Comic book novels

Planeis

Inspired by TDKR i just recently read a novelization of No Man's Land. Inread the trades of that whole huge series long ago. Loved them, and loved the book too. I read the Knightfall novelization and the Death of Superman novel long ago. Loved them. My question is this, why doesnt DC and Marvel get deals with publishers to novelise big series more often and just have novels of their characters much more often?

Star Trek, Star Wars, Dr Who and many other sci fi properties have had TV shows, books, and comics all going at the same time. But DC amd Marvel seem to do it very rarely. Unless Im missing something. I would love to read a novelised version of the current DCU. Emphasis on current. Kevin J Anderson wrote a Worlds Finest book a few years ago... But that was some kind of 1960s version that ive been tempted to read but not really interested in.

It wouldnt even cost DC anything. They sell the writes to say, for example, 12 books a year and give them only the rights to the stories they want them to have access too, or allow the books to have their own stories that go on as long as the dont ruin continuity, like for instance killing Nightwing in a book series when hes alive everywhere else.

Chuck_Melville

They've done so from time to time. I can only assume they weren't big hits. The one I best liked was a series of JLA novels, six in all, five of which spotlighted one of the big guns with guest appearances from the rest of the team. (The best was the Green Lantern novel by Denny O'Neil, featuring the Kyle Rayner GL.)

There was also just a few years back a handful of DC Universe paperbacks which featured team-ups like Superman & The Demon. Best of that batch was The Question, Batman & Richard Dragon by Denny O'Neil, which was a reworking of O'Neil's original origin story from The Question comic.

There was a Green Lantern trilogy featuring Kyle, Alan Scott, and -- I think -- Hal Jordan... and wasn't there also a JSA novel by Paul Levitz?

There have also been novel adaptations of the big DC events like Crisis On Infinite Earths (Marv Wolfman), Infinite Crisis and 52 (both by Greg Cox). I'd say that DC has been keeping on pretty well on that front. I don't know if they're doing anything with the new 52, but they may be waiting until the new universe firms up a bit more.

nweathington

They were never able to gain a lot of traction. I think the one hit they had was an Andrew Vachs Batman novel titled Batman: The Ultimate Evil, which was a pretty good crime novel dealing with child pornography. I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried it again in the near future.

Planeis

I'm saying they never commit to them. Ultimate Evil was 16 years ago. To the best I'm able to determine those justice league novels are 7-10 years old. Justice Society by Levity is 2006 and also for young adults. People have to know how to find things, not have random books by random authors every four to five years. Just like sometimes there are comics that people are really looking forward to, but large delays and gaps in publishing doom them because people dont know when to find them

kiwijase

It could just be that your average DC or Marvel Fan needs that visual element. Maby for the majority, pure text just wouldn't cut it.

nweathington

I don’t know that it’s necessarily DC that won’t commit to them. It’s probably more on the book publisher than DC. As far as I can recall, most, if not all, of the DC novels have been published by Warner Books. While both Warner Books and DC are owned by the same corporation, there is surprisingly little cooperation between the various divisions. I remember Jerry Ordway telling me about how little support they got from Warner Bros. film division when DC came up with all sorts of ways to promote and sell the comic book adaptation of the first Batman movie . DC wanted to have stand-up displays in the theaters, and sell the books there, but Warner wouldn’t give them the time of day. From what I know, it’s not very different with anything else there.

Maybe it was something as simple as Warner Books not having enough pull with the bookstore chains to get good placement. In the grand scheme of things, they aren’t a top publisher like HarperCollins or Simon & Schuster. They aren’t even in the top 50.

I think public perception plays a part too. The whole comics are for kids, and novels are for adults, and never the twain shall meet. The DC-related children’s books from Scholastic seem to do well enough after all.

The new trend of shorter, cheaper ebooks could work in their favor though. A series of 150- to 200-page books telling a large story would have some of the continuity feel of the comics and maybe appeal to comics readers who don’t read novels as much.

dubbat138

I have slowly over the past 10 years been collecting lots of the comic book novels. There was an Ultimates novel I read a few years back that was really good. Plus a JLA one that was great.

SolitaireRose

Marvel had a run of novels in the 90's that did fair to middling, but when paperback sales fell off a cliff in the mid 2000's, they went away. DC tried it for a while in the 2000's, as mentioned, but when the contract ended, neither side much cared, so sales must not have been all that good.

It's hard for ANY paperback originals to do well, and licensed books just aren't what they used to be. It used to be that the Star Trek and Star Wars novels made best-seller's lists, and now they seem to come and go without much fanfare. I don't even see them in Target, Wal-Mart or other mass market retailers, just in B&N and on-line. I think the whole idea of licensed novels is fading as fewer and people read novels for entertainment...

Most of the Marvel novels of the 90's were about 75000 words, which is pretty short, IMHO.

dubbat138

SolitaireRose said:

Marvel had a run of novels in the 90's that did fair to middling, but when paperback sales fell off a cliff in the mid 2000's, they went away. DC tried it for a while in the 2000's, as mentioned, but when the contract ended, neither side much cared, so sales must not have been all that good.

It's hard for ANY paperback originals to do well, and licensed books just aren't what they used to be. It used to be that the Star Trek and Star Wars novels made best-seller's lists, and now they seem to come and go without much fanfare. I don't even see them in Target, Wal-Mart or other mass market retailers, just in B&N and on-line. I think the whole idea of licensed novels is fading as fewer and people read novels for entertainment...

Most of the Marvel novels of the 90's were about 75000 words, which is pretty short, IMHO.

