COMICS AND THE CURRENT ECONOMY

Comics, like everything else are being affected by the economy. Rising costs, and somewhat declining sales as people try to hang onto their cash have driven the average cost of our little goodies, up. But there has been two different approaches by the two leads in the industry. Marvel has raised the price of some of their comics as much as a dollar to make up for the afore mentioned cost and sales issues. Some, I say but not all. Their thinking revolves around charging more for lesser selling books in order to recoup production costs and keeping the book on the market, while books that sell well will retain the current average price because their sales still make them profitable. However, you aint gettin' any more bang for your buck. Same page count and more money being shelled out of your pockets, which in my opinion isn't exactly fair. DC on the other hand has tried something different. They've added 8 more pages of story content in the form of new "back-up" features, which they snarkily refer to as "co-features." Hey DC, a back-up is a back-up. So, for the extra dollar you get more, but the question is, do you really want it? TEEN TITANS has Ravager, DETECTIVE COMICS has the Question, ACTION COMICS has Captain Atom, STREETS OF GOTHAM has Manhunter... and we fans may have to pay that extra buck for these features that we don't really want to read anyway. Seriously, I don't want to have to spend that extra cash on stuff which I'm not interestested in getting. I mean, there's a reason these back-up characters are relegated to that back-up status; the interest in them isn't really there. Look, I can't claim to have solutions here, but to me, I want to buy a book with a main title and have it be just that, and not buy anthology series, which traditionally haven't done well in decades anyway. The economy may be turning around soon, so Marvel and DC- GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER and really think about how not to rip off fans. Your charging extra money for comics will only further decline sales as people have to cut back more. It's really simple economics.

SUPER-MONEY

Take a good look at the attached image. It's Mon-El wearing a reverse-color Superman costume complete with the "S" symbol from an upcoming comic book cover, and it may be a bad sign of something to come. If you've been reading SUPERMAN and ACTION COMICS, you know that the Man Of Steel has been displaced in his own books and starring in one current (WORLD OF NEW KRYPTON) and one upcoming SECRET ORIGINS maxi-series. The Origins series will not revisit the totality of Clark Kent's life, but rather his leaving Smalville and coming to Metropolis. "Why?" Might you ask and "Why is Mon-El supplanting Superman, and why can't the full origin be retold?" Well, this is just speculation, but it may have to do with real life events that have been legally surrounding Comics' first superhero. DC Comics has even stated that something big is building. Could it be that Superman may be lost to DC Comics and has to be replaced in continuity with Mon-EL as the new Superman because of several lawsuits brought on by the Heirs of Jerry Seigel (one half of Superman's creators)? There's even talk that Superman's origin cannot be retold in another film! Before I begin, I want it stated that I am not a lawyer and I'm not versed in every legal part of what I'm going to discuss, but I've been well-read and I'm going to offer a harsh opinion that is based more in ideas of fairness and truth than what lawyers can do in a courtroom. It started with Superboy and the heirs of Jerry Seigel suing over rights relating to the SMALLVILLE television show, and then the "Superboy" name and related concepts in DC Comics publications. The lawsuit forced DC to even "kill" current and most recent Superboy, Connor Kent and not refer to him by his hero name. Thankfully, some deal had been worked out and DC restored Connor to life and has once again been able to use the Superboy moniker, but it seems like the Seigel heirs can't stop smelling potential financial gains. I don't want to seem unfair here, but the Seigel heirs are destroying the name of their father/grandfather and his most honored creation, and are thus destroying the legacy of that man as well.

1938, Superman is purchased under a "work for hire" style arrangement that is common to that day by National Periodical Publications which would later be known as DC Comics. Jerry Seigel and partner Joe Shuster guided the adventures of their creation for some time to come, being published by National Periodical Publications. Long story short: NPP and/or DC thus owned the Superman character and his stories under working agreements of that time, and DC right up until this day has been the caretaker of this most incredible character... the Seigel heirs have not, and nor have they had anything to do with the creation or marketing of this most famous superhero. This has not stopped what I view as money hungry people that as stated, had nothing to do with creating Superman, from trying to receive financial gains by either getting a portion of Super-related monies or from trying to legally steal Superman away from the company that has nurtured their ancestor's creation. One wonders why the Seigels aren't doing something else with their lives to perhaps distinguish themselves in their own right instead of going after DC?

