Comic Book Resources

Just to clarify: you do LIKE comics, right?

snark in a comments section...unheard of!

I like America but I make pithy comments about it. Freedom of speech. Same with Mr. Curran and comics.

He almost lost me with the stretched-taut WWE analogy, but Curran's right on the money.

And just for sheer principle, anyone delivering their missive via web video deserves all the crap one can pile up.

Was just reading about this on the atomic robo site ( http://www.atomic-robo.com/?p=260 ), apparently the Eisner nominated, praised on every comics site I read, never heard a bad thing about it beyond "kinda Hellboy-ish," first mini didn't sell for shit and the publisher threw their support behind it anyway to get a 2nd volume.

Had it been an Image or Dark Horse book instead of a brand new publisher, maybe they'd have done better, I don't know. But that seems like a problem to me at least. I'm not sure it's a problem Kirkman can fix by heroically not writing Marvel books, but it's a problem.

I think that the only way this would ever happen is the way that it already has happened.

Image comics. The big seven. They made waves, they made money. They were big stars.

Can talent do that now? Not easily. Marvel and DC are very good at hyping creators up. An exodus now would only lead to the introduction of the next, great talent at the help of the top books. There would be no backlash, there would be no Spawn #1 selling millions, and there would be no competition. I only see it going down as a group of people take some time to work their own thing, then a year or two later, back at the big two, hyped up more than ever at the new JLA or X-Men relaunch.

The problem isn't a choice between Brian Michael Bendis' Powers vs Brian Michael Bendis' Avengers, either. Asking a creator to sell less books for the sake of the industry is flawed. It's not as if "The Walking Dead" suddenly sold less issues as Kirkman fans were presented with the choice for his "Ultimate X-Men".

Kirkman has to answer several big questions before he can really convince a creator to do what he suggests:

Why would a writer want to make a move that will sell less issues, reduce his market presence, pay less, reach fewer fans, and possibly alienate himself from the major employers of the business?

Love? Art? It's not enough, because if it were, it's would be happening.

---

This also makes me think of the link that was up about Herb Trimpe a few days ago here. Artists forced out, ready to work, but not getting any. He fell out of favour, and then stressed, and fretted, and was genuinely unhappy, even filing for employment insurance. This was the guy that first drew Wolverine, and he couldn't get work. Very scary.

The comics industry is dying a slow death. Face it. It's like a parasite that only feeds off itself. It's so broken on every level it can't possibly sustain itself.

Comics in comic shops - What happens when you take a product and hide it away so only people already looking for will ever be exposed to it? No new or casual readers to grow the readership.

Comics written by fanboys for fanboys - What happens when fanboys are the only ones creating and buying your product? Books that are impenetrable for anyone who should even try to start reading them if they happen to seek out a comic based on movie or cartoon exposure.

An aging fanbase? - What happens as the remaining few thousand out of shape, overweight, babymen die off from well-earned heart attacks? No readership.

The industry as it exists today will soon die, and good riddence! Only then can it be re-invented and revitalized by a new generation and have any kind of future.

As far as Kirkman, Irredeemable Ant-man was quite enjoyable. It didn't go anywhere or do anything really, but jerky Ant-man was amusing enough to sustain my interest. I'm not really sure how a few big 2 writers/artists doing a few more indy books will in anyway "save" comics. The problems in the market are more structural (how do you get comic books into the hands of people that don't read them and don't go to comic shops) and the disconnect between fans of comic ideas and actual buyers of comics (I.e. all the people who saw Dark Knight and Iron Man as well as play all the tie in hero video games but won't buy an actual comic book any time in the appreciable future). Comic ideas are doing amazingly right now in movies/games, especially mainstream properties, but the individual comic market isn't doing any better at all. The distribution and marketing of comics need to change for the comic market to be "saved" or expand to a level anywhere near the level of its intellectual properties.

One thing is for sure: Kirkman looked so depressed in his statement, sounded like he was recording his suicide statement.

The big reason there'll never be another massive shift like there was for the Image founding is that no one in the industry has that kind of leverage, especially with Spidey under the auspices of a whole team of writers and DC having a never-ending supply of people who want to write Batman. Back when Image was founded, losing Lee off X-Men and McFarlane and Larsen off Spidey was a body blow to Marvel that took them years to recover from. Outside of *maybe* Johns or Bendis, there's no one out there who'd have that type of impact. And both those guys are way more likely to go to the other end of the Big Two than strike out on their own, because they both know that a run on the flagship title of the other publisher would be incredibly lucrative.

Aside: part of the problem with Jericho as a face was that he was trying to "save" everyone from Randy Orton, who by that point had gotten quite awesome.

