How to use this Page

I’m always amused by these reports. Why are they so interested in the latest plot twist in a comic book series . . . the ‘death’ of Superman, the ‘death’ of Batman, Wonder Woman’s haircut! The article itself acknowledges what all we comics readers know, that the ‘death’ is a plot device and not a permanent end to the character.

HA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGDuFnpg8LU

Doesn’t matter if the comic store is open now or not. You can’t buy it today thanks to the new street dates. Wonder how well that panacea is gonna work out for them?

Huh, so people can buy the issue today? I’ll stand corrected on that point. Less so on the early ship day as a panacea for the DM’s problems though (but it does make Weds less hectic for retailers–I just don’t see it as solving many more problems than that.)

If you have been reading the book from the start of Hickman’s run and not just this storyline, the killed character was the only one that made sense thematically.

The distribution and relaunch is convoluted. Retailers were given permission to sell this book only today. If your store does not partake in the Tuesday shipping program, it’s still released tomorrow. Also there is a pre-announced 2nd print in a week or two. Every press release has stated that deaths are never permanent, and it’s not like the character is iconic like Superman or topically relevant like Captain America. I cannot see Marvel getting a lot of interest from people outside the hobby. Even if there is some interest, Marvel is cancelling and renumbering the book after the following issue which will have a no dialogue wake for the lead story. There is nothing like providing a jumping off point after your sales spike.

I have to credit Marvel with keeping the secret of who dies this long. That part they did extremely well.

FF#587 shipped a day early, and retailers are allowed to sell it as soon as they opened for business. I guess Marvel wants to catch lightning twice, just like Captain America #25… (or maybe Superman #75)

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=30451

Of course, readers might decide to STOP reading the comic. (I did something similar when the X-Men went through the Siege Perilous. “Hmm… all the characters I like are no longer in this comic. Why should I keep reading? Good thing Excalibur is still normal.”)

Willie Lumpkin is dead.

The report didn’t say they were renumbering/relaunching with FF #1. “588 is the final issue of the Fantastic Four. Beyond that, we’re not ready to say exactly what we’re doing. There won’t be an issue 589.”

Is there any confirmation of a new #1?

It sounds like they are ending the series, which I think is more surprising than the death of XXXXXXX.

I agree with AI. This is yet another pathetic stunt by Marvel to relaunch FF volume 3,4,5??? #1! And of course, after hickman leaves and someone brongs back XXX then we will reverst back to the original numbering system and be somewhere issue 620 or so. The entire Marvel numbering is completely screwed up, not just 1 or 2 titles (like DC did) but most of their icon titles. Next will be Thor.

I have been reading FF since 1999 and enjoyed Hickman’s run. It was refreshing. However, Marvel loss a FF fan for good this time, there are only so many characters (and times) you can kill someone and bring him back. I mean even Aunt did a few times.(and came back)

In the old days, Doctor Doom kind of “died” multiple times. He’d catch some errant asteroid and be adrift in space, or he’d shrink down to nothingness, or some such thing. The end of Emperor Palpatine in Return of the Jedi was a classic Doom-like moment, where he’d disappear from view to an almost certain end, but would appear later, cackling maniacally as the heroes’ jaws hit the floor over his amazing “return from the dead”. It’s a holdover from the old movie serials and the pulps.

I haven’t read this story yet, but hopefully it’ll hold true in this tradition. If not, remember that Ben Grimm died during Mark Waid’s run and came back through some King-ly intervention…

But wait till the one that is dead will return yawn ……….

Yahoo didn’t spoil this. The AP didn’t spoil this. Marvel GAVE them the press release and knew it would be released today. They wanted to bring attention to the comic (while the public went Who? about the death in question). So Marvel is just doing what a business does: promote. If you’re upset about being spoiled, blame them.

• Kill a character.
• End long running series.
• Bring back series immediately with a new #1.
• Eventually (within a year) bring back dead character.
• Eventually (within a year) bring back original issue numbering
• Wash
• Rinse
• Repeat

I can only hope this doesn’t affect the upcoming FF porno movie.

Marvel has a lot of catching up to do in the “death” and “reboot” department. Virtually everybody in the JLA has been “dead” at least once & the DCU has been retconned so many times that I’m surprised there aren’t more slip-ups, scripting-wise.

I’m thinking that Ultron needs to kill a whole shitload of Avengers – and then we find out eight months later that they’ve really been digitally stored in his indestructible codpiece or something. Get on that, will you?

Living with ‘The Walking Dead’ :: http://j.mp/bhZFV1

From Vamps to Zacks, eh Shannon?

Can’t wait to for the series to start— and to see if Darabont and co. does an “Alan Ball/TRUE BLOOD” take on the original Kirkman comics source material…

According to J. Bone (long time friend and collaborator of Darywn) it wasn’t a swipe to Bat-Woman, it was a swipe at The Question.

Which makes his comment event more out of touch considering the “passing of the torch” storyarc of the Question identity happened over a year in DC’s weekly 52 series. And was well told, made sense, and not “stupid” or “uncreative” as Cooke wrote. If anything, it breathed a bit of life into the character and exposed the Question to a wider audience than before – especially considering his last “successful” series was in the late 80s.

This has happened twice now in a matter of weeks: creator makes a stand, people revolt, creator returns with “what I meant to say was…”. Perhaps they should get it right the first time?

Sorry – all off topic to the above article. Back to reading…

“If ____ decides to bring back ____, they’d better have a very clear idea in mind of why somone who has never heard of ____ would also enjoy and follow that book.”

Huzzah!

The same goes for guest appearances and crossovers (which isn’t a new problem to the 2000s I’m afraid). I didn’t grow up reading Marvel, but as an adult I’d try reading one of their series from time to time, but they kept getting interrupted by walk-ons (or even takeovers) by unintroduced characters. (DC’s just as guilty, I’m sure, but I’m a 45-year-old insider there, so it doesn’t bother me.) If the reader has to be/consult a fanboy to appreciate what you’re writing… you’re doing it wrong.

Also, in the interest of providing demographic data points, I am a 45-year-old reader, who grew up with DC but currently read only a few of the less crossovery comics from them. Most of ‘em just aren’t any fun.

Strange that you quote Gotham City Sirens, because it seems that it has all the flaws you’re talking about: after Dini left, I felt that the title lost a lot of humour and got as unusefully dark as Streets of Gotham.

Darwyn didn’t change his position at all. He was nice in not referencing a specific character. It’s common for people to “read into” a statement made by a creator and make assumptions based on that. Then attack them based on those assumptions which can be (and often are) wrong.

Personally I’m a 35 yr old male and don’t read very much Marvel or DC anymore. My tastes have changed over the years and it’s no longer in line with who they are selling to. When I do get the urge for superheroes I’ll check out a title if it looks to be pretty self contained. Usually I just pick up an Essential/Showcase and read Invincible.

“More than one comics professional has expressed the idea that all superhero comics are fueled almost entirely by nostalgia, and I have to say, I think that’s a very dangerous position to take. ”
What? Superheroes were originally intended for children. I see that you conveniently left that fact out. What got many people into comics was their exposure to it as kids. Their exposure sometimes constituted of all ages material. That kind of introduction to comics isn’t possible anymore. DC Comics is a company that exisits soley because of the forty plus crowd. What “young person” would read Wonder Woman?

“Mainstream and superhero comics have a lot more going for them than simply a long history and great name recognition.”
For some reason, there’s this bizzare notion that comics in general are undergoing some kind of renaissance. I’m pretty sure we stil have the same ratio of good material to not so good material, even though the industry has shrunken in the last 20 years.

“Superhero comics aren’t really some sort of bizarre cult worshipping the desecrated remains of the 1930’s. They’re entertainment, and they’re fun. Forget this at your peril.”
Superheroes are relevent because Hollywood and the gaming industry are so eager to use them. Has that resulted in better comics? More fans? I can’t say. But it’s clear that there are more Spider-Man tooth brushes and tottler versions of Marvel superheroes in liscencing in addition to all the big budget movies.

“The DC and Marvel Universes are one of the most fascinating and multi-faceted experiments in collaborative storytelling ever to see print, and that’s nothing to sneeze at. But precisely because they are so large and complex, it’s short-sighted to expect all of your readers to have to remember a ten year old plot point in order to get the story. A well-written story ought to work for longtime fans as well as new readers. Yes, I know, that’s hard to pull off. But at the very least, it should be a priority to try.”
The last time I bought that line was when I was a child which was coincidently the last time I read superhero comics on a regular basis. DC and Marvel have a short term based business outlook. They only really care about their current fan base who are LONG TERM readers.

