Re: 'It has been proven that movies don't sell comics'
I would be interested to see that proof. We have heard exactly the opposite of that in experiences shared by some of the retailers interviewed on CGS.
Now it may be that the bump is not as immediate, or as big, as some retailers would like. (And there is also the necessary question of what promotion and advertising local retailers might do at the time of a movie's release to try to get customers to their store). But I would be curious where it has been definitely shown that movies do not sell comics. And is this only taking about monthly periodicals in the shops? Or does this also include bookstores.
An example off the top of my head (and, sure, one example is only an anecdote)-- the Joker hardcover OGN by Azzarello and Bermejo. Came out shortly after The Dark Knight. Movie bait, as the cover even looked like the movie Joker. Sold like hotcakes in the direct market, if I remember the sales charts from the end of that year. And I would guess sold quite well in the bookstores as well. Did the movie really have nothing to do with that? Was the average direct market reader (not the 100 Bullets fan, but the typical guy in the shop) really chomping at the bit to buy a $20 book about the Joker "From the Writer of Superman: For Tomorrow"? Or did the movie sell that book?
Yeah...what about all the copies of Watchmen that sold in the run up to the movie...?
Or is it only new floppy comics that the movies don't help...?
@Pants Thanks for the info. I've heard him a bit this summer, didn't mean to suggest he'd been entirely absent. Keep up the good work!
@KyleMoyer You make it sound like you have to give up Marvel entirely to check out Image or indies... Don't cut off your nose to spite your face! All the publishers have great books right now. I'm loving Saga over at Image, and Double Jumpers #1 from Action Lab totally lived up to the hype, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna give up Wolverine & the X-Men. And honestly, getting away from the House of Ideas seems to make me appreciate it more when I return...
You misunderstood then (or I misspoke) because I never gave up Marvel completely . But I was only buying a handful of books. But to buy more takes money.
Marvel has been restarting with #1's like it's going out of style. Relaunched X-Men, Captain America, New Avengers, Daredevil.... It's not nearly the same as what DC is doing. And Marvel has a history of going back to original numbering A LOT, so this lacks impact because of this.
Although I'm glad they're not doing a half-assed reboot. You either need to do a full reboot, or non at all, and I'm happy that they chose one, rather than do a soft-reboot, like DC. Don't get me wrong, I like some of DC's new stuff, but I don't think they thought through the continuity issues enough.
Marvel has been restarting with #1's like it's going out of style. Relaunched X-Men, Captain America, New Avengers, Daredevil.... It's not nearly the same as what DC is doing. And Marvel has a history of going back to original numbering A LOT, so this lacks impact because of this.
Although I'm glad they're not doing a half-assed reboot. You either need to do a full reboot, or non at all, and I'm happy that they chose one, rather than do a soft-reboot, like DC. Don't get me wrong, I like some of DC's new stuff, but I don't think they thought through the continuity issues enough.
Exactly what I wanted to say. Trusty.
I just started listening to the episode and I agree that this isn't anything new for Marvel but I wouldn't call it desperation. They've been relaunching families of titles for the last ten years. I'm just irked that they're ending Uncanny X-Men after they just relaunched it with a new number 1.
And let's be honest guys, the X-Men have been tucked away into their own corner of the Marvel Universe for the longest. I can appreciate editorial saying that they want to integrate the X-Men more into the Marvel Universe. It didn't make sense why teams like the Avengers are loved by the public but the X-Men are "feared and hated" just because they're born with their powers. So I'm glad they're trying to change something.
I prefer to think the movie universe builds off of the comic universe so Marvel doesn't really have to "cater" to the movie crowd more than bringing people like Thanos into the spotlight.
As for digital. Do you guys think royalties play a role in the price point? Has DC come to some sort of agreement with Creators that Marvel has not?
I think it was either Loeb or Mark Waid on Nova with Ed Mcguiness on the art. (Ed told me that's his next title).
I remain unconvinced that the New 52 roll-out was planned "for years." Some of it does, some of it seems just as seat-of-the-pants as this Marvel Now stuff does (and I say this as someone who has enjoyed quite a few of the New 52 books thus far, even if I'm only reading 3 or 4 regularly).