1978, SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE hits theaters with a rounding commercial and critical success and starting the genre' of the extremely popular superhero film. Around this time, in an act of fairness, apparently ( I do not know the full details because I've read conflicting reports) DC's now-parent company awards Jerry Seigel and Joe Shuster monies for their creation of Superman and the resulting successes in different mediums. No lawsuit it seemed, but just a goodwill act of thanks to the two men.

The present: Just when things looked to be settled down, the Seigels continue with more lawsuits, further angering fans who love Superman and want to see him remain where he is, because Superman is a staple of the DC imprint across its entire line. Why? Once again, they're smelling the cash. If I was a judge on this case, I would have reprimanded the lawyers who took the Seigel suit to court, and made the Seigels pay DC for their legal fees as a result. I don't feel good about saying such harsh things about the descendants of one of the men who created the most well known and one of the most beloved fictional figures, but they brought it on themselves. So, does that mean that DC now has to prepare for the possible eventuality that they may lose the Clark Kent/ Smallville/ Superman and set about replacing him with a different character? I desperately hope not, I doubt it, and I wish the Seigel family the best in their lives so that they each may succeed at something on their own merits, so they don't have to greedily spoil things for comics fans everywhere while at the same time sullying the name of Jerry Seigel and his creation. Time will tell...

THE FUTURE OF COMICS

You can't stop progress. Go on any subway in New York and you'll see ads all over the place for the "kindle;" an electronic pad that is stylish and can hold about 1700 books for you to read in its database. Newspapers are disappearing too, with some going only on-line, but what does that mean for us comic book afficiandos? Eventually we're going to say "goodbye" to the comic book as we know it. It's enevitable. Does that mean comics will vanish? Hardly, but it does mean that the format which we've grown used to for nearly a century will evolve into the next stage in our technological and digital evolution. There's already downloadable on-line comics from Marvel and DC and there's already been discussion from the two major companies about the pricing of comics when the obvious will happen. That discussion is the first step to reality. So, what does this mean to us fans that love the tactile experience of handling our comics and turning their pages and bagging and boxing our prized possessions? Many good things actually, and some bad too. The first is that space will free up for our collections and there will be less environmental upheavel with less paper and plastic being produced as the world's reading materials goes to digital formats. That means less trees geting cut down for printing purposes and less non-biodegradable plastics that we use to protect our precious masterpieces. It also means that some things will get less expensive. The current comic book costs a minimum (as of this writing) of about $3 and up because of paper costs, but with no paper, there's already talk of charging $.99 (cents) for the equivalent 22 page story download and maybe $1.99 for a CD of the same material. It also means that for a while anyway, comics in their original form might go substantially up in value and net us all a small fortune if we were willing to sell our prized possessions when we get the same material digitally. It also means that comics may go up in popularity in its new format with easier to acquire material as CD versions of the medium are made available to places they've never been sold in before like a Best Buy, for instance or people now being able to get them downloaded right into their computers. New comics companies may arise with more material for us fans too. It may also mean the destruction of the harmful monopoly that Diamond Distributors has on our comics as this new format will be able to bypass this company and its stranglehold on the industry. That's the good news, but then what's the bad? The economy for the store owners where we get our comics from will get affected. Unfortunately this means less sales for them and the unfortunate and eventual going out of business for many stores. This last part worries me. Like many comics buyers, I have a measure of loyalty to my Comic Book store (Grasshoppers Comics in New York- shameful plug), where I have spent my money gladly and also purchase action figures and statues. The owner and manager of that store has the human touch of ordering things for me and holding expensive items until I can finish paying for them. You can't get that kind of service on-line or at a major electronics retailer. You won't be able to get those exclusive items at other places if comic book stores suffer as a result of tecnological progress, to say nothing of how more businesses failing will affect our currently poor economically troubled times. Last but not least, there is that emotional attachment to our comics that will be somewhat lost when they only exist in virtual space. We shall see....