Although I haven’t read Batwoman, I will say that its success was probably based on the fact it was a Batman related book with a likeable artist on it. As long as DC can keep the artistic standard on it high, and can avoid keeping readers from getting bored, readers will continue buying it.

Mainstream comic books take themselves very seriously nowadays. Artists used extensive photo reference to the point many comics appear very close to fumetti. (photo comics. Actual photo comics are probably very expensive to make. ‘I paparazzi’ must have cost a small fortune to shoot. ) Mainstream comics are hyper-conscious. It’s still in the “comics aren’t just for kids” mode. With a few very rare exceptions, there’s an industry littered with Bendis’ and Millars’ and others trying to show the world how mature and grown up (but not sophisticated) Spider-man or whatever soon-to-be-optioned superhero. I call it the Keven Smith mentality and it’s what’s dominant. The other mentality is the nostalgia mentality better embodied by older artists and writers who churn out the same stuff over and over again, less interesting each time they churn it out.

Updated*

“More than one comics professional has expressed the idea that all superhero comics are fueled almost entirely by nostalgia, and I have to say, I think that’s a very dangerous position to take. ”
What? Superheroes were originally intended for children. I see that you conveniently left that fact out. What got many people into comics was their exposure to it as kids. Their exposure sometimes constituted of all ages superhero material. That kind of introduction to comics isn’t possible anymore . DC Comics is a company that exisits soley because of the forty plus crowd. What “young person” would read Wonder Woman?

“Mainstream and superhero comics have a lot more going for them than simply a long history and great name recognition.”
For some reason, there’s this bizzare notion that comics in general are undergoing some kind of renaissance. I’m pretty sure we stil have the same ratio of good material to not so good material, even though the industry has shrunken in the last 20 years.

“Superhero comics aren’t really some sort of bizarre cult worshipping the desecrated remains of the 1930’s. They’re entertainment, and they’re fun. Forget this at your peril.”
Superheroes are relevent because Hollywood and the gaming industry are so eager to use them. Has that resulted in better comics? More fans? I can’t say. But it’s clear that there are more Spider-Man tooth brushes and tottler versions of Marvel superheroes in on childrens’ items in addition to all the big budget movies, that are aimed at the 13 and up crowd.

“The DC and Marvel Universes are one of the most fascinating and multi-faceted experiments in collaborative storytelling ever to see print, and that’s nothing to sneeze at. But precisely because they are so large and complex, it’s short-sighted to expect all of your readers to have to remember a ten year old plot point in order to get the story. A well-written story ought to work for longtime fans as well as new readers. Yes, I know, that’s hard to pull off. But at the very least, it should be a priority to try.”
The last time I bought that line was when I was a child which was coincidently the last time I read superhero comics on a regular basis. DC and Marvel have a short term based business outlook. They only really care about their current fan base who are LONG TERM readers.

Although I haven’t read Batwoman, I will say that its success was probably based on the fact it was a Batman related book with a likeable artist on it. As long as DC can keep the artistic standard on it high, and can avoid keeping readers from getting bored, readers will continue buying it.

Mainstream comic books take themselves very seriously nowadays. Artists used extensive photo reference to the point many comics appear very close to fumetti. (photo comics. Actual photo comics are probably very expensive to make. ‘I paparazzi’ must have cost a small fortune to shoot. ) Mainstream comics are hyper-conscious. It’s still in the “comics aren’t just for kids” mode. With a few very rare exceptions, there’s an industry littered with Bendis’ and Millars’ and others trying to show the world how mature and grown up (but not sophisticated) Spider-man or whatever soon-to-be-optioned superhero is. I call it the Keven Smith mentality and it’s what’s dominant. The other mentality is the nostalgia mentality better embodied by older artists and writers who churn out the same stuff over and over again, less interesting each time they churn it out.

I need to see evil dominatrix Mary Marvel.

Saber Tooth Tiger Mike, I’m confused. I’m not saying most comics are that way, I’m saying they should be. If a comic doesn’t do these things, in my opinion, it won’t attract new readers of any age, kids, teens or adults.

When I say superhero comics have more going for them, I mean they can genuinely be entertaining beyond some tenuous connection to nostalgia – not that they always live up to this potential.

Superhero comics should be for kids – and teenagers and adults of all kinds, not that any one comic should be expected to cater to all these audiences at once. There ought to be more exploration of options other than darker and edgier or pure nostalgia fest for whatever era the creators like best. It can be done, I’ve seen it done.

On the other hand.

I remember the first time (and the second time) Kitty Pryde used the word “nigger”. I remember Wolverine gutting Phoenix. When Slaymaster assassinated the telepathes, when the Fury killed and killed and killed. When Captain UK wet herself. That was the eighties, when I was a boy, reading superhero comics.

The exposure to the child of aspects of the adult world through comics is something I appreciated when I was that side of the age divide, and something I’m having to consider in my own children’s development…

Jaime:

He was being passive-aggressive. It’s not wrong (as you seem to imply) for people to read into a passive-aggressive public statement to better understand what the hell the speaker is talking about.

The Batwoman and The Question, are both really good comics from what I’ve seen. They both featured old characters who’ve been recently developed into lesbians. Saying “oh, it wasn’t THIS, it was THAT” misses the entire point. His statements are a shot against BOTH, if you just look at what he SAID. Not what he claims to have MEANT. His words mean what they mean. He can recant, or he can dig his heels in, but he can’t tell me that left means right and north means west.

I don’t understand the J. Bone comments at all. “He didn’t mean to slag that character, he meant to slag this other, similar character.” What. Ever. Just another version of “Person doesn’t mean what they say when they’re confronted.”

I need to see evil dominatrix Mary Marvel.

Here you are.

As you might expect, reactions to the sexy version of Mary Marvel are mixed, but there are also pix of women dressed as Mistress Mary at comics cons.

SRS

Synsidar, you really need to have an irony detecter installed. Sigh.

As a fumetti creator, I can absolutely say that it’s not very expensive to make photocomics at all. There are a bevy of up-and-coming photographers with high-end digital cameras and full photo studios who don’t have monstrous hourly rates. And even more models who have very low fees.

I imagine that a larger publisher would incur larger costs as the production values ramp up, but it’s surprisingly easy to make fumetti on a shoestring budget, if you are willing to be creative.

Oh, there’s no doubt that many kids and teens enjoy the adult aspects of comics, Rich. There’s room for lots of different kinds of comics, it just would be great if it were slightly more obvious what sort of comic you were getting in the vast space between Batman: The Brave and the Bold and The Boys, you know? Surprise, entrails! is not a happy
moment.

Marvel apparently doesn’t do layered stories anymore, unfortunately.

One of my favorite Avengers storylines by Englehart was in WEST COAST AVENGERS. Mockingbird had been trapped in the past, kidnapped by the Phantom Rider, subjected to mind control, and (implied) raped. She eventually recovered her self-control and let the Rider fall to his death after a fight. When she got back to the present, there his ghost was, vowing to make her pay for letting him die.

The storyline presented ethical problems that I, at least, had never seen before. Two heroes had both erred, grievously, and there was no way of undoing the wrongs. The conflict was adult material, but it was a continuing subplot, while the main stories had the usual heroics. The material was still all-ages.

Doing sophisticated superhero storylines is probably a matter of having the proper background, training, and skills. Scientific literacy enables a writer to examine how a power works in detail and how it could be neutralized. Attention to details generally makes a story more involving and enables the writer to make small developments important, even critical, so when a climax or major development surprises a reader, he can be informed that “X” happened because a logical extension of his power enables him to do ____.

Recently, Ben Bova wrote a piece that criticized comics for lacking depth and plot development. He overgeneralized, unsurprisingly, but some commenters proceeded to jump on him without, apparently, realizing what his actual points were. Much of the power of fiction is in the details.

SRS

I’m a 33 year old male and I’ve long been on the side of Alan Moore and Darwyn Cooke on this one. Superhero comics should be all ages appropriate (i.e. content that could reasonably be read by anyone, not kiddie stuff). Chris Giarrusso’s G-Man comics are the perfect example – they’re funny, they’re smart, and none of the characters are taking heroin, talking about which superheroine they lost their virginity to, or bragging about which superheroines they’ve had threesomes with. The manga One Piece is another excellent example of all ages appropriate material.

I don’t read Marvel and DC stuff, but it seems to me the content is largely “superhero decadence,” or taking characters that were constructed to tell stories like One Piece or Bleach and making them “edgy” and “mature.” Swearing, gratuitous sex, and gratuitous violence for its own sake isn’t mature, yet that’s what most of these books seem to have.