See it is weird. I live in a tiny town. Where pretty much the only place to shop is Walmart. And the one in town always seems to have some Star Wars novels in. Plus from about 2007-2009 they did have some Marvel novels on the shelves. I know I got a Spider-man and a Wolverine one. But I have noticed when I goto Biloxi,which is the 5th biggest city in the state,the Walmarts down there have no licensed books on the shelves.

Planeis

nweathington said:

I don’t know that it’s necessarily DC that won’t commit to them. It’s probably more on the book publisher than DC. As far as I can recall, most, if not all, of the DC novels have been published by Warner Books. While both Warner Books and DC are owned by the same corporation, there is surprisingly little cooperation between the various divisions. I remember Jerry Ordway telling me about how little support they got from Warner Bros. film division when DC came up with all sorts of ways to promote and sell the comic book adaptation of the first Batman movie . DC wanted to have stand-up displays in the theaters, and sell the books there, but Warner wouldn’t give them the time of day. From what I know, it’s not very different with anything else there.

Maybe it was something as simple as Warner Books not having enough pull with the bookstore chains to get good placement. In the grand scheme of things, they aren’t a top publisher like HarperCollins or Simon & Schuster. They aren’t even in the top 50.

I think public perception plays a part too. The whole comics are for kids, and novels are for adults, and never the twain shall meet. The DC-related children’s books from Scholastic seem to do well enough after all.

The new trend of shorter, cheaper ebooks could work in their favor though. A series of 150- to 200-page books telling a large story would have some of the continuity feel of the comics and maybe appeal to comics readers who don’t read novels as much.

Your comments about Warner's publishing are the only comments on this thread that I agree with. Its pretty clear they have no idea what they are doing. Its one of the bad things about Warner being so large, they feel like they have to maintain control over everything instead of licensing out DC characters to a publisher that actually knows what their doing.

All the other comments, about comic people not reading, about licensed properties not selling, about mass market paperbacks not selling, I find wildly incorrect. Licensed properties do sell. Yea, Star Wars books aren't at the very top of the best seller list anymore, but they are in fact high on the list. And not only that, but there's money to be had and sales to be made off the "best seller" lists. Just like there are comics that sell only a couple thousand copies, there are plenty of sales that go on that don't make the top 100 lists.

Star Wars, Star Trek, Transformers, even freaking Halo sells books. And why does everyone talk about Wal-Mart? I'm sure they move a ton of books on top 10 lists, but they aren't a book store. I see plenty of licensed books on the shelves at stores all the time.

Chuck_Melville

Book stores, for the most part, are quietly going extinct due to a lack of sufficient business. Ask B Dalton's. Or any number of independent and second-hand shops in my area.

There are two reasons, basically, for that: a lack of interest in reading (it wasn't all that long ago when the discovery that kids were actually reading and buying Harry Potter was huge news), and the shift to e-readers.

The only place I see paperbacks anymore is either at Safeway or Walgreens, and those are usually the same soap opera potboilers, mysteries or self-help books from the NY Times best seller list; Dalton's is gone, and only Barnes & Noble has anything like a diverse selection -- and they're way out of my way.

But going back to the lack of interest angle -- I think what you've got is really more of a 'chicken or the egg' situation. There's not so much of a demand for the superhero books so they're not making as many any more; there's not so much of a demand, because readers aren't seeing them on the stands anymore. (In some instances, they're not seeing any stands anymore.) It's a cycle. It would certainly help if the publishers printed more, but it would also help if there were more customers clamoring for them.

nweathington

I went into a Barnes & Noble last week for the first time in four or five months, and the sci-fi/fantasy section had shrunk by half—only two walls of three shelving units. And on one of those walls, all the books were face out, meaning even fewer books. So little stock. But two units of one wall was all licensed property books, compared to three units the last time I was there. So licensed property books must still be selling relatively well.

As for Warner, they are a media corporation, so I don’t have a problem with them having a book company under their umbrella. But it appears they sold their book arm to Hatchette in 2006. Since then the few books they’ve licensed out have been published by Ace, along with Berkeley, HarperCollins, William Morris, and a few others. It’s been somewhat scattershot. It seems that outside of Ace, most publishers haven’t been willing to commit to anything long-term for whatever reason, be it prior sales or lack of interest.

SolitaireRose

Planeis said:

nweathington said:

I don’t know that it’s necessarily DC that won’t commit to them. It’s probably more on the book publisher than DC. As far as I can recall, most, if not all, of the DC novels have been published by Warner Books. While both Warner Books and DC are owned by the same corporation, there is surprisingly little cooperation between the various divisions. I remember Jerry Ordway telling me about how little support they got from Warner Bros. film division when DC came up with all sorts of ways to promote and sell the comic book adaptation of the first Batman movie . DC wanted to have stand-up displays in the theaters, and sell the books there, but Warner wouldn’t give them the time of day. From what I know, it’s not very different with anything else there.

Maybe it was something as simple as Warner Books not having enough pull with the bookstore chains to get good placement. In the grand scheme of things, they aren’t a top publisher like HarperCollins or Simon & Schuster. They aren’t even in the top 50.

I think public perception plays a part too. The whole comics are for kids, and novels are for adults, and never the twain shall meet. The DC-related children’s books from Scholastic seem to do well enough after all.

The new trend of shorter, cheaper ebooks could work in their favor though. A series of 150- to 200-page books telling a large story would have some of the continuity feel of the comics and maybe appeal to comics readers who don’t read novels as much.

