DC vs. Marvel - the unresolvable problem

Originally posted by roughrider
You know why they lost momentum? Because they were counting on the Green Lantern movie to be a breakout hit in 2011, expand the appeal of DC to non comics fans, and it would have coincided with the debut of The New 52. They would have had the kind of synergy Marvel has going on right now, releasing anywhere between 2-4 movies a year. When GL flopped critically and commercially, there was nothing but the comics, one new movie that came out two years later (Man Of Steel), and now the next DC Universe movie doesn't come out until 2016.

I knew Grant Morrison was tempting fate when he named that series Final Crisis. DC gets restless too quickly. They will do some major shakeup in time for the release of Batman vs. Superman, I Think.

Both companies lose momentum and quickly at that. Look at Marvel NOW's sales and how they quickly renumber books and start events rapidly one after another. DC has been seeing an increase in sales, overall, and this is why they will NOT do another reboot. Sales are fine. It's the smaller companies that are gaining, too.

Originally posted by Golgo13
DC has been seeing an increase in sales, overall, and this is why they will NOT do another reboot.

I'll remember your quote. 😉

If they choose to reverse The New 52 in the same way Marvel once did the Heroes Reborn universe, I'm counting it as another reboot.

Originally posted by roughrider
I'll remember your quote. 😉

If they choose to reverse The New 52 in the same way Marvel once did the Heroes Reborn universe, I'm counting it as another reboot.

I'm just guessing. DC has never done two close reboots together. 2 Major ones in their entire publishing history.

Like I said earlier, I can see them bringing back the Pre-Flashpoint timeline (I miss those characters, but I hope they don't do that.)

Remember in 2015 will be the 30th anniversary of the Crisis and we already saw the Anti-Monitor at the end of Forever Evil.

Having a being like the Anti-Monitor active - who eats entire universe and dimensions - it's the perfect tool to cause another shakeup in DC history.

You can have a shakeup and not have a complete reboot.

Btw, if they DO a reboot and bring back the pre flashpoint timeline, you can probably thank Geoff Johns. He tweeted a few days ago that he misses writing the JSA.

Really?
As just a fan, not a writer, i can see a lot of good things that came from the New52. Some bad, too.
But, as a writer, there are few things worse than being stuck writing what you dont like.

Originally posted by riv6672
Really?
As just a fan, not a writer, i can see a lot of good things that came from the New52. Some bad, too.
But, as a writer, there are few things worse than being stuck writing what you dont like.

Yeah, i really like what has spun out of the 52. Its not petfect, but no company is. All johns said is that he misses the JSA. A lot of fans do. Not that he hates the 52.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Yeah, i really like what has spun out of the 52. Its not petfect, but no company is. All johns said is that he misses the JSA. A lot of fans do. Not that he hates the 52.

We just need more time to let go eventually we'll accept it more

Originally posted by Lek Kuen
I can't know for sure as I wasn't around at the time, but it does seem people forget that post crisis wasn't the original universe when they flip out about how the reboot shows how stupid dc is and how it could never work. I'd bet that people were pretty made post COIE at first too as people always are after these things. Assuming the editors stop being dicks and let the writers really stretch there legs (as well as bring in more fresh blood for the new stuff) I think once more time has passed it will be fine.

Yup.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Yeah, i really like what has spun out of the 52. Its not petfect, but no company is. All johns said is that he misses the JSA. A lot of fans do. Not that he hates the 52.

Given how other writers have flat-out ignored his directives, I'd be mad if I were him.

Originally posted by roughrider
Having a being like the Anti-Monitor active - who eats entire universe and dimensions - it's the perfect tool to cause another shakeup in DC history.

AM is around in SCW and IC, and neither of those were reboots.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Hmm, never thought of that. They could reintroduce Pre-Flashpoint universe.

Anyway, why do you think DC doesn't have diversity? I think that's wrong. DC has had numerous war books, a western, they have produced more street level books, since the 52 started, more magic/super natural, space books, etc..

There's much less variety in author voice, and much more a house style.

Look at Daredevil, Hawkeye, She-Hulk, Uncanny X-men, Moon Knight, Ms. Marvel, and Uncanny Avengers. Each of these books is different from each other in basic style. Marvel, basically, gives the authors a lot of room to stretch their wings without dictating style too much. They make sure things fit together planning wise- better than DC even, continuity tends to mesh well- but how they get to point A to point B and in what style is very much left to the individual creative team.

Daredevil, Hawkeye, and Moon Knight. These three are all street level, but they are *drastically* different. Daredevil is heroic, often light-hearted, with serious stories in there, but also often weird foes and a fun feel. Hawkeye is extremely low-level, often slice of life-y, focusing on the low powered adventures between Avengers stuff, where the neighborhood's mobsters are a continual problem. Moon Knight.... Moon Knight is a detective, and he's crazy. His missions are weird, and the style is stark. Moon Knight isn't even 'colored' white, the artist simply doesn't fill in his white areas, he is an absence in the page, and he has an egyptian god speaking in his head.