I think the whole argument about which lesbian character Cooke was referring to is a bit of a strawman argument. It doesn’t matter – if a character was made a lesbian to appeal to the prurient interests of grown men, it’s an epic fail. (On the other hand, if it was done because someone was like – hey, let’s explore what it might be like to be a superhero who happens to be homosexual, it’s a win. It seems like there could be a lot of stories told about characters like that.)

Synsidar, you really need to have an irony detecter installed. Sigh.

Well, the popularity of Mistress Mary and the existence of Byrne’s Malice (a possessed Sue Storm) point out how writers cater, or pander, to tastes that might be better left unsatisfied. What real storytelling purpose does having a heroine go bad serve?

SRS

@Kate Fitzsimmons:

Hell F-ing Yes to your entire column, btw!! I agree with you 100% on every point you made.

“I’m going to come right out and say it — when you don’t know if a heretofore demure superhero title is going to dissolve into an orgy of rape and disembowelment in the next issue, it makes it that much harder to recommend to a new reader.”

YES!!!

The shame of it is, rape, children being forced to eat rats, explicit sex, and foul language can all be used in honest ways, to make a story more interesting. It just has to be done well. So to me this all boils down to, tell good stories… which in it’s self means different things to different people.

Sorry, if this has already been said in the comments, I didn’t take the time to read them all.

This Waid fellow, I like the cut of his jib.

I’m not sure if piracy is to blame for the current comic sales slump. This is a cycle that is created by businesses that put more effort into short term marketing tricks to spike sales quickly than trying to slowly build a dedicated customer base. Eventually the current marketing ploy is going to run its course and sales will drop until another plan gets put into action. Piracy may have an effect on sales, but not as much as a poorly conceived business model. On a slightly related note, the direct market replaced the newsstand, how can the direct market honestly believe that it will never be replaced?

Well, for me it’s content that’s to blame. I don’t want to read most of these books anymore, and I sure as hell don’t want my son to read them. Well, he’s three, so if he could read them it’d be a miracle… but I digress…

I don’t even know if I would ever download this crap if it wasn’t crap. Even the monthly format largely leaves me cold these days, due to the obtrusive advertisements that just yank me out of the story.

However, I’m a total sucker for pretty pretty hardcover collections. Don’t care about the cost- just design it well, make it sexy, and I’m there. Die cut dust cover with spot varnish? More please! No ads? uh, yes. Something to take to a con to get signed- forcing me to carry 100 pounds of books on my arm? Sign me up!

Glad most comics have crap content, cuz buying any more of these pretty hardcovers would sink my house…

I would say the cover price jumping 35% on a significant number of titles in a dismal economy might have more to do with the dreary sales than digital piracy.

…”but piracy has to be too”…

Except that’s a complete and total assumption.

But I do agree wholeheartedly with Gage’s statement that illegally downloading a comic is a vote for it to end. If it’s not worth your money, it shouldn’t be worth your time.

Why all this focus on piracy, though? Webcomics are digital comics, too. People read digital comics instead of print comics for two reasons: they’re free, and they’re fulfilling a demand that print comics are not.

Nobody reads something for free just because it’s there, though. At least not for long. Still, that’s a cause for concern with retailers.

But y’know, where are all the NON-genre books? Where are the humor books? They’re not really coming out of the print comics industry — and I don’t know how much of it’s because the publishers don’t print them, or because the retailers and distributor(s) don’t support them, but that’s something that needs to change.

I concur that it’s all about content. Most of what’s out there (I’m just thinking of the big two here cuz they drive the industry, though image and dark horse and others take cues from them), is ugly and inclusive and overthought.
Even in the grim n gritty days, I never thought I would see the day that had a cover with green arrow with an arrow through his head.
I’m no prude to violence but it seems that there is an exhausted contemptive vibe coming from most books.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: comic books aren’t going anywhere. Comic book retailers on the other hand…

Everything that the industry is afraid of right now has already happened in other entertainment industries, and in each situation each of those industries was able to find one or two avenues to harness digital sharing and usually able to find a new business model that works:

iTunes has cornered the market in music, TV and movie, and now e-book distribution. Amazon has done the same thing with physical media. Netflix and Hulu are close behind in digital video distribution.

Sometime in the next 2-3 years, Comixology or someone is going to find a comic book reader that works properly, and fans & companies will begin to migrate to that platform. As more people migrate, we’re going to see more and more retailers go under, just like we have with bookstores, music stores, and Blockbuster. But the industry and the major players in it will survive, and hopefully thrive.

Wow, Mark Waid is one hot looking blonde.

One quibble with Dan Brothers’ statements about Netflix (“Netflix doesn’t hold back on content, let publishers set ridiculous prices, or send customers to Blockbuster, so why should digital comics do the same?”).

Netflix *does* hold back on content.

They’ve signed multiple agreements with studios to delay renting certain DVDs for 28 days or more. Blockbuster has signed exclusivity agreements with those same studios. All of this is a bunch of people trying to protect the sales channels that have worked for them for 20 years or more.

As for allowing publishers (studios) to set ridiculous prices … anyone who thinks Netflix streams are going to remain so cheap in the future is, frankly, deluding themselves.

If Netflix wants to be on par with cable company offerings, they’re going to have to offer more money for licenses. Which means higher subscription rates for customers.

How does this relate to comics? It’s a similar licensing and retail channel problem. You can’t offer excellent prices online without alienating the hell out of your existing retail chain.

See also: http://www.google.com/search?q=netflix+signs+deal+delay+warner+brothers

@ John.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Sex change. It works.

Chike– “One quibble with Dan Brothers’ statements about Netflix (“Netflix doesn’t hold back on content, let publishers set ridiculous prices, or send customers to Blockbuster, so why should digital comics do the same?”).

Netflix *does* hold back on content.”

Perhaps Netflix and Hulu and other online media sites need to cater to the demands of businesses that still have semi-healthy sales channels, but the comic book industry doesn’t have this problem. The businessmen in the direct market need to realize that these new comic formats and methods of distribution will never be uninvented. They may still have the time to innovate and adapt, but if their only solution is to dig in their heels and “keep it real” then they will end up in the same situation as the mom and pop video rental stores and buggy whip manufacturers. Every technological innovation has upset the status quo at some time, and eventually the dust settles and the market stabilizes. Usually, the businesses left standing have been the ones that embrace change. Unfortunately the comic industry is one that has an almost pathological aversion to change.

@russ lowery – I think you raise a valid point but I disagree about some of your conclusions.

There’s no way for an independent retailer to participate in the new world order of digital distribution. They’re completely cut out of this model.

It’s not so much a “buggy-whip manufacturer” kind of problem. In a variety of ways, these guys offer a value that can’t be replicated online (serendipity, secondary markets, etc).

The difference with other goods — like software, music, or movies — is that the good itself is the same whether you buy a DVD/CD, rent from an independent, or stream something off Netflix.

The same goes for books. Text, aside from some editing and design issues, is just text.

But comics? Comics are a different beast. I’ve seen a lot of artwork and layouts recently that simply couldn’t work on a 10″ tablet screen, much less a smartphone screen.

So we’re entering a world where it’s not artists and publishers that will define the medium, it’s technology companies like Apple, Adobe and Amazon.

There are a lot of advantages to digital distribution, but I’m wary of worlds where DC’s “Wednesday Comics” or a one shot mini from Gabrielle Bell are less likely to exist, simply because technology dictates the market and the medium.

@Chike- I can understand your point of view, but I completely disagree with it.

Independent retailers are already competing in the market against free downloadable copies of all of the comics that they offer in their stores. In fact, they have been for years. Like you said, there are aspects of printed comics that do not translate well to a screen, and the stores that have been doing well have done so by focusing on these. Some have been catering to customer bases that are outside the realm of the traditional comic shop. Their market is changing whether they like it or not. It is their job to change with it, or find another business.

The argument about movies being the same whether you but the dvd, rent it from a store, or stream it online doesn’t take into account that the movie industry said the exact opposite when the television was invented. They thought that nobody would replace going to a theater with watching their movies on such a tiny screen. Nobody would give up the quality of film for digital recording. Nobody would want to buy movies when they could rent them cheaper. Who would ever rent movies by putting them on a list and waiting for them to come in the mail? All of these arguments are easily translated to comics.

Technology has always defined the comics medium. The advances in printing technology have improved every aspect of comics from how they are drawn to what colors can be used to make them. These artists and writers are reacting to the new technology and adapting their storytelling to the new tools that are available.

I have no problem seeing an industry where the artists can push the boundaries of a medium that has at the same time grown beyond the limitations of page width and length, but also that play to the strengths of the new screen size formats.

One of my beefs with the direct market is this:
no impulse buying.

Where I live, I need to order ANY comic or trade from Previews catalog, 2 months ahead. The store does not carry more than a copy or two of ANY comic to place on their shelf, and very seldom will it pull in a GN or Trade for instore sale.