Looking at Kirkman's work has made me come to the weird conclusion that it has to be far, far easier to write creator owned comics than mainstream Marvel comics. His creator owned stuff is much better. It's partially because he's not limited at all. He can do whatever he wants, pace things however he wants, disregard anything he wants, go to all the extremes under the sun. Look at how far he goes in Walking Dead. The first big twist in Invincible, the one that more or less made the book in the early going, was way out there.

I think he was able to do that with Ant-Man, somewhat, and it's his only Marvel work that really stands up.

I'm way more impressed with someone who can do amazing things within the system, who can build off years of continuity as a tool and not a hinderance, especially if they can do it while keeping the stories meaningful and accessible than someone who bounces around their own stuff. I think it's got a much higher level of difficulty, but that's just me.

(And yes. I just realized I said that I think it's harder to write well someone else's characters, with tons of back story to build upon, than to come up with your own quasi-original ideas. You don't have to point this out to me. I get what I just said).

I just want to point out that it is easier for writers to have multiple books come out. Bendis can have his powers as well as his new avengers, satisfying to both indie lovers and fanboys. however if your are a penciler you have to choose solo book or company book.

With me it just happened the other way around. I started reading this article and it bleh me away. I noticed the link to Kirkman's video and it definitely captured my attention.

Criticizing this article would be the same thing that Curran did to Kirkman's, so I'll stop at it.

On the bright side, I think there was a lot of sense into what Kirkman said. I'm 38 years old and I see comic books aimed at me. No way when I was 13 years old I would have jumped into the comic book wagon with stories that require you've been at least 15 years in the reading to understand what's going on. Yes, DC and Marvel are milking this market, but they're not creating a new one, so, they're marked for death as an industry.

Kirkman's idea is great, considering he managed to get great success with Invincible and his other creations and let's not talk Marvel and DC numbers, that's different from all basis. What he suggests sounds like one of the basis behind the creation of Image, with the difference that this time there would be more than great artists, there would be great writers behind the project.

I do like DC and Marvel a lot, but it's not hard to see where they're going at this point. So, the industry better creates a new option soon or it will fade away.

I can't say R-Kirk's heart is in the wrong place. However, his points aren't really valid. Nobody has been able to explain to me how creator owned material is going to save the comic industry. Look, lets face it..an exodus from Marvel and DC (particularly Marvel) has happened before and how did that turn out? A boom for a year or maybe two and when the novelty wears out or the writer who creates a character hires someone else to write it (McFarlane, Liefeld, Jim Lee..you guys know this) and then sales slowly fall.

The comic book industry is dying a slow death not because creators don't create and write their own material but because a generation is growing up and more needs to be done to get in new readers. Heck, i am not going to pretend that i have a solution but creator owned by unknown creators will only clutter the already cluttered market and achieve nothing.

By the way, Kirkman's Ultimate X-men sucked like hell!!!

I'm not going to argue the merits or lack of merits of his argument. All I know is he became a partner in Image (a company that I believe still lets its book be creator owned) and then released a video asking top talent to do more creator owner books. Even if he said "I don't care where you do it" it still seems to be at least based in self-interest.

When it come to kirkman suggestion every one should go self publishing two things come to mind as real reason's he suggest it and they are not really to help save the industry

1 he now works for Image this has been siad by others but when it comes handling creator owned property Image does alot of some of it good some not so good but this cry for independts help image out
think about it did he suggest creator go to Vertigo or fantigraphics? the problem with Imege is that it is intirly up to the creators how the advertise if they are succsessful the geat a larger percentage of profits. I will be honest and say I really don't look at most of images stuff I watch for Fell and the WitchBlade title but that is all .

2 he has had limited sucsess out side of Image yes Marvel Zomies did well but look at how much faith Marvel had in Jubile . IT was a fantastic series that if it had had and artist that drew The character more like she was supposed to be drawn would have been sucsessful they ended it six issues. with this decree he can justify not working for the top two

good day

Chris, I disagree that it's that hard to grab a book without knowing 15 years of background. I hopped on DD at Brubaker's run after being told in a couple of minutes that his identity had gone public, he'd become Kingpin, and then been arrested. As long as the story is good you can enjoy it without knowing all the years of details. Those come with time and make the story better, but are unessential.

I gotta disagree using the same example. I picked up the first tpb of Brubaker's DD, which had a big white "1" printed on the side and was the beginning of an entirely new creative team. DD was in jail and fighting unspecified charges. It was never explained in the story and there was no introductory material at all in the tpb. I actually struggled through the whole book without understanding anything that was going on.

Did it not occur to Marvel that there might be people who lost interest in Bendis's run but were now ready to try the book again? Apparently Marvel didn't want us back or didn't care.