All the other comments, about comic people not reading, about licensed properties not selling, about mass market paperbacks not selling, I find wildly incorrect. Licensed properties do sell. Yea, Star Wars books aren't at the very top of the best seller list anymore, but they are in fact high on the list. And not only that, but there's money to be had and sales to be made off the "best seller" lists. Just like there are comics that sell only a couple thousand copies, there are plenty of sales that go on that don't make the top 100 lists.

Star Wars, Star Trek, Transformers, even freaking Halo sells books. And why does everyone talk about Wal-Mart? I'm sure they move a ton of books on top 10 lists, but they aren't a book store. I see plenty of licensed books on the shelves at stores all the time.

I have to disagree.; Mass Market paperbacks are going away, and many publishers have announced that they will no longer publish them, moving to hardcover and trades only. Back in the late 90's, it was common for a mid-line mystery novel betw4een 15,000 and 20,000 copies. Now, an author I know says that publishers would be giddy for numbers like that on a midline paperback. Hard Case Crime's publisher went under, and they've moved to Titan Books, where they have to publish as trades to get enough profit to keep the books in print.

If you go to the USA today bestseller's list, they list the 150 bestselling books of the week...and you'll see that the new Star Trek and Star Wars books aren't on the list. The dirty little secret of the book industry is that non-fiction outsells fiction by staggering numbers, and political books sell the best out of non-fiction since they get pushed relentlessly on TV and radio. Then, you should read up on the growing number of authors who are moving to writing YA books because that's where the sales are.

We're also seeing a LOT of authors moving to self publishing because the publishing houses are telling them that they aren't getting the sales they need. Fiction writing is in flux, and who knows where it will all end up.

And why do we talk about Wal-Mart? Because in a LOT of the country they are the biggest brick and mortar bookseller in the US. My parents live in central IL, and the only bookstore within an hour's drive is Wal-mart, the closest B&N is in Peoria. They've switched over to the Nook simply because they can't get books (other than the Wal-Mart selection) without a long drive.

15 years ago, I'd agree with you, but with the Star Trek books having titles pulled and delayed due to slipping sales, I think the golden age of licensed books is a thing of the past.

nweathington

SolitaireRose speaks the truth. But while that golden age of books, licensed or otherwise, is in the rear view mirror, the silicon age is just gearing up. Again, I think shorter serialized DC/Marvel novels at $2.99 or $3.99 a pop could do well in the evolving ebook market.

dubbat138

SolitaireRose said:

Planeis said:

nweathington said:

I don’t know that it’s necessarily DC that won’t commit to them. It’s probably more on the book publisher than DC. As far as I can recall, most, if not all, of the DC novels have been published by Warner Books. While both Warner Books and DC are owned by the same corporation, there is surprisingly little cooperation between the various divisions. I remember Jerry Ordway telling me about how little support they got from Warner Bros. film division when DC came up with all sorts of ways to promote and sell the comic book adaptation of the first Batman movie . DC wanted to have stand-up displays in the theaters, and sell the books there, but Warner wouldn’t give them the time of day. From what I know, it’s not very different with anything else there.

Maybe it was something as simple as Warner Books not having enough pull with the bookstore chains to get good placement. In the grand scheme of things, they aren’t a top publisher like HarperCollins or Simon & Schuster. They aren’t even in the top 50.

I think public perception plays a part too. The whole comics are for kids, and novels are for adults, and never the twain shall meet. The DC-related children’s books from Scholastic seem to do well enough after all.

The new trend of shorter, cheaper ebooks could work in their favor though. A series of 150- to 200-page books telling a large story would have some of the continuity feel of the comics and maybe appeal to comics readers who don’t read novels as much.

All the other comments, about comic people not reading, about licensed properties not selling, about mass market paperbacks not selling, I find wildly incorrect. Licensed properties do sell. Yea, Star Wars books aren't at the very top of the best seller list anymore, but they are in fact high on the list. And not only that, but there's money to be had and sales to be made off the "best seller" lists. Just like there are comics that sell only a couple thousand copies, there are plenty of sales that go on that don't make the top 100 lists.

Star Wars, Star Trek, Transformers, even freaking Halo sells books. And why does everyone talk about Wal-Mart? I'm sure they move a ton of books on top 10 lists, but they aren't a book store. I see plenty of licensed books on the shelves at stores all the time.

I have to disagree.; Mass Market paperbacks are going away, and many publishers have announced that they will no longer publish them, moving to hardcover and trades only. Back in the late 90's, it was common for a mid-line mystery novel betw4een 15,000 and 20,000 copies. Now, an author I know says that publishers would be giddy for numbers like that on a midline paperback. Hard Case Crime's publisher went under, and they've moved to Titan Books, where they have to publish as trades to get enough profit to keep the books in print.

If you go to the USA today bestseller's list, they list the 150 bestselling books of the week...and you'll see that the new Star Trek and Star Wars books aren't on the list. The dirty little secret of the book industry is that non-fiction outsells fiction by staggering numbers, and political books sell the best out of non-fiction since they get pushed relentlessly on TV and radio. Then, you should read up on the growing number of authors who are moving to writing YA books because that's where the sales are.

We're also seeing a LOT of authors moving to self publishing because the publishing houses are telling them that they aren't getting the sales they need. Fiction writing is in flux, and who knows where it will all end up.

And why do we talk about Wal-Mart? Because in a LOT of the country they are the biggest brick and mortar bookseller in the US. My parents live in central IL, and the only bookstore within an hour's drive is Wal-mart, the closest B&N is in Peoria. They've switched over to the Nook simply because they can't get books (other than the Wal-Mart selection) without a long drive.

15 years ago, I'd agree with you, but with the Star Trek books having titles pulled and delayed due to slipping sales, I think the golden age of licensed books is a thing of the past.