With digital comics, I can go online, order, and get my comic right away.

Hey, I am the almighty customer!!!
I pay the salaries of the entire comic industry and the retailers, and the printers, and the delivery truck drivers.

The indutry needs to treat me with respect and retailers need to tell me how I benefit from buying my comic from them, instead of buying a digital copy online.

@John: Comment of the year.

@Al: You describe a problem most people try to brush aside yet is very real. A lot of comic stores, particularly in the MidWest, only order and stock Marvel and DC. I don’t want to read the catalog every month and create an order sheet – I just want to read the comic. Money isn’t the issue there, it’s how involved I have to be to have the opportunity to purchase an issue of RASL or Thrizzle.

Back to Chris Gage’s comment, I think the customer base being only 300,000 people, as stated by Boom comics at SDCC, is the problem. That’s just a tiny audience.

It’s gonna be an innnteresting world, w/ the electric publishing. I’m torn.

On the one hand, we creators who have made something up have to stay vigilant in protecting our rights, copyright, trademark, etc.

& on the other, you have a creator like Nina Paley (the animated flick “Sita Sings the Blues”, Depression is Fun, Mimi & Eunice), a truly self-made enterprise, who works free of copyright. Ms. Paley and I are FB acquaintances & one day I teased her itno telling me about how her last year was, fiscally. She did well, very comfortably. & she lets you download her movie for free. Yet it still gets screened in cities around the world & she makes money off of the merchandise.

People who are quick on their feet will wrangle a way, like Nina did, to distribute digitally as well as in print. Perhaps a happy medium between retaining rights to one’s characters but become more comfortable w/ free digital preview issues & stuff like that.

Comics is still the stuff, however we’re making them. Words and pictures.

There’s no shortage of views on the future of publishing.

Perhaps my views were shaped by the eras in which I grew up, but I have difficulty with the idea of expecting to make a living from writing or drawing for publication. There are just too many people with the same dreams. Being a successful fiction writer isn’t just a matter of being “good” in a critical sense; it’s being good and also finding an audience. If a writer’s exceptionally good and his books sell well, he lands a contract with a publisher and advances. A journalist can be a reporter, a columnist, or a contributing editor. He can also be a freelancer. Making a living by writing fiction might be closer to wanting to be a professional athlete than it is to “When I grow up, I want to be a _____.”

There’s recently been talk about the idea that E-book readers selling for under $100 will make them mass-market items. That means a bigger market for E-books, obviously; how paper publications will fare in that market remains to be seen.

SRS

http://adistantsoil.com/2010/08/27/colleen-doran-video-for-the-copyright-alliance/#comments Just thought I’d add this link from Colleen Doran’s site that encapsulates a lot of the problems Mark and Sergio cover.

used to be gung ho on Waid’s side… once compared Napster to the Boston Tea Party.. but.. I’ve matured to realize what Argones has to say. A lot of these down loaders, of which I am one, need to realize the market cannot exist if one free copy can lead to a free million copies within hours. It’s all fine and dandy until you come out with a comic and no one buys it because a thousand or more people downloaded the scan online.

Hell, I have to wonder if that’s one of a dozen reason reasons why Scott Pilgrim failed at the box office. Too many of its generation are too busy waiting for the free download and don’t bother with theaters. I’m on the latter end of that Napster generation. I was hitting college just as Napster hit, even lived across from the hall it was invented a year or so prior. I can’t imagine what kids now think with torrents and growing up in high school with torrents and other file sharing so readily established.

The click heard around the world has totally upset the entire market for the entertainment industry. And these generations have to realize their creations will be fighting for space just like the ones they’ve been downloading. It’s a whole new game and the rules are stacked against anyone trying to create anything in media and make any form of living doing so. Argones is right to cry out about the unfairness these kids, myself included, have thrust upon the world of entertainment and art. I used to laugh at that old ‘Don’t Copy That Floppy’ video or “You wouldn’t steal a car!”. Yet while crap like that is heavy handed, they’re not entirely wrong. And I’m sure Argones makes a better argument than the MPAA and RIAA suing high schooners and their unwitting grandmas for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

And yeah, the free web comics model where you pray someone donates or buys a goofy T shirt is interesting. Yet it’s pretty awful that they’ve been forced into it due to the digital gun of piracy. If they could make money selling actual comics online, why wouldn’t they? The situation stinks, even if people are scraping by with this model.

Now count me in for wanting an actual debate between the two on this. I’d love to see a clear moderated forum for them to discuss it.

I agree with Xenos and Aragones, the online model of publishing is too relient on the net. Quoting The Incredibles “If everyones super, then no one is”, Aside from our blood,sweat, and tears all we have is our work/ideas. If our ideas are up for grabs to anyone to distribute/use, then why should we create?

Speaking for my self the digital model is more a desperation move, changing the messenger does not change the demand of product. A Wal-Mart mom who doesn’t read comics is not going to buy a one because it’s online, we have no mass market products sell online. The industry is still selling chocolate-to-chocolate lovers and because the consumer-base of comics is so small the taste of comics is just as selective and uninclusive.

The current air of all entertainment media is familiarity(established franchises and sequels), with that said who’s going to thrive in this online model? sure as hell not the indies and manga(as long as the scanlators are around), only the most established of Marvel/DC properties will do good(maybe a few vertigo titles) but they are going to sell to the same people who bought them before. different model, same customers so whats the point?

Without having heard the original arguments: I agree with both sentiments, too. Copyright has been extended several times in this country under the guise of protecting living authors, when in fact it’s about corporations maintaining control over old material. Public domain IS an important concept and shouldn’t be trampled for the wrong reasons.

On the other hand, as creative people we do have to protect the rights of our material. That’s a bigger discussion. I don’t think the solution is lawsuits, and it’s certainly not trying to guilt downloaders (as the MPAA did with its ads showing key grips saying they wanted to feed their families).

No wonder the world economy has been on the brink this past decade… Free content, outsourced labor… Peopledont have Real jobs or careers anymore.

Scott Pilgrim failed at the box office because no one wants to see a movie about douche-bag slackers in the middle of a major recession. AND because it’s fans are a generation of pirates.

I’m with Waid on this. Content should be free. Make your art and love it and then show it to the world and hope they love it. Then sell some friggin’ toys and cash the check.

@ Jay but if your work is in public domain, you get no insentive for your hard work. if you have no insentive for your efforts then why should you create?

Aragones’s insistence on getting paid for something makes sense… if you’re in the position where people are already willing to pay you for it, sight unseen. Not everyone is yet.

If you aren’t, then at least owning your intellectual property makes sense.

Serhend, the incentive is that people will like your stuff and pay you for your various merchandising / print comics / theater showings.

This, true, would not apply to public domain, where anyone would be allowed to profit off of your work, but there are actually options between locked down DMCA hardcore copyright and public domain.

Allow me to introduce you to the many fine options at Creative Commons. Check the bottom of your favorite blogs, many have Creative Commons Copyright notice.

A creator can choose a wide variety of possibilities when licensing their content, allowing them to maintain their rights while still allowing for many free uses and creative reuse and remixing.

You can require that people attribute your work to you, that people use your work only for non-commericial purposes, that those people using your work have to then license the resulting products under the same licensing terms as yourself (share alike), or that people may quote you, but cannot alter your work (non-derivative).

In practical terms, it means you can share your work in some ways for free while retaining the option to be the only one to profit off of it, if you so choose.

Personally, my blog is licensed under Attribution – Noncommercial – Share-Alike terms, because that’s what works for me.

To the board:

I would like to raise a simple point and let you fight it out:

The internet as we know it is temporal.

Right now, we are at the beginning of something else. I think it’s like…an application-based internet. The app-er-net?

Some comic books like my own and those of your favorite big dudes Marvel, DC, Image and Dark Horse are available in situations like Comixology and the app-based storefront.

Similar to iTunes, they have (somewhat) managed the once-thought-impossible task of wrangling the “free content” genie back into the bottle and restoring control to the hands of the content-creators or copyright holders.

While bootlegging is still possible and is still occurring, a legal option with specifically-designed coding allows content-owners to not only curb piracy, but actually do what was thought impossible: charge money for digital content.

Think that over, dudes?

Also, to Jay, specifically: nothing is free. If creators don’t get paid, they cannot earn a living. Those of us who then do not have the time (or physical energy) to do this as a hobby will be forced away. The only thing that you’ll find “free” then is a world “free” from comics.

I think the issue is a lot more complex than picking one of two sides. And that was the crux of what Mark was trying to say last night.

Stop being afraid. Realize we exist in this world now and we can’t stop it. Let’s all talk and see how we can turn this to our advantage and thrive.