AN END TO CONTINUITY REBOOTING

Continuity in comics has become mutable which can be frustrating to fans who have read comics for more than say, ten years. A frequent occurence has been to "reboot" continuity, eliminating the stories that we fans love, or somehow changing vital elements of a character and their story. Think of how many times DC has rebooted, starting with the 1950's "Flash Of Two World's" all the way through CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS and beyond, to say nothing of the idiotic Spider-man change I've written about previously. Look at the JSA, and even titles in Marvel that still feature heroes that operated in World War II. That piece of history is a rich background to comics tales even today, but there's going to come a point where it'll be unbelievable for any character to still be alive from that time, short of immortality. Some JSA newbies are the children or grandchildren or "legacy" heroes from the originals that operated during that time. How long will it be before they are too old to even be the grandchildren of those beloved original heroes? What to do to stop this and keep continuity the consistent factor it should be in monthly serialized comics? There are solutions. The first and most important is to tell stories that do not reference a period in time, so that the stories and characters always exist in a timeless fashion. Do not mention real history and refer to time differently than we do in real life. If you read a multi-part arc in any comic, it could take maybe six months for example to unfold, but in "comics time," the story may take only a matter of days from when the story concludes, and should always be referenced as such, if even referenced at all. Years should be called months, months should be called weeks, weeks into days, etcetera. Keeping pop culture or current real world history out could also aid in never needing a continuity reboot, which quite frankly fans are weary of. Only time can tell....

NO MORE KILLING, PLEASE!

Death.. in real life terrible, in entertainment like comics, a plot device that has worn out its welcome. Just off the top of my head: Harry Osborn, Bucky Barnes, Hal Jordan, Barry Allen (although to be fair, his "death" wasn't really that, he just vanished and people have been calling it "death"), Green Arrow, Cyclops, Phoenix (okay, she's SUPPOSED to die and come back), Colossus, Hawkman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Hippolyta, Captain America, and MANY more for the list to go on. These are all characters who have died and been resurrected. So what's the point? Maybe that comic creators should STOP killing characters in an attempt to "shock" the audience, because it's ultimately futile since another writer, some time later will just invalidate that death by bringing that character back to life. Death has become an overused plot device that has become pointless and I urge comics editors to put a moritorium (pun intended) on killing off characters because it begins to show laziness and a lack of imagination on the part of the writer. There are other ways of creating drama that doesn't involve the pointless death/resurrection cycle in comics. Look at Alan Moore and what he did to Barabara Gordon in THE KILLING JOKE. He crippled a major character who to this day is still dealing with the effects of that incident, and who has become a much more interesting and integral character since. What about Tony Stark's alcoholism? Again, long range complications that make for compelling drama. At least BLACKEST NIGHT seems to be addressing this overused shock mechanism. Writer Geoff Johns I think is crafting what might turn out to be one huge deus-ex-machina of character ressurection with a consistent, storyline dicatated reason for bringing the dead back to life. Doesn't everyone think that Martian Manhunter, Aquaman, and other dead heroes will permanently resurface at the conclusion of the crossover event? Johns too was responsible for killing off Connor Kent and Bart Allen and then bringing them back himself, but at least you could tell he had a plan set in motion to do it. Which brings us to another point; every character in comics is someone's favorite and maybe it's unfair to rob the audience of that character. If a writer can't think of a use for a particular cast member, they should just find a means of writing the character out of the story for awhile so that someone else can come in and use him/her/them when they get the chance. Take a look at the unfairness here. So many heroes and their supporting casts have been killed and returned to life, and yet no one has thought of a way to bring Gwen Stacy back to life? I have, and it would be one great and OBVIOUS way to do it, that I'm surprised no one has thought of it. Yes, I know it sounds like a contradiction after saying no more killing and resuurection, but if they could do it with the long standing death of Bucky Barnes into the brilliant Winter Soldier/Captain America arc, why not Gwen? But hey, at least DC is not claiming that Bruce Wayne's current disappearance is a death....

STOP THE LATENESS!

Latness is comics... It disappoints readers, upsets retailers, and paints the comic companies in a bad light. However, THERE IS A NO-BRAINER SOLUTION!! Seriously, can't DC and Marvel figure out ways to prevent delayed comics? Why is it that I can and they can't? Corporate bullshit? Okay people, here goes- First off, DO NOT HIRE AN ARTIST TO DO A MONTHY BOOK, OR A CROSSOVER EVENT IF THAT ARTIST CANNOT DRAW 22 PAGES A MONTH! Do we need another "CIVIL WAR," or the embarrasment of J.G. Jones from "FINAL CRISIS" and the subsequent company-wide delays that result from their inability to produce on time? I'm not saying that these great artists should not work in the industry if they can't produce for a monthly medium, but INSTEAD RELEGATE SLOW ARTISTS TO MINI-SERIES OR PROJECTS that don't affect an entire line of books. Moreover, DON"T SOLICIT BOOKS OR SCHEDULE THESE HUGE EVENT CROSSOVERS UNTIL THEY ARE FULLY DRAWN and "in the can." There's even more; comic companies should take a look at websites like deviantart.com for instance to mine the talents on sites like that for new hot talent that may be able to produce great work, fast. Again, it's a no-brainer.