In the county I live in the only places to buy books is Walmart,Walgreens and Dollar General. You have to drive close to an hour to find a legit bookstore.

Planeis

SolitaireRose said:

Planeis said:

nweathington said:

I don’t know that it’s necessarily DC that won’t commit to them. It’s probably more on the book publisher than DC. As far as I can recall, most, if not all, of the DC novels have been published by Warner Books. While both Warner Books and DC are owned by the same corporation, there is surprisingly little cooperation between the various divisions. I remember Jerry Ordway telling me about how little support they got from Warner Bros. film division when DC came up with all sorts of ways to promote and sell the comic book adaptation of the first Batman movie . DC wanted to have stand-up displays in the theaters, and sell the books there, but Warner wouldn’t give them the time of day. From what I know, it’s not very different with anything else there.

Maybe it was something as simple as Warner Books not having enough pull with the bookstore chains to get good placement. In the grand scheme of things, they aren’t a top publisher like HarperCollins or Simon & Schuster. They aren’t even in the top 50.

I think public perception plays a part too. The whole comics are for kids, and novels are for adults, and never the twain shall meet. The DC-related children’s books from Scholastic seem to do well enough after all.

The new trend of shorter, cheaper ebooks could work in their favor though. A series of 150- to 200-page books telling a large story would have some of the continuity feel of the comics and maybe appeal to comics readers who don’t read novels as much.

All the other comments, about comic people not reading, about licensed properties not selling, about mass market paperbacks not selling, I find wildly incorrect. Licensed properties do sell. Yea, Star Wars books aren't at the very top of the best seller list anymore, but they are in fact high on the list. And not only that, but there's money to be had and sales to be made off the "best seller" lists. Just like there are comics that sell only a couple thousand copies, there are plenty of sales that go on that don't make the top 100 lists.

Star Wars, Star Trek, Transformers, even freaking Halo sells books. And why does everyone talk about Wal-Mart? I'm sure they move a ton of books on top 10 lists, but they aren't a book store. I see plenty of licensed books on the shelves at stores all the time.

I have to disagree.; Mass Market paperbacks are going away, and many publishers have announced that they will no longer publish them, moving to hardcover and trades only. Back in the late 90's, it was common for a mid-line mystery novel betw4een 15,000 and 20,000 copies. Now, an author I know says that publishers would be giddy for numbers like that on a midline paperback. Hard Case Crime's publisher went under, and they've moved to Titan Books, where they have to publish as trades to get enough profit to keep the books in print.

If you go to the USA today bestseller's list, they list the 150 bestselling books of the week...and you'll see that the new Star Trek and Star Wars books aren't on the list. The dirty little secret of the book industry is that non-fiction outsells fiction by staggering numbers, and political books sell the best out of non-fiction since they get pushed relentlessly on TV and radio. Then, you should read up on the growing number of authors who are moving to writing YA books because that's where the sales are.

We're also seeing a LOT of authors moving to self publishing because the publishing houses are telling them that they aren't getting the sales they need. Fiction writing is in flux, and who knows where it will all end up.

And why do we talk about Wal-Mart? Because in a LOT of the country they are the biggest brick and mortar bookseller in the US. My parents live in central IL, and the only bookstore within an hour's drive is Wal-mart, the closest B&N is in Peoria. They've switched over to the Nook simply because they can't get books (other than the Wal-Mart selection) without a long drive.

15 years ago, I'd agree with you, but with the Star Trek books having titles pulled and delayed due to slipping sales, I think the golden age of licensed books is a thing of the past.

Theres a Star wars book right now in the top 20 New York Times list, in hardback. Whoever said it had to be a mass market paperback anyway? Death of Superman, Knightfall, No Man's Land... All those I read in hardback.

People who read dont get the majority of their books from Wal-Mart. If anything the book stores are going away not because of Wal-Mart smd ebooks but because of Amazon.

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

Check out tne sci fi section on Amazon, check out the titles and subjects, you dont think theres room for a well made Superman or Batman book or whatever? Star Wars and other sells because they hire good authors to write their stuff, veteran sci fi writers. There are no super heroes on there because there are none to buy and its very difficult to clamor for something ( as someone else suggested) when it doesnt exist.

SolitaireRose

Planeis said:

SolitaireRose said:

Planeis said:

nweathington said:

I don’t know that it’s necessarily DC that won’t commit to them. It’s probably more on the book publisher than DC. As far as I can recall, most, if not all, of the DC novels have been published by Warner Books. While both Warner Books and DC are owned by the same corporation, there is surprisingly little cooperation between the various divisions. I remember Jerry Ordway telling me about how little support they got from Warner Bros. film division when DC came up with all sorts of ways to promote and sell the comic book adaptation of the first Batman movie . DC wanted to have stand-up displays in the theaters, and sell the books there, but Warner wouldn’t give them the time of day. From what I know, it’s not very different with anything else there.

Maybe it was something as simple as Warner Books not having enough pull with the bookstore chains to get good placement. In the grand scheme of things, they aren’t a top publisher like HarperCollins or Simon & Schuster. They aren’t even in the top 50.

I think public perception plays a part too. The whole comics are for kids, and novels are for adults, and never the twain shall meet. The DC-related children’s books from Scholastic seem to do well enough after all.

The new trend of shorter, cheaper ebooks could work in their favor though. A series of 150- to 200-page books telling a large story would have some of the continuity feel of the comics and maybe appeal to comics readers who don’t read novels as much.