Personally, I think this very attitude is the only sane choice for comic professionals wanting to look forward.

If the reason things are created is for the money then dont friggin create. In fact get stuffed. I dont want your movies comics or any of that shit if that’s why you’re doing it!

Making money isn’t the only reason people make comics. But you can’t expect them to live on fancy wishes and fuzzy emotions. Everybody needs to pay for their groceries, and if no ones willing to pay people to make comics, then there might not be a reason to make comics.

Or at least, there might not be a reason to devote your entire life to making comics. Not everyone wants to work a 40 hour week at a dayjob and then make 30 pages of comics a month for you- there’s a reason many webcomics update slowly or sporadically. And even then, they’re not making the comics for you- they’re making them for themselves. They owe you nothing.

Well. of course I would do it for the money. If making comics is your chosen career, of course money is *A* primary concern.

Comics are a mass medium. Scott Pilgrim made the Top 100 at BN.com. The movie is seling the books, just like Dark Knight did a few years ago.

As for a dicussion on copyright in the digital realm, go read Corey Doctorow’s Content. Free downloads in a variety of formats (including Braille!)

Libraries have figured this out. Ebook publishers have figured it out. Some cartoonists have figured it out. There a lot of different business models, but if you control your copyright, you also control how you sell your creations.

I wonder… have any creators cancelled their copyright in their wills? Basically telling their estates not to challenge anyone…

“Note: It is possible that Marvel’s acquisition by Disney may have some impact on this project.”

As might, Dubai World’s recent plans to restructure the repayment of 26 billion dollars worth of debt, which managed to rock global financial markets last week (although that seems to have settled down a bit in the days since then.)

(Tangentially related, yesterday’s NPR’s “Planet Money” podcast discussed Dubai, interviewing a Canadian woman who’s worked in Dubai for a few years. It’s an interesting–and different from the usual–view of the place…)

I’d heard the total debt figure quoted as $60 billion. Wonder if the 26 is a subset of that.

I think that’s it exactly. this article talks about Dubai World having $60 billion in debt and that seems to indicate that this recent debt restructuring plan addresses $26 billion of that amount.

Thanks for the clarification, Ali.

As for Disney, I’d suspect there might be a buyout clause for use of the characters, assuming that Marveland is still in progress at this point. But when you’re talking about this much money, things get wacky and the rules change.

Wow, did anyone read this article from that site?

http://disneyandmore.blogspot.com/2009/05/why-disney-will-never-build-theme-park.html

Eye opening. I find the debt law portion of this article extremely ironic, given what’s now happening to Dubai, debt-wise. Perhaps they should all imprison themselves…. Ah, but that would never happen. (Dubai, personally, scares the crap out of me. I would never visit.)

How can you not love the idea of a theme park built on slave labor?

That article should be required reading for anyone who’s even heard of Dubai. Thanks for the link.

Advanced reading on the subject: EVIL PARADISES, which covers Dubai, Shanghai and more. From a decidedly Marxist perspective, though I think most of the material was written before the top of the bubble, so the gloating may be at a minimum.

As I’ve said from the beginning….everything in Dubai is full of fail!!! This is ridiculous that they are stull planning this!

You CANNOT, repeat C-A-N-N-O-T rescue nor create a country based on multibillion dollar tourism projects!

But we’re not going to be here in 2012.

Didn’t anybody see the movie? We have to open it in 2011!

~

Coat

I wonder what the Carl Ichan (spelling?) and Ron Perlman (spelling?) rides will be like?

WHAT?! Mark Coale is an actual person? Not some sock puppet Mary Jane pseudonymous bot worthy of a doctoral dissertation?! GawDAMN.

Next thing, you’ll be telling me Steve Ditko is a real person, too.

Excellent Joëlle Jones “You Have Killed Me” cover!

Ok, so where can I buy it if I wasn’t in Baltimore this weekend?

Yes, but they are “Limited Edition” Eggos! Hopeflly you didn’t actually plan to open and eat them! You need to save them so they’ll be worth a fortune someday! :^D

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!! Leggo My Eggos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They’ve been out for a couple of months now. I actually brought a package a while back, they taste just like normal Eggo’s.

Wha–? The box says “over 25 different images”…are there actual pictures on the actual waffles?

I now realize that Eggo waffles have always reminded me slightly of the brain cell alien creatures from TOS Operation: Annihilate…

Extra tasty when covered with Gagh!

The STAR TREK tie-in Eggo waffles started appearing on the shelves in March. BTW, frozen foods have expiration dates — I believe that’s a legal requirement — but the dates don’t really mean anything. As long as the food stays frozen, it’s okay to use. Thawing and refreezing food is risky, since bacteria can survive freezing.

SRS

Still, not as cool as the Star Wars toaster, but still, pretty cool! ;D

Hmm.. I know at least one friend who’d be happy to see Kirk and Spock together covered in maple syrup. And somehow I know there’s already fanfic out there for it.

Michael, was that a cheap attempt to revive the SW vs. ST rivalry? You nasty man!

Glad to hear they taste like normal Eggos. But judging by the drawing on the package, they look more like the 60s ST than the reboot version. What happened there?

Len, with or without me, it will always be there! ;P

Teehee!!

I get it!

I don’t

the Tiki

Just because a few people failed to turn on the automatic gush over recent corporate appointments.

On business deals and movie deals:

The Disney-Marvel deal and the DC reorg will give people the chance, perhaps, to see the differences between journalism as practiced by comic book e-zines and magazines, and the mainstream media. There would usually be profiles of Nelson and Levitz that examined their careers to date, got quotes from people, with attribution or without, and summarized their careers (as presidents) to date as successes , failures, or yet to be determined. Such profiles might appear in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, Salon, or other publications, but I doubt that critical profiles will appear in the comic book press. Of course, Nelson’s been moving upwards, so one wouldn’t expect to see much criticism.

I expect to see some articles, somewhere, about Disney-Marvel deal examining the price Disney is paying, just what it’s getting for $4 billion, and whether more than a handful of the Marvel characters really have much profit potential beyond their comic book roots.

Comic book fans who think about characters within the context of the shared universes they inhabit probably aren’t the best ones to evaluate whether they have mass appeal. Over at io9, they’ve been pushing for a Wonder Woman movie for some time, but there are no indications in the three articles that her fans can think of her as a genre character, instead of a comic book superheroine. Jodi Picoult’s take on the character is more accurate than anyone else’s because she’s willing to call ridiculous things (the costume, etc.) ridiculous. Contrary to what her fans say, she’s not well-adjusted; she can’t be, because her sex drive is abnormal or repressed.

When a comic book fan looks at the Hulk, he might see an exciting character, but all a screenwriter might see is someone (Banner) with a depersonalization disorder. Either it’s cured, and the Hulk disappears, or Banner dies from it. The disorder doesn’t provide the basis for a series.

If a generic superhero is a simple archetype, a screenwriter wanting to do good work won’t be satisfied with focusing on the basic qualities; he’ll focus on the aspects of the character that make him or her unique. If those aspects don’t make sense, in a genre fiction context, he’ll be unable to produce a good script. That’s probably why JLA, WONDER WOMAN, CATWOMAN, and other films, produced or unproduced, have reportedly been afflicted with script problems. A viewer can’t be expected to pay to see a movie that’s written on the basis that it’s installment #4 of a seven-part series.

SRS

“Comic book fans who think about characters within the context of the shared universes they inhabit probably aren’t the best ones to evaluate whether they have mass appeal.”

And yet, the shared universe is exactly the tack Marvel is exploiting in its current slate of films. It’s too early to tell if that strategy will work, but the sprinkles of cross-continuity in “Iron’Man” and “The Incredible Hulk” have certainly intruged fans and non-fans alike. So by building that continuity from the ground up, Marvel/Disney could potentially bring many more Marvel characters to the screen than they would using Warners’ isolated “stand alone” character movies.

That said, the PR about Disney having access to Marvel’s “5,000 character catalog” definitely raised some eyebrows. To paraphrase a Twitter comment by writer James Lileks, what…does that number include the crowd scenes from Kirby’s old Atlas monster stories?

Freaky Tiki,

I think the joke is that the main character’s full title is:

“She Who Must Be OBEYED!!”

It’s too early to tell if that strategy will work. . .

It certainly is, but after a few installments of IRON MAN, if the hero and his supporting cast stay the same, the creativity in the films will come from the choice of villains. Whiplash could bomb as a villain; he certainly won’t be used to promote the comic book.

BTW, in the io9 piece, “Why All The Wonder Woman Hate?”, Bendis was quoted as tweeting “Wonder Woman is a walking std farm!!”