After all, Brubaker and Lark were coming off "Gotham Central", a DC book, so maybe some people picking this up would be buying their first Marvel book, right? Did they ever buy another?

Can Kirkman save comics?

Why not?
Somebody has to do it.

Comics is a dying art.

I disagree with the very notion that comics need saving. Marvel, DC, and the Industry built around them may be dying(which I don't necessarily believe either), but Comics as Art is doing just fine.

Also, what Grant Morisson said.
http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2008/08/29/grant-morrison-is-god/

"Comics is a dying art."

So's your grammar.

Agent_Torpor said:

“Comics is a dying art.”

So’s your grammar.

Would you prefer one of the following:

"Comics are a dying art"
"Comic is a dying art"

The original grammar is correct because "Comics", the way it's used in that sentence, is a singular collective noun. If you is gonna be a grammar nazi, be correct.

I'm not sure that I agree with the sentiment of the sentence, by the way. Superhero comics probably are in trouble - they have an aging readership, and very little is being done to bring new readers in. Most people who enjoy superheroes these days seem to do so in other mediums.

On the other hand, non-superhero comics seem to be doing better than ever these days.

I don't think the Image analogy stands up because with Imagem you had seven artists ( pencillers ) leave. Are their any artists today that people would buy the book no matter what, who don't have a bad reputation for being late? Yes, Image books shipped later and later, but when these artists were at the big two they were producing monthly work, not what passes for monthly these days ( please see Ultimates II, Cival War, Infintie cirsis )

What an ego.

Comics are having the same problems other declining mediums are facing. There are so many alternatives for kids now, be it games, movies, etc. And these alternatives are much better quality-wise now than they were 10 or 20 years ago.

One other problem getting newer fans to many titles is, there's too much backstory for people to catch up. Daytime soaps have the same problem.

I am not going to support marvel or dc's strategies but i do understand that many decisions they take are business driven and like any other business they must survive..by any means necessary. Where they are today is as a result of natural business growth. Without doubt the american comic book industry is controlled by the big two and that will not change in the forseeable future. In my opinion however, i believe the problem with the comic industry goes beyond marvel and dc but general perception.

The general perception is that comics are for kids, however , kids don't read comics anymore. Sure one or two do but the overwhelming majority see it as something that is "childish" (funny coming from a kid). At the same time, the current generation of comic book readers are growing up, getting married and having kids. They simply don't follow the comics they way they used to. Not to mention that comics are really expensive these days (i live in the U.K and spending 1.50 pounds on a comic is quite painful at times). Hence the rise of the graphic novel and marvel and dc (especially marvel) tailor their storylines for that format. Again, i don't see how having thousands of creators writing comics all over the place will help..in fact, if anything, that will cannibalize the market even further ( a la image in the early 90's) and we all know the comic book industry today CAN NOT support too many comic book companies. Again, what needs to be done is to bring in new readers..if manga sells the way they say it does in america (i don't personally like manga) then something needs to be done. Kirkman's idea isn't one of them.

Comics are dying? Or Marvel and DC comics are dying?

Comics still sell a lot in Japan and France. Why?

“Comics are a dying art”
“Comic is a dying art”
"Comics are dying? Or Marvel and DC comics are dying?"
-----------------------------------------
I don't want to speak for anyone else, but I believe most of us are saying the same thing here.

The years old standard conventional habit, of buying (mostly Marvel/DC superhero) monthly comics are dying. The idea of walking into a comic shop (or newsstand of years gone by) and picking up a handful of comics to read, enjoy (and maybe collect) just doesn't make sense anymore. And it has nothing to do with the writer or artist.

It just doesn't make any sense to spend nearly $4 for 24 pages of a chapter of an ongoing story. A chapter, for the most part, that gives the reader no synopsis or even worse makes them have to come into the story with a ton of backstory knowlege or they'll be totally lost.

The art of telling a story, adventure, humor, dramatic, etc... with sequential graphic work is NOT dying. It's just moving to stand alone books.

The habit of buying and reading affordable, readable, monthly comics is dying and no hot or well known creator will be able to save it.

Amen to what Richard said above. The comic book as a medium is not dead but the business model that marvel and dc is operating is breaking down and dying off. The graphic novel is really the only way foward. Unless there is radical drop in the price of comics and an increase in the quality..there is no way new readers are getting in. It just isn't going to happen. Right now i have 100 pounds to spend and i look at buying a couple of comics but when i walk into the local GAME store right next to forbidden planet..the choice is a no brainer. (C'mon guys..15 pounds for a pre-owned game that u might play for weeks as opposed to a 19.99 pound graphic novel isn't really much of a choice).