But... relaunch, shmeelaunch. Just give me good comics. If I end up liking some of these new books, the numbering or nomenclature won't affect me one way or the other.
I remain unconvinced that the New 52 roll-out was planned "for years." Some of it does, some of it seems just as seat-of-the-pants as this Marvel Now stuff does (and I say this as someone who has enjoyed quite a few of the New 52 books thus far, even if I'm only reading 3 or 4 regularly).
But... relaunch, shmeelaunch. Just give me good comics. If I end up liking some of these new books, the numbering or nomenclature won't affect me one way or the other.
I can't say if it's 100% true but I read that DC wanted to do the reboot after Final Crisis but the then Publisher nixed it. (I guess it kind of makes sense if you cinder the year long Superman and Wonder Woman stories we got under JMS).
So after they got a new Publisher they rolled out with the reboot. However I definitely agree that they didn't think a lot of it out.
Dc and marvel have stated in interviews, as has Diamond, and retailers, that a batman movie does not have swarms of people coming in to a store looking for batman comics and continuing to read them. Watchmen sales, v for vendetta sales, went up sure. But are those buyers continuing to buy those series? Of course not. Which is what a casual reader wants. That is why serialized trades are packaged more and more as stand alone stories. Are Iron Man sales up significantly since the movies began?
Many people in comics fandom seem to be far out of touch with how non fans perceive comics. Many non fans who purchased watchmen saw it as literature or a novelty. many, many non comic fan sources were telling them as such. Time magazine is not saying to go out and buy Avengers now is it? Non fans love the movies. And are warming to tv. Which means the comics end will have to gear comics more towards those people to entice them in. Walking Dead is a great example of what can happen, but it is the anomaly that proves the rule.
Dc and marvel have stated in interviews, as has Diamond, and retailers, that a batman movie does not have swarms of people coming in to a store looking for batman comics and continuing to read them. Watchmen sales, v for vendetta sales, went up sure. But are those buyers continuing to buy those series? Of course not. Which is what a casual reader wants. That is why serialized trades are packaged more and more as stand alone stories. Are Iron Man sales up significantly since the movies began?
Many people in comics fandom seem to be far out of touch with how non fans perceive comics. Many non fans who purchased watchmen saw it as literature or a novelty. many, many non comic fan sources were telling them as such. Time magazine is not saying to go out and buy Avengers now is it? Non fans love the movies. And are warming to tv. Which means the comics end will have to gear comics more towards those people to entice them in. Walking Dead is a great example of what can happen, but it is the anomaly that proves the rule.
After the first movie was the first time in my memory that Iron Man had more than one ongoing title. Heck, I think even in the speculator boom of the 90s there wasn't more than one Iron Man book. Two books didn't end up being sustainable for long, sure, but I would guess that sales of Invincible Iron Man rival or beat past Iron Man performance. Is that only because of the movie? Well, we can't know how that book would have done without the movie, sure. It is one of those things that is hard to prove. But whatever Marvel has said in interviews, as you are saying, the fact is they greenlit a second Iron Man book the same summer as the movie, and retailers bought it. And they also released all sorts of extra reprint trades. Just as they had two Thor titles, multiple Cap titles, and loads of reprints for both last summer. There was an additional Avengers title and loads of reprints added this summer. If Marvel were so sure that movies don't sell comics, what they are publishing year after movie year tells a different story. Ditto with DC greenliting extra product around their movie releases.
Now, do they wish they could see even more of a bump? Probably. I don't know the interviews you are citing. Maybe they are grousing that a movie doesn't create a sustainable interest? Not sure. Everyone wishes they could sell more of everything.
But simply put, the idea that movies don't sell comics has not been proven. Even skipping Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and TV's Walking Dead as outliers (I avoided Watchmen as an example, as I agree with you it sells and is thought of differently then virtually any other book... of course, it still ended up selling more in the lead up to the movie then it usually did) anyway, even skipping those examples, there are plenty of other books, from Kick-Ass to American Splendor, that got a movie boost. And there have been creators and retailers on CGS that have said that the movies help sell books (often they complained that it was hard, when it came to the Big 2 superheroes, to know exactly which book to point someone towards, but that is a different matter. That is not a demand problem, that is having a supply problem).