All the other comments, about comic people not reading, about licensed properties not selling, about mass market paperbacks not selling, I find wildly incorrect. Licensed properties do sell. Yea, Star Wars books aren't at the very top of the best seller list anymore, but they are in fact high on the list. And not only that, but there's money to be had and sales to be made off the "best seller" lists. Just like there are comics that sell only a couple thousand copies, there are plenty of sales that go on that don't make the top 100 lists.

Star Wars, Star Trek, Transformers, even freaking Halo sells books. And why does everyone talk about Wal-Mart? I'm sure they move a ton of books on top 10 lists, but they aren't a book store. I see plenty of licensed books on the shelves at stores all the time.

I have to disagree.; Mass Market paperbacks are going away, and many publishers have announced that they will no longer publish them, moving to hardcover and trades only. Back in the late 90's, it was common for a mid-line mystery novel betw4een 15,000 and 20,000 copies. Now, an author I know says that publishers would be giddy for numbers like that on a midline paperback. Hard Case Crime's publisher went under, and they've moved to Titan Books, where they have to publish as trades to get enough profit to keep the books in print.

If you go to the USA today bestseller's list, they list the 150 bestselling books of the week...and you'll see that the new Star Trek and Star Wars books aren't on the list. The dirty little secret of the book industry is that non-fiction outsells fiction by staggering numbers, and political books sell the best out of non-fiction since they get pushed relentlessly on TV and radio. Then, you should read up on the growing number of authors who are moving to writing YA books because that's where the sales are.

We're also seeing a LOT of authors moving to self publishing because the publishing houses are telling them that they aren't getting the sales they need. Fiction writing is in flux, and who knows where it will all end up.

And why do we talk about Wal-Mart? Because in a LOT of the country they are the biggest brick and mortar bookseller in the US. My parents live in central IL, and the only bookstore within an hour's drive is Wal-mart, the closest B&N is in Peoria. They've switched over to the Nook simply because they can't get books (other than the Wal-Mart selection) without a long drive.

15 years ago, I'd agree with you, but with the Star Trek books having titles pulled and delayed due to slipping sales, I think the golden age of licensed books is a thing of the past.

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

I'm afraid we're going to have to disagree then. As for the stats on people reading:

http://hotforwords.com/2011/04/11/42-of-people-who-graduate-from-college-never-read-another-book/

1/3 of high school graduates never read another book for the rest of their lives.
42 percent of college graduates never read another book after college.
80 percent of U.S. families did not buy or read a book last year.
70 percent of U.S. adults have not been in a bookstore in the last five years.
57 percent of new books are not read to completion.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16435529

Americans spend two hours a day watching television and seven minutes reading. And only one-third of 13-year-olds are daily readers.

Lastly, the one that gets me: Back int he 70's and 80's, they would list on paperbacks things like "7 million copies sold!" for a best seller. Now, the Harry Potter books sold great, and so did 50 Shades of Gray, but the average "blockbuster" novel is lucky to move a couple hundred thousand copies.

I'm not ashamed, embarrassed or anything else. As someone who writes genre fiction and hopes to publish soon, I am just researching and learning the realities.

Chuck_Melville

Planeis said:

Theres a Star wars book right now in the top 20 New York Times list, in hardback. Whoever said it had to be a mass market paperback anyway? Death of Superman, Knightfall, No Man's Land... All those I read in hardback.

The Death Of Superman and Knightfall were nearly two decades ago; No Man's Land, last decade. The nature of the marketplace has changed since then.

Planeis said:

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

It's not like this is a new revelation. The newer generations have a rather limited interested in books in general. If it's longer than 140 characters, it's tl;dr. That's why it's news when books like Harry Potter or the Hunger Games or even Twilight suddenly take off and capture an entire generation's imagination; the headlines suddenly blare about how teenagers are suddenly reading books again -- only it usually turns out to be those one or two series.

Planeis

70% of all statistics are made up. I personally don't believe a single one of those. Every single person I know whose graduated from college reads. Some read A LOT. I don't believe for one single second that 80% of US households didn't read a single book. That website is so full of backwards stats its not even worth discussing. That same site also says that 70 million American's read a romance novel last year. So which is it? Did 80% of households not read a book? or did 1/3 of the country read a romance novel? It also goes on to detail that its a $20+ billion dollar industry and that as an example 700 MILLION books were sold in 2007. So which is it? A small industry or a large one?

Again, from the same website that you directed me to it says accurate sales figures for books are impossible to get. Books are not like box office receipts for movies. Have you ever heard they way they make the new york times bestseller list? Its not the most scientific system.

There seem to be at least 1 million people who consistently buy comics every month, and I'm not one of them by the way. As a percentage of the population, thats very low, but they still manage to sell a LOT of titles every year and make money right? Is it your contention that these 1 million (and it could be higher) people who probably spend $100 a year on comics wouldn't spend $15 on a book of these same characters?

Again, according to that same website you sent me to, they had a link to more stats. Said in 2006 there were 2,600 Graphic Novels published in one year. You don't think there's room for a dozen novels?

I'm not arguing that a super hero book would be some kind of runaway best seller that sells millions. Genre books develop a fan base by being consistently published and developing a brand, which is where I think the WB's publishing partners have severely failed. Star Wars, Star Trek, Halo, Transformers, whatever... all series books develop a consistant look and branding so when your looking at them online or in a bookstore you can tell right away what your looking at. Every DC related book I've ever seen has had a different, sometimes ugly and uninteresting look that does not communicate very well at all. And on top of that, as I've said previously, they aren't consistantly published.

Planeis

Chuck_Melville said:

Planeis said:

Theres a Star wars book right now in the top 20 New York Times list, in hardback. Whoever said it had to be a mass market paperback anyway? Death of Superman, Knightfall, No Man's Land... All those I read in hardback.