DC has more street titles, but they don't have near that variety of *style* between all of them but together.

DC books, while they have a few in different genres, give a lot less openness to other styles. Their superhero books resemble each other a lot more. The writers don't get to stretch their voices as much.

I'll mention two DC books that very much do/did have their own style: Wonder Woman, and Batwoman with the old team. Batwoman looked like nothing else in the line. Wonder Woman doesn't. But the others? There's far more resemblance across titles, because the editors instruct and edit the writers to keep them more in the house style. And when Wonder Woman's team leaves, you can bet you'll see art more like Superman And Wonder Woman or Justice League, and it's tone is going to change.

-PR-

The New 52 had a rocky start both on panel and off, but it did give us some really good books. They just need to keep it up while improving the books that have been falling behind.

DC has faced a lot of controversy too, which didn't help (though I honestly don't think all of it was warranted).

A problem is, saleswise, if it's not Superman, Batman, Justice League, or a few other individual titles, it is sliding down. The gap between the big books and everyone else is too big.

DC can have 5 issues of Batman Eternal in the top 10, put out the same number of books, and still be behind 16% in market share (this April, that happened). That's how bad it is. A good

The controversies and writer changes of a lot of the minor ones have gotten people convinced that they can't count on writers in minor ones finishing their stories. They don't think DC thinks any but the big two are important so they don't trust 'em, in short.

I can't imagine that things after COIE were smooth, though. That was a far bigger shift in the status quo than the N52 has been.

Compared to now? Things kept together much better. That was an 'up' era, the reason why reboots even caught on.

The reboots of Superman (Bryne's Man of Steel) and Wonder Woman (George Perez) and Flash (Wally taking the helm) were popular and successful, and other books went along fine or picked up sales too.

Even though it was a big shift in status quo, business wise it was much smoother sailing.

Nu52 started out with big sales across the board, but those problems are killing sales of all but the core titles and a few exceptions.

RoughRider

You know why they lost momentum? Because they were counting on the Green Lantern movie to be a breakout hit in 2011, expand the appeal of DC to non comics fans, and it would have coincided with the debut of The New 52.

This, I doubt. Comic movies may inspire a few people to move over, but they rarely significantly boost, or harm, comic sales.

The failure of Green Lantern hurt the DC movie universe, but not the comic one.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Both companies lose momentum and quickly at that. Look at Marvel NOW's sales and how they quickly renumber books and start events rapidly one after another. DC has been seeing an increase in sales, overall, and this is why they will NOT do another reboot. Sales are fine. It's the smaller companies that are gaining, too.

Uh, Marvel's actually at a 17+ year high. In April, they produced the same number of books as DC and beat them in market share by 16%. Which is further from DC than DC was from Image (Image is also doing well right now, btw).

May, DC put out 87 comics to Marvel's 74, still lost in market share by 4%, and this is a *good* month for DC.

This is a rather one sided state of affairs, honestly.

Marvel has, with Marvel Now, announced they're doing a 'season' strategy, where they do a run with one creative team, a complete story, end it, then start with a new #1 and possibly the same creative team, maybe a different one, but a new direction in any case.

Marvel Now is a rousing success that's causing marvel to, proverbially, 'rake in the money.'

Originally posted by Golgo13
Btw, if they DO a reboot and bring back the pre flashpoint timeline, you can probably thank Geoff Johns. He tweeted a few days ago that he misses writing the JSA.

As one of the architects and brains behind the Nu52, making both the JLA and the Lantern corners of it, I doubt he'll be a primary cause. He may miss the JSA, but he's also not one of the opponents of the Nu52 by any means.

If they do reboot, it's more likely going to be due to sales. And possibly a major change in management, corporate cannot be happy.

Originally posted by Q99
There's much less variety in author voice, and much more a house style.

Look at Daredevil, Hawkeye, She-Hulk, Uncanny X-men, Moon Knight, Ms. Marvel, and Uncanny Avengers. Each of these books is different from each other in basic style. Marvel, basically, gives the authors a lot of room to stretch their wings without dictating style too much. They make sure things fit together planning wise- better than DC even, continuity tends to mesh well- but how they get to point A to point B and in what style is very much left to the individual creative team.

Daredevil, Hawkeye, and Moon Knight. These three are all street level, but they are *drastically* different. Daredevil is heroic, often light-hearted, with serious stories in there, but also often weird foes and a fun feel. Hawkeye is extremely low-level, often slice of life-y, focusing on the low powered adventures between Avengers stuff, where the neighborhood's mobsters are a continual problem. Moon Knight.... Moon Knight is a detective, and he's crazy. His missions are weird, and the style is stark. Moon Knight isn't even 'colored' white, the artist simply doesn't fill in his white areas, he is an absence in the page, and he has an egyptian god speaking in his head.