I was thinking that the most likely basis for that remark is that he’s read WW porn, which usually has the heroine raped or gang-raped by the villain(s), with WW enjoying the sex despite herself.

SRS

Subtle.

Isn’t it funny that in her entire section of answers she manages to NOT name a single of those “valued creators”? I guess she could start with Jerry Sie… oooops.

Corporate speak, gotta love what’s not being said.

Funny how DC/Warner hire women figureheads without the slightest experience in comics - Fierman, Pohja and now Nelson (google their press releases announcements) I would say it’s because they’re blonde but that wouldn’t apply to Fierman and the lovely Karen Berger counter that theory or shall I say paranoia.

So when do people freak out and start paranoid theories about Warner Brothers eliminating the print comics?

New publisher? Off the top of my head, maybe Bob Wayne? He’s been a loyal acolyte for years…knows the biz….maybe he’ll get the nod. Or, maybe Robinov will bring in another member of his entourage who knows little to nothing about comics.

As for Nelson, the jury is still out….waayyyy out….on that move. Sure, her success with the Harry Potter property is impressive, but the Potter industry and the comics biz are *profoundly* different realms that require (corporate-speak alert) very specific “knowledge sets” to understand, much less manage or chart a future course for. Levitz “shadowing” Nelson for a period of time will certainly bring her up to speed to a certain extent…but when you replace the guy with comics in his DNA with an outsider (an incredibly accomlished outsider, but an outsider nonetheless), I don’t see the sunny future the PR campaign is painting.

In the corporate settings I’ve worked in for a few decades now, I’ve noticed that the high level executive class believes itself to be so hyper-competent, they can be brought in from anywhere, plug in, and thrive. Just recently, my education publishing company brought in a hot shot marketing guy from a scissor company…once again demonstrating that “widget” mentality that if someone can sell one thing, he or she can certainly sell another thing….despite the profound differences in the markets, demographics, industry knowledge, etc. Well, predictably Hotshot Scissor Guy crashed and burned…and I’m sure he’ll be replaced by someone else who has little to no deep knowledge of the industry I work in.

All of this to say, I see the same mentality at work with Nelson. The same false extrapolations seem to be at work (”Hey, if she could manage one fantasy character…Harry Potter…she can certainly manage hundreds of comic book superhero properties, right?”), as well as that same corporate hotshot belief that you can simply “bone up” or be a “quick study” on the new market you’re entering and succeed.

Sure…she could turn out to be another Jenette Khan and use her outsider status to DC’s advantage, but when you’ve got a shark like Robinov pulling her strings, it’s not likely.

Color me “wary”.

Change is scary.

Mark, it’s odd that you seem to think WB’s Harry Potter success is built on one character. The record profits brought in by the Potter franchise are a result of the ability to exploit it as a “universe” not a single character. That seems like precisely the kind of thing the DC universe needs.

Both Fierman and Pohja both have experience in publishing, and each was hired to meet the needs of their positions. As did Jenette Kahn when she was hired.

I am cautiously optimistic. The big question is not what Ms. Nelson will do as President of DCE, but who the new Publisher will be. There are at least two internal candidates with DC who would do well, which speaks well of Mr. Levitz’s tenure.

A-Rod: I guess I wasn’t thinking *literally* a single character….but more a single franchise with its own very unique market, in this case the Harry Potter franchise.

In that particular case, Nelson was dealing with and shepharding a single creator’s vision…a far cry from juggling hundreds of different characters, creators, and several unique (and sticky) ownership and legal issues (such as the ongoing Siegel and Shuster lawsuits). My point was that managing and marketing one fictional realm doesn’t necessarily mean that skill can readily and successfully translate to another (a depressingly common mentality within the ranks of high-level corporate types).

the ability to exploit it as a “universe” not a single character.

I know that I certainly enjoyed the Auntie Muriel movie.

//\Oo/\

I am curious: Does this effect Dan Didio in any way?

“What I bring to the party is a skill at moving properties and brands through Time Warner as a company.”

Right, but an integral part of effectively moving those brands and properties is a familiarity and understanding of them you don’t get from a new title on your business card.

Of course, if you subscribe to the “corporate widget theory” that doesn’t put much weight on deep knowledge of the product, Nelson’s presence shouldn’t be on any concern. However, having seen my share of execs with laughably shallow knowledge of the products they’re marketing, I’ll continue flying the yellow caution flag over the Nelson/Robinov news.

Diane seems okay, maybe after a while she’ll convert into a comic book fan. But it’s her BOSS that I’m worried about!!

Diane Nelson could very well turn out to be just what DC Entertainment needs, if the prime objective is making the DC characters appealing to audiences beyond comic book readers. The demographics for the “Harry Potter” readership and moviegoers are similar to the (desired) demographics for DC Comics readers. Nelson will also naturally use modern approaches for popularizing the “DC” brand.

Since Nelson’s specialty is brand management, here’s an example of an article on the subject.

I expect the new publisher, whoever that eventually is, to determine Dan DiDio’s future at DC.

SRS

I think it’s likely hat Nelson is not planning to manage DC Comics or its comic-book publishing operations on a day-to-day basis. Most likely like Disney with Marvel, as long as it’s making money and supporting its own operations, DC will be allowed to continue publishing its comics, if for no other reason than to continue producing the content that will be used for other platforms.

Nelson’s job will be to migrate those characters and their decades of content to other media and platforms.

How much authority and independence DC’s publisher will have in all this will be interesting to track, because he/she will be the medium between Nelson and WB and the editorial/creative side of DC–and that authority will be defined by Nelson/WB.

Is it me, or is Nelson getting more credit for Harry Potter than- I don’t know…- JK Rowling?

“But I’m the first one to admit, I’m not by my nature a comic fan.”

And is that really a bad thing? Someone who’s not brainwashed into thinking that things work the way that do because they do. Many organisational transformations (or marketplaces - look at the smartphone sector) occur because new blood comes in and say *why do we do things this way?*, *why does this process work this way?*.

[…] * A couple of addenda of yesterday’s DC demi-bombshell. First, Heidi MacDonald allows us to “Meet Diane Nelson.” The woman who’ll sooon be running DC spoke to Sharon Waxman at The Wrap and did joint interviews with soon to be former DC Comics president Paul Levitz for Comic Book Resources and Newsarama. Apparently part of the function is to reassure fans that the new DC will be “talent friendly” and that the highly regarded Levitz wasn’t too unhappy to be nudged aside after seven year’s in the prexy-seat. […]

@ Neep

Shush, you! J.K. Rowling had nothing to do with the sheer brilliance that was the foundation of Harry Potter’s success, as can be evidenced by the fact that the by the time Warner Bros got involved, after the third book, Harry Potter was already a global bestseller…. oh, wait. Hm, that’s right. The series was already a bestseller. Damn! Guess it was Rowling after all. Potter’s success is often falsely touted as a brilliantly executed marketing strategy, as if it was created in a high-tech cauldron, surrounded by marketing people cackling, hee hee hee, let us put in some magic, hee hee hee, some English boarding school drama, hee hee, the kids will love it.

Well, that is a myth. It was luck, a good story that connected with kids at the time, and it almost grew organically.

Let us take a closer look at the resume as presented in the PR release…

Prior to being named President, DC Entertainment, Nelson most recently served as President, Warner Premiere since its founding in 2006.

Warner Premiere is the direct-to-video label of Warner Home Video, itself the home video unit of Warner Bros. The first release under the Warner Premiere banner was the prequel The Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning. Their second title release was a sequel to the 1999 smash hit horror film House on Haunted Hill, titled Return to House on Haunted Hill. The label released Get Smart’s Bruce And Lloyd Out Of Control, a spin-off of the 2008 film Get Smart, on DVD and Blu-ray July 1, 2008. The film follows the adventures of the two tech experts from the first film, played by Masi Oka and Nate Torrence, respectively. It was written by the two writers of the previous film. On July 29th, 2008, Warner Premiere released Lost Boys: The Tribe, a sequel to the 1987 horror film The Lost Boys, on DVD and Blu-ray. Corey Feldman reprised his role of vampire hunter Edgar Frog; Corey Haim appeared in a cameo. Two upcoming Warner Premiere’s projects are The Clique movie, based on the best selling preteen novels by Lisi Harrison. To find the two lead roles, they have put a contest on website Sugarloot, where young girls have been uploading audition videos. The other being Scooby-Doo: In the Beginning, (a co-production of Cartoon Network) which is a prequel to the live-action Scooby-Doo films starring Sarah Michelle Gellar, Matthew Lillard and Freddie Prinze Jr.

I’m… really not impressed by that. Are you?