The Death Of Superman and Knightfall were nearly two decades ago; No Man's Land, last decade. The nature of the marketplace has changed since then.

Planeis said:

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

It's not like this is a new revelation. The newer generations have a rather limited interested in books in general. If it's longer than 140 characters, it's tl;dr. That's why it's news when books like Harry Potter or the Hunger Games or even Twilight suddenly take off and capture an entire generation's imagination; the headlines suddenly blare about how teenagers are suddenly reading books again -- only it usually turns out to be those one or two series.

I know those books are old. That's my whole point. There are other, many other genre books out there including niche licensed properties that are consistently published.

I'm not arguing that these things are runaway huge successes and I'm not sure why people keep trying to point that out. Comics aren't runaway huge successes. Most shows on cable don't get huge numbers either.

All I'm saying is I wish they'd put together a good brand of books and try to consistently publish them. A sucessful book, much like a successful comic, doesn't have to be a huge seller.

Greg

My wife is interested in lot of the stories and titles I've talked about, but she will not read trades or graphic novels, she doesn't want the pictures and she says they're too distracting when trying to read the word balloons. She's read the DC novels and I know she would be all over a novelization of the major story lines and anything that is good crime story or in the likes of Court of Owls or Locke & Key.

dubbat138

Planeis said:

SolitaireRose said:

Planeis said:

nweathington said:

I don’t know that it’s necessarily DC that won’t commit to them. It’s probably more on the book publisher than DC. As far as I can recall, most, if not all, of the DC novels have been published by Warner Books. While both Warner Books and DC are owned by the same corporation, there is surprisingly little cooperation between the various divisions. I remember Jerry Ordway telling me about how little support they got from Warner Bros. film division when DC came up with all sorts of ways to promote and sell the comic book adaptation of the first Batman movie . DC wanted to have stand-up displays in the theaters, and sell the books there, but Warner wouldn’t give them the time of day. From what I know, it’s not very different with anything else there.

Maybe it was something as simple as Warner Books not having enough pull with the bookstore chains to get good placement. In the grand scheme of things, they aren’t a top publisher like HarperCollins or Simon & Schuster. They aren’t even in the top 50.

I think public perception plays a part too. The whole comics are for kids, and novels are for adults, and never the twain shall meet. The DC-related children’s books from Scholastic seem to do well enough after all.

The new trend of shorter, cheaper ebooks could work in their favor though. A series of 150- to 200-page books telling a large story would have some of the continuity feel of the comics and maybe appeal to comics readers who don’t read novels as much.

All the other comments, about comic people not reading, about licensed properties not selling, about mass market paperbacks not selling, I find wildly incorrect. Licensed properties do sell. Yea, Star Wars books aren't at the very top of the best seller list anymore, but they are in fact high on the list. And not only that, but there's money to be had and sales to be made off the "best seller" lists. Just like there are comics that sell only a couple thousand copies, there are plenty of sales that go on that don't make the top 100 lists.

Star Wars, Star Trek, Transformers, even freaking Halo sells books. And why does everyone talk about Wal-Mart? I'm sure they move a ton of books on top 10 lists, but they aren't a book store. I see plenty of licensed books on the shelves at stores all the time.

I have to disagree.; Mass Market paperbacks are going away, and many publishers have announced that they will no longer publish them, moving to hardcover and trades only. Back in the late 90's, it was common for a mid-line mystery novel betw4een 15,000 and 20,000 copies. Now, an author I know says that publishers would be giddy for numbers like that on a midline paperback. Hard Case Crime's publisher went under, and they've moved to Titan Books, where they have to publish as trades to get enough profit to keep the books in print.

If you go to the USA today bestseller's list, they list the 150 bestselling books of the week...and you'll see that the new Star Trek and Star Wars books aren't on the list. The dirty little secret of the book industry is that non-fiction outsells fiction by staggering numbers, and political books sell the best out of non-fiction since they get pushed relentlessly on TV and radio. Then, you should read up on the growing number of authors who are moving to writing YA books because that's where the sales are.

We're also seeing a LOT of authors moving to self publishing because the publishing houses are telling them that they aren't getting the sales they need. Fiction writing is in flux, and who knows where it will all end up.

And why do we talk about Wal-Mart? Because in a LOT of the country they are the biggest brick and mortar bookseller in the US. My parents live in central IL, and the only bookstore within an hour's drive is Wal-mart, the closest B&N is in Peoria. They've switched over to the Nook simply because they can't get books (other than the Wal-Mart selection) without a long drive.

15 years ago, I'd agree with you, but with the Star Trek books having titles pulled and delayed due to slipping sales, I think the golden age of licensed books is a thing of the past.

Theres a Star wars book right now in the top 20 New York Times list, in hardback. Whoever said it had to be a mass market paperback anyway? Death of Superman, Knightfall, No Man's Land... All those I read in hardback.

People who read dont get the majority of their books from Wal-Mart. If anything the book stores are going away not because of Wal-Mart smd ebooks but because of Amazon.

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

Check out tne sci fi section on Amazon, check out the titles and subjects, you dont think theres room for a well made Superman or Batman book or whatever? Star Wars and other sells because they hire good authors to write their stuff, veteran sci fi writers. There are no super heroes on there because there are none to buy and its very difficult to clamor for something ( as someone else suggested) when it doesnt exist.

There is still plenty of people that don't shop online. And as I said in a previous post in lots of rural areas the only place to get books is Walmart or a store like that. Most of my friends graduated college. And at least 70% of them haven't read a book since then. It amazes them that I can in one year read at least 100 books. I don't know about other areas. But where I live the library in town is the only library in 3 counties. I have gotten to know the librarians pretty well. One of them told me that outside of people over the age of 50,they have very very few people come in to check out books. "Most of the people under 50 that come in are here to either check out dvds or use our free Wifi."