And I'm sure there have been retailers and creators that have said exactly what you are saying, too, based on their own experience. But I don't think there is a consensus, because I have also heard the opposite.
It may not be swarms of people that continue to read them, but that is not the same thing as saying that movies don't sell comics. They can. And, just like we hear stories of fans who got started because of the 1989 Batman movie or the 1990s X-Men cartoon, they can end up recruiting someone to start a life of comics reading. That reading might just get spread out over time and a variety of books. But much of what I have heard is that the movies have a net positive effect. They can sell books.
I hope this gives marvel the chance to clean up their double shipping business. I'm fine with one title double shipping with avengers because it seems like a "marvel universe" book, but if anymore titles proceed to double ship every month, I wont be buying many books. Most of the time it is just unnecessary to even have 2x the shipping which leads to a poorer product anyway.
What doesn't make sense to me is why doesn't DC and Marvel to more to get comics in the hands of non-comic readers? Couldn't they do something where if you buy a ticket to one of their movies you get a comic? Even if it's one of the free comic book day comics? Wouldn't that be at least something? Say what you want about the Green Lantern movie but the fact that there was an ad for DC comics at the end of the credits was awesome. Now I have said time and time again that it should have been before the movie so everyone would have seen it but it was something.
To be honest, I dont really see the big deal about certain titles being started at no.1 again. it's not the first time, and it doesnt matter if it's either issue 622 or issue 1. it's still the same comic. I firmly believe that in several years, you wont get comics in continuous issue form, you'll get mini-series after mini series (like the old 90's venom title). with the collected trades being numbered so that fans can keep chronological track. that way there will always be a new no.1 for readers to collect and new readers wont be intimidated by the length of back issues they might feel they've missed out on. yes it's a dierect response to DC's 52 relaunch, and good...it means they're doing something. We all forget that both Marvel and DC are profit reliant businesses that need to make money to continue. Tapping into the current trends of movie franchises is not a bad thing, it's necesary. For all that extra profit they make from Uncanny Avengers no.1, it means they'll have extra funds to help finance a new series of Runaways in the future, or Alpha Flight or any number of books that arent in the public eye as much as the 'big stars' of Marvel. and we all want that right?
What does concern me is the quality of the story. and to be honest, until I read these new titles, I cant judge that. These number ones are jumping on points for new readers, and also a deep breath for long time readers as well (the latest Daredevil series proved that sometimes stopping and taking a deep breath from all the baggage the past series had accumulated can be a good thing).
It's new, it's different, it's exciting, it might even be good. I'm looking forward to the next few months from Marvel.
The time traveling X-Men book does have me intrigued. I am most curious to see how past Scott Summers reacts to current Scott Summers. I
Jamie, I think modern Cyclops might not be around to meet 'back in the day' Cyclops. what with his apparent exclusion from 'Uncanny Avengers', and his brother Havok representing the Summers clan. I think AvX will prove to be his undoing. I get the feeling that the 'time travelling' X-Men will arrive during the final throws of AvX. With maybe the Phoenix Five going back in time to destroy the Avengers almost at their start. (Scarlet Witch's premonition) Will they also bump into a young X-Men and somehow bring them forward in time accidentaly?. I just have this image in my head of the final pages of AvX with a 'Dark Cyclops', battling everyone until he's stood next to a younger Jean Grey who witnesses his suicidal destruction from an alien weapon as he screams 'JEAN!!'. Mirroring a major event from years prior.
In my experience (which admittedly means nothing), movies/TV don't necessarily bring in new readers from outside comics. What they do is get comic book readers like me who might not have been reading much of a certain comic to either track it down and see how the source material is or go back to it after it reminds us of what we liked about the book.
Comments
Or is it only new floppy comics that the movies don't help...?
Marvel has been restarting with #1's like it's going out of style. Relaunched X-Men, Captain America, New Avengers, Daredevil.... It's not nearly the same as what DC is doing. And Marvel has a history of going back to original numbering A LOT, so this lacks impact because of this.
Although I'm glad they're not doing a half-assed reboot. You either need to do a full reboot, or non at all, and I'm happy that they chose one, rather than do a soft-reboot, like DC. Don't get me wrong, I like some of DC's new stuff, but I don't think they thought through the continuity issues enough.