DC has more street titles, but they don't have near that variety of *style* between all of them but together.

DC books, while they have a few in different genres, give a lot less openness to other styles. Their superhero books resemble each other a lot more. The writers don't get to stretch their voices as much.

I'll mention two DC books that very much do/did have their own style: Wonder Woman, and Batwoman with the old team. Batwoman looked like nothing else in the line. Wonder Woman doesn't. But the others? There's far more resemblance across titles, because the editors instruct and edit the writers to keep them more in the house style. And when Wonder Woman's team leaves, you can bet you'll see art more like Superman And Wonder Woman or Justice League, and it's tone is going to change.

A problem is, saleswise, if it's not Superman, Batman, Justice League, or a few other individual titles, it is sliding down. The gap between the big books and everyone else is too big.

DC can have 5 issues of Batman Eternal in the top 10, put out the same number of books, and still be behind 16% in market share (this April, that happened). That's how bad it is. A good

The controversies and writer changes of a lot of the minor ones have gotten people convinced that they can't count on writers in minor ones finishing their stories. They don't think DC thinks any but the big two are important so they don't trust 'em, in short.

Compared to now? Things kept together much better. That was an 'up' era, the reason why reboots even caught on.

The reboots of Superman (Bryne's Man of Steel) and Wonder Woman (George Perez) and Flash (Wally taking the helm) were popular and successful, and other books went along fine or picked up sales too.

Even though it was a big shift in status quo, business wise it was much smoother sailing.

Nu52 started out with big sales across the board, but those problems are killing sales of all but the core titles and a few exceptions.

This, I doubt. Comic movies may inspire a few people to move over, but they rarely significantly boost, or harm, comic sales.

The failure of Green Lantern hurt the DC movie universe, but not the comic one.

Disagree on this. Look at some of DC's titles like Harley Quinn, Detective Comics (the new team), Green Arrow, etc... All have their own tone and are different from one another. Quinn is a Deadpool, slapstick, funny book. Detective Comics is all about detective work for Batman in contract to Snyder's book, and Arrow is mystic kung fu style, which is awesome.

Then you have books like Green Team and Movement, which all had their own voice, too.

And books you just mentioned in Batwoman and WW. DC has just as much variety, IMO. And we're not even including Vertigo, which is under DC as well.

Marvel's sales slide down as well. Look at a book like FF or Fantastic Four, which gets in the top 5, then slides all the way near 50 the next month. Marvel NOW's sales are dipping as was seen in a report at CBR. The constant events and renumbering inflates sales.

Originally posted by Q99
Uh, Marvel's actually at a 17+ year high. In April, they produced the same number of books as DC and beat them in market share by 16%. Which is further from DC than DC was from Image (Image is also doing well right now, btw).

May, DC put out 87 comics to Marvel's 74, still lost in market share by 4%, and this is a *good* month for DC.

This is a rather one sided state of affairs, honestly.

Marvel has, with Marvel Now, announced they're doing a 'season' strategy, where they do a run with one creative team, a complete story, end it, then start with a new #1 and possibly the same creative team, maybe a different one, but a new direction in any case.

Marvel Now is a rousing success that's causing marvel to, proverbially, 'rake in the money.'

As one of the architects and brains behind the Nu52, making both the JLA and the Lantern corners of it, I doubt he'll be a primary cause. He may miss the JSA, but he's also not one of the opponents of the Nu52 by any means.

If they do reboot, it's more likely going to be due to sales. And possibly a major change in management, corporate cannot be happy.

Marvel has always been the #1 company in terms of sales. DC usually rules the top 10, but the difference from Marvel is their secondary characters always sell better. That's not a knock, DC's sales have increased to 7% in the last few months, which is good and closing the gap.

Originally posted by Golgo13
but the difference from Marvel is their secondary characters always sell better.

I disagree there

if some of them sell better then why do they get cancelled 🙄

Thats a subject i've commented on.
In todays quick turn around world, both Companies IMO, dont give new books a chance to find an audience, axing books way too soon.
As an analogy, now classic sitcoms like Seinfeld, Cheers, and All in the Family initially got ratings that experts say would have gotten them cancelled prior to one whole season today.

Okay, rant over.

Originally posted by Q99
There's much less variety in author voice, and much more a house style.

Look at Daredevil, Hawkeye, She-Hulk, Uncanny X-men, Moon Knight, Ms. Marvel, and Uncanny Avengers. Each of these books is different from each other in basic style. Marvel, basically, gives the authors a lot of room to stretch their wings without dictating style too much. They make sure things fit together planning wise- better than DC even, continuity tends to mesh well- but how they get to point A to point B and in what style is very much left to the individual creative team.