Krescan

I think my problem with them is if it's a original novel I'm probably not going to get it because that's an investment of time to find out that it's something I'm not going to like. Especially if the author is someone that I'm not familiar with. And if it's the novelization of an event then I've already read it so I'm not crazy about reading it again. I had Marvel's Civil War novel in my hand this weekend and put it back on the shelf for that reason.

That being said I've requested the Astonishing X-men: Gifted novel from my library which I plan to get as soon as it's in. And also I listened to No Man's Land on audio book and am very looking forward to going back and reading the comics version of that eventually.

Also I fall into a weird category that the statistics didn't cover. I only read 2 books in high school the Iliad and A Separate Peace. But after high school I don't have enough bookshelves to hold them all. Having a midnight radio DJ job makes for some prime reading time.

Chuck_Melville

Planeis said:

Chuck_Melville said:

Planeis said:

Theres a Star wars book right now in the top 20 New York Times list, in hardback. Whoever said it had to be a mass market paperback anyway? Death of Superman, Knightfall, No Man's Land... All those I read in hardback.

The Death Of Superman and Knightfall were nearly two decades ago; No Man's Land, last decade. The nature of the marketplace has changed since then.

Planeis said:

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

It's not like this is a new revelation. The newer generations have a rather limited interested in books in general. If it's longer than 140 characters, it's tl;dr. That's why it's news when books like Harry Potter or the Hunger Games or even Twilight suddenly take off and capture an entire generation's imagination; the headlines suddenly blare about how teenagers are suddenly reading books again -- only it usually turns out to be those one or two series.

I know those books are old. That's my whole point.

And you missed mine. The reason those books did as well as they did, beyond the fact that they were spun off of the general public interest in those story arcs from the comics, was because the marketplace was different at that time. Even ten years ago, it was different. What held true for those books success at that time isn't true anymore today, whether it be customer interest, corporate dynamics or distribution methodology. The prime audience at that time has moved on to a different bracket and the newer audience that has displaced them in the old desirable age bracket is the one that showing more interest in other less challenging media.

Planeis

Chuck_Melville said:

Planeis said:

Chuck_Melville said:

Planeis said:

Theres a Star wars book right now in the top 20 New York Times list, in hardback. Whoever said it had to be a mass market paperback anyway? Death of Superman, Knightfall, No Man's Land... All those I read in hardback.

The Death Of Superman and Knightfall were nearly two decades ago; No Man's Land, last decade. The nature of the marketplace has changed since then.

Planeis said:

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

It's not like this is a new revelation. The newer generations have a rather limited interested in books in general. If it's longer than 140 characters, it's tl;dr. That's why it's news when books like Harry Potter or the Hunger Games or even Twilight suddenly take off and capture an entire generation's imagination; the headlines suddenly blare about how teenagers are suddenly reading books again -- only it usually turns out to be those one or two series.

I know those books are old. That's my whole point.

And you missed mine. The reason those books did as well as they did, beyond the fact that they were spun off of the general public interest in those story arcs from the comics, was because the marketplace was different at that time. Even ten years ago, it was different. What held true for those books success at that time isn't true anymore today, whether it be customer interest, corporate dynamics or distribution methodology. The prime audience at that time has moved on to a different bracket and the newer audience that has displaced them in the old desirable age bracket is the one that showing more interest in other less challenging media.

Sir, I did not miss your point. I just think its highly erroneous. Many comments, including yours, seem to indicate that people don't read. They do read. Like I said many times, check out the best seller lists for Sci-Fi. Your telling me you don't think well made books featuring some of the most recognizable characters on earth could fit in? Halo, vampires, zombies, books about super heroes (but not Marvel or DC), star wars, star trek, dune... there's room for all of them, but not Batman and Green Lantern?

There are books made, just not a consistant series. That's how audiences develop. For instance, for each of the new Bat movies, they have made movie-tie in novelizations. Why not an expanded universe series based on the movies? Why not an expanded universe like the other books series I mentioned?

What makes all these other books so successful that wouldn't work for characters that people love and are some of the most recognizable characters in the world? Is Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter somehow worth a book, but Superman isn't? Is True Blood (which I read and watch BTW) really that much better than Wonder Woman? I mean honestly, you think there is room for a True Blood show, books, AND comics... but only comics for characters that hundreds of thousands spend money on every single month.

I actually think the ones they've released in recent years probably have been successful. Kevin J. Anderson wrote a couple and sold well and won awards, the most recent of which I think was 2009. They just don't tie them together and really try to form a series. Its always stand alone, elseworlds type tales, or a comic tie in for only the very largest crossover events.

Planeis

Greg said:

My wife is interested in lot of the stories and titles I've talked about, but she will not read trades or graphic novels, she doesn't want the pictures and she says they're too distracting when trying to read the word balloons. She's read the DC novels and I know she would be all over a novelization of the major story lines and anything that is good crime story or in the likes of Court of Owls or Locke & Key.

Thank you.

Krescan

Planeis said:

Chuck_Melville said:

And you missed mine. The reason those books did as well as they did, beyond the fact that they were spun off of the general public interest in those story arcs from the comics, was because the marketplace was different at that time. Even ten years ago, it was different. What held true for those books success at that time isn't true anymore today, whether it be customer interest, corporate dynamics or distribution methodology. The prime audience at that time has moved on to a different bracket and the newer audience that has displaced them in the old desirable age bracket is the one that showing more interest in other less challenging media.

