are no longer selling individual titles but the shared universe experience. DC to their credit, realizes the pie isn't going to get any bigger, and they aren't going to get a bigger piece of that pie than Marvel in the current marketplace. They have begun to allocate resources ot finding/expanding their markets outside the pie with stuff like the Ink/Zoom books targeted at the YA book trade and being library friendly. Things like Hill House which may not get a lot of sale sin the direct market pie, but when they get put out in book form in the book trade will capture a large chunk of the Joe Hill/Stephen King audience and sell outside the pie of the direct market. Marvel has no interest (or maybe I should say Disney has no interest) in committing the resources for that kind of migration into different markets, in large part because the content they currently produce doesn't play well there. And again, as top dog, it is easier to ride out the status quo than seek change. Change is bad risk as far as they are concerned, even if sales are down form eras past, they are still as good as they can be in the current era. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2020 15:49:45 GMT -5
I sincerely appreciate the pie analogy.  I know the kind of stuff I discuss is escapist, but as stated elsewhere I am a realist in other ways. Elsewhere on the web, I have come across fellow Brits who want to resurrect British anthology titles that died years ago, e.g. Eagle and Starblazer. And that is when I put my logical head on, much like you do, and tell people, "No, no, no." Because I know the past cannot be recaptured. Anthology titles here, costing 30p or 40p a week, are from a bygone age. The only surviving one is 2000 AD, having ran since 1977. The best the British market can hope for are occasional reprints of the most popular stories from the old anthology titles; but there may not be demand for some of them. If we use a Hulk analogy, the "Hulk" in me has little time for logic and pines for the past; the "Banner" in me realises the reality as you describe. |
|
|
|
Post by UKMikey on Jan 11, 2020 14:51:57 GMT -5
Those who benefit from the status quo are agents of the status quo, not agents of change. Marvel currently benefits the most form the status quo. They will not change until something outside Marvel causes a significant change in the status quo. This is why the recent Marvel books I've enjoyed have been outside the status quo. Squirrel Girl. Ms. Marvel. The Vision. X-Club. Not just heroes punching villains, or bemoaning the curse of their powers. This was definitely the case with the New 52 for me. I, Vampire, Demon Knights, Frankenstein: Agent Of S.H.A.D.E.... they were all as good as anything I've read from DC. Even more mainstream books like Justice League Dark and Azzarello/Chiang's Wonder Woman were creative highspots for me during probably my least favourite period in modern DC history. That's why it's hard for me to understand why anyone would want to write off an entire publisher's output based on a few isolated examples. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2020 15:16:47 GMT -5
I'm not sure Marvel's event obsession impacting on all its books are isolated examples.
There was a time when Venom's solo book might have remained immune to the big X-events, Spidey events, etc. It seemed that way at times. Now we have Venom, hardly the most cosmic/universe-trotting of characters, having three of his issues impacted by "War of the Realms".
DC aren't entirely blameless. But I have been able to read their books without all of them being part of a big event. Some may be, but I have read quite a few Aquaman comics over the last 4-5 years, most of which seem unaffected by whatever big event DC has going on. I did buy Justice League vs. Suicide Squad (in trade form) about a year ago. It reprinted the following:
JUSTICE LEAGUE VS. SUICIDE SQUAD #1-6
SUICIDE SQUAD backup story of #8
SUICIDE SQUAD #9-10
JUSTICE LEAGUE #12-13
That's not unwieldy to me. It's manageable and self-contained. Had Marvel been running DC, I suspect the story would have been in every comic imaginable, even those not suited to it. I mean, does Venom, a street-level anti-hero, really need to be part of a cosmic story involving various realms?
I find DC more manageable in that sense. All the stuff pertaining to the JLA battling the Suicide Squad was all in that one trade for me - at an affordable price.
|
|
