What I Read This Year Part IV

[earthscorch]

Creepie Susie by Angus Oblong -- The title's actually longer than that, but I'm going to be lazy. I thought the Oblongs cartoon was sort of amusing, and discovered that it was based on a book. Well, it's only loosely based on the book, and the book is very warped and tasteless. Much moreso than the cartoon. If you like warped, tasteless humor, this

Comments

[earthscorch]

The Avengers cartoon is based on Ultimate Avengers, where pretty much everyone is a jerk. He was a jerk in the movie, but he was learning! The turn around was part of the whole deal. He's always been one of the shadier Avengers-types, that said. The deal with him getting kicked out of the Avengers and alienating Captain America was because of his habit of going off and doing stuff on his own without thinking of others. Of course, he's always a shameless womanizer.

From the time they were created, up through much of the 90's, the characters were all pretty consistant. They changed and evolved somewhat, but they were always recognizable as the guy Stan Lee wrote, so to speak. I don't think that's the philosophy anymore at all. There seems to also be a trend of making everyone a jerk to be edgy. I blame Alan Moore and Frank Miller for that one. ;)

It's fairly popular, if you can trust the internet on such matters, but keep in mind that sales are so low anymore that that's not saying much. I keep hearing people talking about how much sales have improved, but they've gone from like 20% of sales in the 80's to 30%! That says to me that someone's doing something wrong, just less wrong than five years ago.

[sapphirebreeze]

Orrrrrrrr...

...the basic culture has changed, and comic books now have to compete against ever more omni-present gaming consoles, online gaming, ipods and music subscriptions, instant access to television via the internet (youtube, torrent, etc), free web comics, a crashing global economy, and a number of other things that weren't relevant factors in the '80's for your average person's entertainment dollar.

On the other hand, I will grant that DC, who are allowing some of their characters to return more to a heroic ideal while allowing others to remain shadier/jerkier, allowing for a large range of comics that has room for both the nice guys and the jerks, is doing stronger against Marvel than it has in decades.

Hnh. People like variety in characterization. Who'd have thunk it?

But seriously. See first paragraph. I think it's unrealistic to expect comics to sell in the same amounts that they did in the 80's. They've got more competition. Hell, cable was only getting started then, and VCRs weren't that common at the start of the decade. Today, instant everything is available for free at the touch of a few buttons. It really is a different world.

[earthscorch]

It's probably true! Comics also did poorly in the 70's, when it was all about Dirty Harry and Death Wish. Then after Star Wars came out, they started doing good again! We've been in this stupid negative mindset for like 15 years now. It's depressing.

Of course the comic books were a lot worse in the 70's, overall. They were trying to fill the gap that Stan Lee left, and not quite stacking up. There was lots of good stuff, mind you, and plenty that was worth buying.

When TSR (makes of D&D) started to tank, they blamed it on Magic: the Gathering. But the reality was, they just weren't making good products, for the most part. The books were cheaply made, full of filler, and with poor writing and art. There were some gems, but it was mostly junk. I'm seeing a direct parallel here. However, comic books tend to take a lot less time to read, cost more, and are a small piece of an ongoing story anymore (that you may have to wait well over a month to get the next part of): you get less bang for your buck. I once suggested a Shonen Jump-like format, when I started this blog. Still think it's a good idea.

In short, no doubt it's many factors. Kids with short attention spans are surely part of that.

[sapphirebreeze]

It's worth noting that trade paperback sales tend to be very strong when compared with individual issue sales. That's another vote for both the short attention span thing, and the 'small pieces of an ongoing storyline' thing.

[earthscorch]

Yeah, I'm starting to wonder if comic books are a viable format any more. Maybe they should just circumvent the monthly issues altogether and jump right into the trade paperback. But they survived the 50's, so they oughta be able to get through this.

[sapphirebreeze]

Oh, yeah, that reminds me.

Next year, Detective Comics is going on hiatus.

I mention this because there are two comics that I honestly believed would be produced at least montly until pretty much the end of Superhero Comicbookdom, and that's Action Comics and Detective Comics. These two titles were the beginning of Superheroes in Comics, and with that much force of tradition and longevity behind them, I just assumed that no matter what sales were like (and DC has been publishing them through some pretty lean years), they'd be there until the end.

Hiatus isn't the same as cancelled, of course, but it still absolutely stunned me when I heard that.

[earthscorch]

Yeah, that is shocking... The only superheroes to last through the 50's. It was bad enough when Marvel kept restarting their series, but this is a whole new level. Wow! Makes me wonder.

[sapphirebreeze]

Not to mention the fact that Detective Comics is the title from which the company gets its name.

[sapphirebreeze]

All that said, I am probably a little biased, as I was given, for free, a goodly number of those 80's Iron Man comics, and I found him to be dull and gave them to my brother. Meanwhile, I actually pay for an Iron Man book today - and I only bother to buy two books from Marvel at all. That and a cross-company crossover (and the cross-company crossover also, coincidentally, prominently features Iron Man). So maybe they are doing things wrong, but I know that I, personally, am now paying money for something I wouldn't have owned for free two decades ago.

[earthscorch]

Iron Man's never been a top end book, from what I can tell. X-Men had Chris Claremont, Daredevil had Frank Miller, the Hulk had Peter David, Thor had Walt Simonson, Fantastic Four had John Byrne. Iron Man hasn't had a run like that. He wasn't a big character when Stan Lee was writing him, or really since then.

I bet they're pushing him a little extra since the movie was so good, and treating him with extra care these days. I bet they could find a way to make you and me both want to read Iron Man.