What makes all these other books so successful that wouldn't work for characters that people love and are some of the most recognizable characters in the world? Is Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter somehow worth a book, but Superman isn't? Is True Blood (which I read and watch BTW) really that much better than Wonder Woman? I mean honestly, you think there is room for a True Blood show, books, AND comics... but only comics for characters that hundreds of thousands spend money on every single month.

There is a bit of a difference there that the two examples you have were books first then other television or movies second. I would think it's easier to go from a popular book to an increase in viewers for movies or television. Where as if you have a popular movie or other medium you'll have people that will want a book but that number would definitely drop significantly I would think.

Chuck_Melville

Planeis said:

Chuck_Melville said:

Planeis said:

Chuck_Melville said:

Planeis said:

Theres a Star wars book right now in the top 20 New York Times list, in hardback. Whoever said it had to be a mass market paperback anyway? Death of Superman, Knightfall, No Man's Land... All those I read in hardback.

The Death Of Superman and Knightfall were nearly two decades ago; No Man's Land, last decade. The nature of the marketplace has changed since then.

Planeis said:

Its amazing to me that all of you think people dont read or buy books. Many people on these boards seem embarressed to be fans of super heroes. Nobody cares what you read people.

It's not like this is a new revelation. The newer generations have a rather limited interested in books in general. If it's longer than 140 characters, it's tl;dr. That's why it's news when books like Harry Potter or the Hunger Games or even Twilight suddenly take off and capture an entire generation's imagination; the headlines suddenly blare about how teenagers are suddenly reading books again -- only it usually turns out to be those one or two series.

I know those books are old. That's my whole point.

And you missed mine. The reason those books did as well as they did, beyond the fact that they were spun off of the general public interest in those story arcs from the comics, was because the marketplace was different at that time. Even ten years ago, it was different. What held true for those books success at that time isn't true anymore today, whether it be customer interest, corporate dynamics or distribution methodology. The prime audience at that time has moved on to a different bracket and the newer audience that has displaced them in the old desirable age bracket is the one that showing more interest in other less challenging media.

Planeis said:

Sir, I did not miss your point. I just think its highly erroneous. Many comments, including yours, seem to indicate that people don't read. They do read. Like I said many times, check out the best seller lists for Sci-Fi. Your telling me you don't think well made books featuring some of the most recognizable characters on earth could fit in? Halo, vampires, zombies, books about super heroes (but not Marvel or DC), star wars, star trek, dune... there's room for all of them, but not Batman and Green Lantern?

I'm not saying that people don't read -- I'm saying that fewer are reading, especially among the younger readers who are in the demographic that the publishers would be aiming at. And, sure, I think there's room for superheroes -- but I'm not the one making the decisions. And so long as they feel it isn't worth their time and money to produce those books, they won't.

Planeis said:

There are books made, just not a consistant series. That's how audiences develop. For instance, for each of the new Bat movies, they have made movie-tie in novelizations. Why not an expanded universe series based on the movies? Why not an expanded universe like the other books series I mentioned?

I think the adaptations tend to be more of a reflex these days than anything really planned. You produce one to tie in to the movie and hope it will sell. The real question is how well do they sell? Unless the movie is a giant hit -- and unless the book performs at least as well -- they're likely not inclined to produce any further volumes. And they likely wouldn't expand upon the series unless there was still a movie in the theater to tie it to, wanting something mainstream to help stir up mainstream interest in the books rather than just the fans alone.

Planeis said:

What makes all these other books so successful that wouldn't work for characters that people love and are some of the most recognizable characters in the world? Is Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter somehow worth a book, but Superman isn't? Is True Blood (which I read and watch BTW) really that much better than Wonder Woman? I mean honestly, you think there is room for a True Blood show, books, AND comics... but only comics for characters that hundreds of thousands spend money on every single month.

There is no Superman or Wonder Woman tv show or movie to tie the books to. When the Superman movie comes out, there will be an adaptation. Series like the Halo books do well because the game is still very popular, more so, I would say, than comics, and creates it own audience.

Planeis said:

I actually think the ones they've released in recent years probably have been successful. Kevin J. Anderson wrote a couple and sold well and won awards, the most recent of which I think was 2009. They just don't tie them together and really try to form a series. Its always stand alone, elseworlds type tales, or a comic tie in for only the very largest crossover events.

How well did they sell? The problem with best seller lists is that they can be deceiving. If the overall sales for books within any given week should drop 75%, then taking the top ten slots isn't all as impressive as it sounds. What is the actual volume, and how does it compare to five years ago? To ten years ago? Twenty? If the overall volume has shrunk, (and I don't actually know that it has, I just suspect it based on what I've read) then that goes a long way towards answering your questions.

DoctorDoom

I think my problem with them is if it's a original novel I'm probably not going to get it because that's an investment of time to find out that it's something I'm not going to like. Especially if the author is someone that I'm not familiar with. And if it's the novelization of an event then I've already read it so I'm not crazy about reading it again. I had Marvel's Civil War novel in my hand this weekend and put it back on the shelf for that reason.

There's a Civil War novel? Holy crap! Get Graphic Audio on that!





DJ's represent!

DoctorDoom

And holy crap.

http://marvel.com/news/story/19143/civil_war_prose_novel_coming_to_graphicaudio

random73

@Planeis I agree with you more than i don't but i suggest you dial down the agression knob just a bit. as a person whose mouth is also frequently bigger than his brain i emplore you to relax just a little bit. and any sentence that contains "you people" just doesn't need to be typed because it is designed to cause friction and is not condusive to proving any point at all.