Exactly what I wanted to say. Trusty.
I just started listening to the episode and I agree that this isn't anything new for Marvel but I wouldn't call it desperation. They've been relaunching families of titles for the last ten years. I'm just irked that they're ending Uncanny X-Men after they just relaunched it with a new number 1.
And let's be honest guys, the X-Men have been tucked away into their own corner of the Marvel Universe for the longest. I can appreciate editorial saying that they want to integrate the X-Men more into the Marvel Universe. It didn't make sense why teams like the Avengers are loved by the public but the X-Men are "feared and hated" just because they're born with their powers. So I'm glad they're trying to change something.
As for digital. Do you guys think royalties play a role in the price point? Has DC come to some sort of agreement with Creators that Marvel has not?
I think it was either Loeb or Mark Waid on Nova with Ed Mcguiness on the art. (Ed told me that's his next title).
We've also got a running list of the changes happening during Marvel NOW.
But... relaunch, shmeelaunch. Just give me good comics. If I end up liking some of these new books, the numbering or nomenclature won't affect me one way or the other.
So after they got a new Publisher they rolled out with the reboot. However I definitely agree that they didn't think a lot of it out.
Watchmen sales, v for vendetta sales, went up sure. But are those buyers continuing to buy those series? Of course not. Which is what a casual reader wants. That is why serialized trades are packaged more and more as stand alone stories.
Are Iron Man sales up significantly since the movies began?
Many people in comics fandom seem to be far out of touch with how non fans perceive comics. Many non fans who purchased watchmen saw it as literature or a novelty. many, many non comic fan sources were telling them as such. Time magazine is not saying to go out and buy Avengers now is it? Non fans love the movies. And are warming to tv. Which means the comics end will have to gear comics more towards those people to entice them in.
Walking Dead is a great example of what can happen, but it is the anomaly that proves the rule.
Now, do they wish they could see even more of a bump? Probably. I don't know the interviews you are citing. Maybe they are grousing that a movie doesn't create a sustainable interest? Not sure. Everyone wishes they could sell more of everything.
But simply put, the idea that movies don't sell comics has not been proven. Even skipping Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and TV's Walking Dead as outliers (I avoided Watchmen as an example, as I agree with you it sells and is thought of differently then virtually any other book... of course, it still ended up selling more in the lead up to the movie then it usually did) anyway, even skipping those examples, there are plenty of other books, from Kick-Ass to American Splendor, that got a movie boost. And there have been creators and retailers on CGS that have said that the movies help sell books (often they complained that it was hard, when it came to the Big 2 superheroes, to know exactly which book to point someone towards, but that is a different matter. That is not a demand problem, that is having a supply problem).
And I'm sure there have been retailers and creators that have said exactly what you are saying, too, based on their own experience. But I don't think there is a consensus, because I have also heard the opposite.
It may not be swarms of people that continue to read them, but that is not the same thing as saying that movies don't sell comics. They can. And, just like we hear stories of fans who got started because of the 1989 Batman movie or the 1990s X-Men cartoon, they can end up recruiting someone to start a life of comics reading. That reading might just get spread out over time and a variety of books. But much of what I have heard is that the movies have a net positive effect. They can sell books.
What does concern me is the quality of the story. and to be honest, until I read these new titles, I cant judge that. These number ones are jumping on points for new readers, and also a deep breath for long time readers as well (the latest Daredevil series proved that sometimes stopping and taking a deep breath from all the baggage the past series had accumulated can be a good thing).
It's new, it's different, it's exciting, it might even be good. I'm looking forward to the next few months from Marvel.
I get the feeling that the 'time travelling' X-Men will arrive during the final throws of AvX. With maybe the Phoenix Five going back in time to destroy the Avengers almost at their start. (Scarlet Witch's premonition) Will they also bump into a young X-Men and somehow bring them forward in time accidentaly?. I just have this image in my head of the final pages of AvX with a 'Dark Cyclops', battling everyone until he's stood next to a younger Jean Grey who witnesses his suicidal destruction from an alien weapon as he screams 'JEAN!!'. Mirroring a major event from years prior.