Before that, Nelson served as Executive Vice President, Global Brand Management, Warner Bros. Entertainment, with the primary responsibility of working cross-divisionally and throughout Time Warner to maximize and optimize all the various windows and outlets available to the Studio’s signature franchises, brands and event properties on a global basis. In this post, Nelson’s primary focus was the management of the Harry Potter brand, which she has overseen since the brand’s launch at the Studio in 1999. These efforts have helped drive the success of the brand to become the most successful film franchise of all time, as well as a respected consumer property that has generated billions of dollars for the Studio.

Ah, here he is. Harry Potter. Okay, so she was overseeing the more glorified licensing department from 1999 to 2006. Please note that it was only until 2006.

At Global Brand Management, Nelson and her team of more than 15 employees worked in all media and platforms to support a number of other key franchise properties, including “The Matrix Reloaded,” “The Matrix Revolutions,” “Batman Begins,” “The Dark Knight,” “Happy Feet,” “Polar Express” and “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” among others.

“Happy Feet” was released at the end of 2006. At which time Miss Nelson was already at her new job at Warner Premiere. So, by the PR release’s own definition, she didn’t oversee “Global Brand Management” on that. “Dark Knight” came out in 2008. Again, she was already President of Warner Premiere. I am not sure what brand management was successful for “Polar Express” (as we can see by the millions of toys, tie-ins and other marketing glory that movie has produced), the same for “Charlie and the Chcocolate Factory”. We can make a case for Matrix 2 and 3, because I remember how much crap was coming out along those films.

So, let us take a look at what she did and deduct Harry Potter. Take into account what she said and didn’t say in her first interviews. And it becomes clear that she is a hyped up corporate drone.

I suspect DiDio will be the next publisher at DC.

“I suspect DiDio will be the next publisher at DC.”

I think you’re right.

Nurf: Great reporting. Now I’m even more wary (”warrier”?)

Kids, you can only learn so much from press releases, take it from a veteran Kremlinologist.

I’m… really not impressed by that. Are you?

I take it you didn’t read Wikipedia’s description of Warner Premiere, or you’d have seen this:

In 2006, Warner Home Video announced they would enter the market of releasing original direct-to-video films, a market that has proven lucrative for studios over the past few years. They announced much of their output would be follow-ups to films that had done well at the box office theatrically, but wouldn’t be expected to do well if a sequel were to be made.

You damned the unit for doing what it was created to do, whether or not you agree with the business plan.

It might be more useful to highlight Warner Premiere’s promotional efforts, such as “One Eskimo”:

Big media companies talk about “breaking the silos” all the time, but often, it remains just that-talk-while content gets incubated and marketed by separate digital and traditional creative teams. With a new project called The Adventures of One Eskimo, though, Warner Bros. has actually tried to walk the “no silos” talk.

Described as a “visual album,” the project blends music, animation, digital distribution and social media-and teams from Warner Premiere, Warner Bros. Digital Distribution, and Warner Bros. Television collaborated on it from the start. Available on iTunes in September, the 10-episode animated series tells the story of a boy and his quest to win back his lost love, rock opera-style. [. . .]

I went to the exclusive launch event last night, and Eva Semple Davis, Warner Premiere’s SVP of acquisitions and business development, told me it was imperative that the company “pooled all of [its] assets to create a total music experience” from the start.

Hype aside, that’s an attempt to do something different. Writing off Nelson before she’s even put her people in place is unfair.

One thing that no comics publisher has had in the last several decades is a comics product that actually reaches a mass market. If Nelson could recruit the right talent and/or market comics in ways that sold hundreds of thousands of copies, she’d be a major benefactor for the industry.

SRS

The reason why the press release brushes over the past three years of Miss nelson’s career is simply this, as President of Warner Premiere she did exactly what she is supposed to do now at DC Entertainment, namely tying together “franchises” for new product. In other words, she was the GG, and for those those who don’t know the term, that’s the “Greenlight Guy”. So, what product WAS made and how successful that product was reflects immediately on her taste, her skills and the way she made her decisions.

Now, personally, I don’t care for her one way or another, but I find it irksome when everybody is having starry eyes the moment they hear “Harry Potter”, wow, she must be really great then, right? And no, this is not Kremlinology, it is called research, quite simple, really. You know, it’s what journalists are trained to do, or at least used to, before re-printing a press release became “journalism”. Looking at the numbers and putting them into context..

Get Smart’s Bruce and Lloyd Out of Control - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 143,609

Lost Boys: The Tribe - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 285,820

Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 104,199

In the DVD market, as abysmal as it has become, those numers are still… abysmal. And the fact that not a single one of those things made it onto the press release means they know that this is not something they can throw to the analysist (the public won’t care one way or another) and make it look good.

The reason why this is important? Simple. In her entire career, the Warner Premiere gig was the first time Miss Nelson was fully responsible for the output, positioning and marketing of the product.

Let’s say this again: Harry Potter, Harry Potter, Harry Potter… she must be great, Harry Potter, Harry Potter, Harry Potter.

In the DVD market, as abysmal as it has become, those numers are still… abysmal.

Nurf, there’s so little context for that assertion that it’s effectively meaningless. Doing research means providing supporting evidence for one’s statements.

You’re coming across like a right-wing pol talking to his buddies about those dreadful Democrats who expects them all to say, “Yeah, you’re right. They’re Democrats! No one should vote for them.”

SRS

guess I haven’t actually learned my lesson…

“I’m… really not impressed by that. Are you?”

Yes, actually.

“‘Dark Knight’ came out in 2008. Again, she was already President of Warner Premiere.”

Yes, but that film was likely being prepped in 2006 if not 2005 and she was likely Nolan’s contact (or at least one of them) within Warner. From what I’ve read, she seems really keen on working with the PEOPLE behind the product. This is why the Harry Potter and Dark Knight info is important. She seems responsible for making sure Rowling and Nolan were happy and taken care of and that has resulted in heaping mounds of cash for Warner.

“And it becomes clear that she is a hyped up corporate drone.”

So she fits right in with all the other corporate drones. Congratulations, you just put out the welcome mat. Despite a frequent claim to wanting “outside the box” thinking, corporate employees never think outside the box because the box is the corporation and thinking outside the box could lead to a reduction in profit which will get you fired. Hence, they’re drones. Some drones are better than others. Nelson might be one of the better drones, and I see nothing about her that says otherwise.

“I suspect DiDio will be the next publisher at DC. ”

If you see another post I made, that’s pretty much what I was getting at without naming names. Publisher and EIC… unless there’s some rule that prevents a single person from holding both of those titles. Or it’ll be some VP who becomes VP of somethingerother and DC Comics Publisher.

“Get Smart’s Bruce and Lloyd Out of Control - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 143,609

Lost Boys: The Tribe - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 285,820

Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 104,199

In the DVD market, as abysmal as it has become, those numers are still… abysmal.”

You think so, eh? I bet all of those DVDs made a profit. 104, 199 at half of retail is probably $1, 041, 990.00. Not too bad for a DVD prequel without Jessica Simpson’s attributes to sell it. Also, I find it hard to believe it only sold 104k to date…first week, I believe, but it’s possible that it’s “to date.” But let’s not forget that other Direct to DVD product from the studio fits right in with her new job–Batman: Gotham Knight, Superman: Doomsday, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, New Frontier…. Ever think that maybe her handling of THOSE properties (in addition to all her other accolades) is a major factor in getting her this new job?

A lot of people seem to be speaking out of fear for their precious comic books. Her job seems to me to be making more money from the fact the Warner owns DC Comics which is overflowing with Intellectual Properties ready to be exploited in every which way. The monthly publication of comics will probably serve no purpose in her eyes except as an assembly line of potential stories for utilizing elsewhere. This could be a bad thing, but in and of itself, I don’t think it deserves some of these fearful reactions. Give her a chance.

….and THEN grab the torches.

What’s with the “fearful” label…other than cloaking (and invalidating) genuine skepticism as something irrational? I don’t sense any fear whatsoever from Nerf’s posts…and actually find his effort to do some digging rather refreshing, especially in light of all perpetual moaning about the lack of “real comics journalism”. Hats off to Nerf for going beyond the press releases and getting a better picture of Nelson’s track record. Nerf’s right…the “Harry Potter” bit is being used like a crucifix to Dracula to ward off reasonable skepticism…which is certainly warranted when an experienced veteran like Levitz is vacating the position.

And Synsidar…what the hell is with the political allegory? Anyone who does some digging or doesn’t agree with the group-think is somehow a grumpy Republican? Geez.

And Synsidar…what the hell is with the political allegory?

Reflexive cynicism — the “corporate drone” comment — isn’t an improvement over groupthink, but party loyalists, such as Limbaugh, routinely indulge in it. If a Democrat has an idea or is doing something, it’s bad or wrong.