Daredevil, Hawkeye, and Moon Knight. These three are all street level, but they are *drastically* different. Daredevil is heroic, often light-hearted, with serious stories in there, but also often weird foes and a fun feel. Hawkeye is extremely low-level, often slice of life-y, focusing on the low powered adventures between Avengers stuff, where the neighborhood's mobsters are a continual problem. Moon Knight.... Moon Knight is a detective, and he's crazy. His missions are weird, and the style is stark. Moon Knight isn't even 'colored' white, the artist simply doesn't fill in his white areas, he is an absence in the page, and he has an egyptian god speaking in his head.

DC has more street titles, but they don't have near that variety of *style* between all of them but together.

DC books, while they have a few in different genres, give a lot less openness to other styles. Their superhero books resemble each other a lot more. The writers don't get to stretch their voices as much.

I'll mention two DC books that very much do/did have their own style: Wonder Woman, and Batwoman with the old team. Batwoman looked like nothing else in the line. Wonder Woman doesn't. But the others? There's far more resemblance across titles, because the editors instruct and edit the writers to keep them more in the house style. And when Wonder Woman's team leaves, you can bet you'll see art more like Superman And Wonder Woman or Justice League, and it's tone is going to change.

Honestly, while I agree that DC does watch over its writing staff far too closely, I often feel that Marvel doesn't do it as much as they should.

Giving writers freedom is one thing, but if there's no accountability, then it's going to make fans just as unhappy, imo.

A problem is, saleswise, if it's not Superman, Batman, Justice League, or a few other individual titles, it is sliding down. The gap between the big books and everyone else is too big.

DC can have 5 issues of Batman Eternal in the top 10, put out the same number of books, and still be behind 16% in market share (this April, that happened). That's how bad it is. A good

The controversies and writer changes of a lot of the minor ones have gotten people convinced that they can't count on writers in minor ones finishing their stories. They don't think DC thinks any but the big two are important so they don't trust 'em, in short.

they do suffer, and it's sad, imo.

quite rightly so. this isn't the first time dc has ****ed up promising arcs by changing the writing staff (they did it preboot too, sadly), and it annoys how they can't leave shit alone sometimes.

Compared to now? Things kept together much better. That was an 'up' era, the reason why reboots even caught on.

The reboots of Superman (Bryne's Man of Steel) and Wonder Woman (George Perez) and Flash (Wally taking the helm) were popular and successful, and other books went along fine or picked up sales too.

Even though it was a big shift in status quo, business wise it was much smoother sailing.

Nu52 started out with big sales across the board, but those problems are killing sales of all but the core titles and a few exceptions.

I was speaking more from a continuity standpoint than a sales one.

Originally posted by Kazenji
I disagree there

if some of them sell better then why do they get cancelled 🙄

Lol what? They do sale better, but sales dip and they end up renumbering them.Nature of the beast.

Originally posted by riv6672
Thats a subject i've commented on.
In todays quick turn around world, both Companies IMO, dont give new books a chance to find an audience, axing books way too soon.
As an analogy, now classic sitcoms like Seinfeld, Cheers, and All in the Family initially got ratings that experts say would have gotten them cancelled prior to one whole season today.

Okay, rant over.

Yup. It's all about sales for both companies, obviously. Marvel is MASKING their problems by continuously pumping out huge events, renumbering their books, and DOUBLE shipping. It inflates sales. DC has nearly the same gimmicks, too.

April had an inflated month where the number one book was TASM and on top of that, DC had several titles that were delayed, thus the reason for such a big gap.

http://www.comichron.com/monthlycomicssales/2014/2014-04.html

Looking at DC's and Marvel's state, both companies are doing well. Their sales ARE up.

Anyway, what do you think of Kirman's statements that Marvel is a poorly run company?

http://www.blastr.com/2014-1-13/robert-kirkman-slams-marvel-destroying-comic-book-biz

Originally posted by Golgo13
Yup. It's all about sales for both companies, obviously. Marvel is MASKING their problems by continuously pumping out huge events, renumbering their books, and DOUBLE shipping. It inflates sales. DC has nearly the same gimmicks, too.

April had an inflated month where the number one book was TASM and on top of that, DC had several titles that were delayed, thus the reason for such a big gap.

http://www.comichron.com/monthlycomicssales/2014/2014-04.html

Looking at DC's and Marvel's state, both companies are doing well. Their sales ARE up.

Anyway, what do you think of Kirman's statements that Marvel is a poorly run company?

http://www.blastr.com/2014-1-13/robert-kirkman-slams-marvel-destroying-comic-book-biz

Both companies are run poorly, just in different ways, imo.