Nelson has to be given the opportunity to do her job before one concludes she can’t do it — and her critics can’t even say what that job is at this point.

SRS

Back in 2006, MIT hosted a conference titled “Futures of Entertainment.” The panelists included Diane Nelson, speaking about “Fan Cultures,” and Paul Levitz, speaking about “Transmedia Properties.” There are audio and video recordings of the panel sessions.

SRS

More from Nelson, on promoting the HARRY POTTER films:

An exception is the “Harry Potter” franchise, which had only one promotional partner, Coca-Cola, for the first two movies, and none for the last two.

That’s in part because “Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling went on record stating that “fast-food kids meals would be her worst nightmare,” said Diane Nelson, executive vice president of global brand management for Warner Bros. “She made it clear she had an aversion to it. “We … decided internally it was not the right way to approach the brand.”

Nelson said Warner Bros. planned to continue fast-food tie- ins to promote other films, and noted that the industry now offered more healthful alternatives to give people a choice.

“We are certainly conscious and watching the situation with childhood obesity and how that is being tied in with our business…. It’s important to be responsible.”

That said, Nelson added, “we’re not going to walk away from the category.”

Some points and counterpoints on the handling of “Harry Potter”:

We have to be very careful to not exploit, not over commercialize, not take it from the kids and turn it into something that it’s not,” says Nelson.

There are critics, though, who say they already have. “What they’re doing to Harry Potter is making it another widget inside the larger corporation,” says Aurora Wallace, a professor at New York University’s Culture and Communications Department. “It’s not about magic, fantasy or wizardry even, it’s about selling more subscriptions.”

“They know that if you want to get the inside track on Harry Potter that you’ve got to be an AOL subscriber, you’ve got to turn to Entertainment Weekly, you’ve got to turn to Time magazine, you’ve got to buy the soundtrack on Atlantic records,” she adds.

Nelson doesn’t agree. “I think as long as we are true to the books, that’s something that can co-exist quite nicely,” she says. “The fans will see an expression of the books in the film and the video and the merchandise hopefully that they think is true and respectful of the initial book. But at the same time Warner Bros. will be building something that will help our business.”

One more, on Nelson and “Harry Potter” fans:

Warner Bros., which once tried to shut down many of the fan sites because of copyright concerns, has invited Spartz and others to the sets of Potter films and premieres, valuing their expertise and, of course, their access to so many fans.

“When we have brought representatives from some of the key fan sites and showed them the details for the film sets, even if some of them were disappointed that we had left out certain elements from the books, they respected what we were trying to do,” says Diane Nelson, Warner Bros.’ executive vice president for global brand management.

“We’re not naive enough to think we’re going to avoid criticism, but bringing the fan sites into the process is what we feel is really important.”

Great stuff, Synsidar…thanks for the additional insight!

An interesting tidbit:

““She (Rowling) made it clear she had an aversion to (Harry Potter fast food kids meals). “We … decided internally it was not the right way to approach the brand.”

Very interesting. Apparently, Warners COULD have went ahead and did Harry Potter kid meals, but voluntarily deferred to Rowling’s “aversion” (stopping short of classifying it as Rowling forbidding it).

@Nurf : What’s the deal with this one? You said:

Looking at the numbers and putting them into context..

Get Smart’s Bruce and Lloyd Out of Control - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 143,609

Lost Boys: The Tribe - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 285,820

Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning - DVD Sales
DVD Units Sold: 104,199

I see absolutely no context whatsoever. Furthermore you would need to know what the company’s IPAs for those projects were and what their profit and sales projections were before you could make a judgment on their relative success or failure.

And what is with the constant crticism of extemely successful entertainment properties? The Polar Express (which you claim is a failure because YOU personally didn’t see any PE toys in your happy meal) is the 12th highest grossing G rated movie of all time and the highest grossing G rated movie WB has ever had. I’m not sure what you mean when you talk about real journalism, but personal annecdotal evidence is not considered real journalism either. Also we’re called analysts not analysists.

“What’s with the “fearful” label”

Judging someone before there’s even anything other than what’s on the surface to judge.

There’s another word for that–prejudice. Prejudice is a result of fear. Hence, fearful.

Too bad you couldn’t get a scan of one of the issues of “The Comic Reader” that Paul actually edited (his last issue was TCR #100).

For the sake of posterity, one of these days I’ll have to scan all the covers of all of my old ‘zines and post them on line so this era’s fans can have some idea what came before. I may even post the TCR index I compiled in 1990 for my ‘zine “Maelstrom” #6 (with some of Paul’s help, I might add).

Too bad you couldn’t get a scan of one of the issues of “The Comic Reader” that Paul actually edited (his last issue was TCR #100).

Well, above is an editorial Levitz wrote for TCR #100. Thank Scott Edelman.

SRS

Ah, memories.

By the way, the name on that “Fourth World Nuts” comic strip at the bottom of the page — Carl Gafford — caught my eye. Carl was a fan back in 1973, when TCR #100 was published, but, like Paul, he also went on to become a pro in the comics business. Carl did the coloring work for the “Steve Canyon” 50th anniversary strip I wrote and drew for the “Air Force Times” in 1997.

We were also both long-time members of the APA-zine, CAPA-alpha, founded by the late Dr. Jerry Bails in 1964, and which is still being published today. As a matter of fact, if my calculations are correct, CAPA-alpha should be on issue #563 this month, which by coincidence, happens to be their 45th anniversary issue!!!

Ah, memories…

Oops! I’m a month off. October will mark the 45th anniversary of CAPA-alpha.

Hmmm… Just out of curiosity, I’m going to go back and do a little research and see if Paul Levitz was ever a member of CAPA-alpha. I know a number of his contemporaries at DC were, such as Neal Pozner.

it’s all Grant Morrison’s fault for making the DCU a sentient being. it went up and made *WB* sentient of what a pretty thing it had in its pocket all this time.

Russ: If Paul was in K-a it was only for a brief time. I think he was in Chuck Spanier’s NYapa and he was definitely a member of a Legion apa for quite a while.

I just checked the membership list posted in the 30th anniversary issue of CAPA-alpha (#360, 1994), and Levitz was never a member.

But some guy named Paul Kupperberg was…

;)

[…] Since Wednesday’s announcement, there have been a large number of posts looking back on the career of Paul Levitz, and all of them sounding like his career is over.  Throughout the posts, there seems to be an overture of career death when it comes to him.  Though Heidi catches herself,  he’s a guy rejoining the ranks of company he’s most comfortable with. […]

Intellectual property talks. Everything else walks.

Man, there are some terrible films on that list (and a couple of quite good ones, thankfully.)

But you’re right, it does show why corporations are so interested in acquiring recognizable properties, doesn’t it?

SHREK was technically an adaptation of William Steig’s 1990 children’s book.

If only Marvel could have gotten a piece of the Transformers back when they basically created that universe for them.

Marvel named Optimus Prime after all.

Studios should only invest in Genres whose names begin with the letter “A”.

Surely the Lord of the Rings movies should be on any top 20 grossing list for the 2000s. They place higher than some of these at Box Office Mojo.

Yeah, I’m not sure why LOTR isn’t on there. Return of the King would fall right after Transformers 2, and Two Towers after Spider-Man 2 and Fellowship after Indy 4.

So that, and you know, the first Harry Potter movie isn’t even listed and it made the most out of all of them.

So not entirely sure how reliable this list is…

Also, we probably shouldn’t get locked into thinking that movies are the be-all and end-all of how Disney and Warner want to better exploit Marvel and DC.

I’m sure video games are a big part of this kind of thinking. At a time where a Halo or a Gears of War can bring in revenue comparable to any Hollywood blockbuster, and a lot of folks expecting a lot from this new Batman: Arkham Asylum game, I’d bet there are a lot of hopes of using these characters in video games independent of any movie.

The real list according to BoxOfficeMojo.com:

1. The Dark Knight
2. Shrek 2
3. Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace
4. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest
5. Spider-Man
6. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
7. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith
8. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
9. Spider-Man 2
10. The Passion of the Christ
11. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
12. Finding Nemo
13. Spider-Man 3
14. Shrek the Third
15. Transformers
16. Iron Man
17. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
18. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
19. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
20. Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones

Lotta geek fodder there. Just sayin’.

Well, the Pixar flicks, Dark Knight, Iron Man, Spidey 2 and Potter were pretty good/not bad/admirable what-have-you… but yeesh, what a strange list… and yup, Lord of the Rings is missing.

Now we know why they keep going after all these properties, save for Pixar and that might be changing if they make a Marvel flick as rumored.