Now, Lateness also has to do with distribution, and unfortunately Diamond Distributors is a monopoly that has a strangelhold in the industry. Why has no one investigated this monopoly? Or have they, and come to the conclusion that comics aren't that important? What I'm referring to here is the holiday scheduling. Comics have a long tradition now for Wednesday delivery dates, and sometimes holiday scehedules make the books arrive on Thursdays, which gives retailers one less day a week to sell new releases and affects readers who may only have that Wednesday to get their books. Again, ready for another no-brainer? SHIP THE BOOKS A DAY EARLY ON HOLDIDAY WEEKS SO THAT THEY GET OUT ON THE STANDS ON WEDNESDAYS! I mean, if they can ship a day late, they can ship a day early. DUH! WOW, it took one second to think of that! Can the industry get its act together? Who knows, but above are some solutions. Next up- the ususal Wednesday Comic Report and next Sunday's column on death in comics!

THE "SINS PAST" OF JOE QUESADA AND WHAT HE DID TO SPIDERMAN

Lest you think I only have problems with the goings-on at DC Comics, let's backtrack a few years to when J. Michael Straczinsky was writing a successful run on AMAZING SPIDERMAN. It all started with an important life changing four-parter called "Sins Past," in which we discover that the most beloved dead girl in all comicsdom, gave birth to two children. Yup, can you believe that Gwen Stacy had children? Years ago I unfairly blamed JMS for writing this travesty of a strory, because it turned out the children were not Peter Parker's but those of his arch-nemisis Norman Osborn a.k.a. the Green Goblin. Well, it turned out that JMS all along had intended these children to be the by-product of Peter and Gwen's love, but Marvel Editor-In-Chief, Joe Quesada quickly nixed the idea because he felt that having children would age Peter and JMS was forced to do a rewrite of his plans with the patently ridiculous idea of Norman being the dad, thus sullying the memory of one of the most loved girlfriends in the medium. Can you believe this crap? Well, it turns out that this is not Quesada's only major screw-up in the world of Spiderman. Oh, you know what I'm talking about, but before we get there, we have to bring in the events of Marvel's CIVIL WAR, in which among other things, another mandated idiotic move occurred when Spiderman revealed his identity to the entire world. PETER PARKER WOULD DO THIS??

CIVIL WAR was a major Marvel Comics crossover event in which superheroes now had to become mandated by the government. Not a bad idea given the political climate of the times because even storywise, those repercussions are making for some interesting stories in today's Marvel Universe which had threads in SECRET INVASION and the current DARK REIGN. Now, I'm going to digress here before I get back to Spiderman, and write about the famous delay that CIVIL WAR underwent because of its artist Steve McNiven. Lateness in comics will be the subject of another column. Suffice to say, an entire months worth of Marvel's books were delayed because of the company-wide crossover, in which reatilers suffered with "make-up" comics to fill the gap. Series Editor Tom Breveroot made some of the most disgustingly insulting comments to readers and artists that I've ever read. Instead of taking the blame for a bad choice of a slow artist ( McNiven is a great artist, but too slow to hinge a company crossover on), or getting another capable artist to pick up the slack to keep the book on time, Breveroot used this as an opportunity to slam DC by comparing the lateness of WATCHMEN, DARK KNIGHT to CIVIL WAR. To be fair, DC has had similar problems, but not like what happened with CW and Breveroot's choices for comparison were uneducated because the DC titles he mentioned were not in-continuity titles that affected an entire line of comics. Furthermore, Breveroot insulted any artist in comics who ever worked as a fill-in artist by stating that comics readers don't want them. Hey Tom and Joe, has it ever occurred to you to maybe make sure your comapny wide crossover was given to an artist who could work on time, or to make sure that maybe you scheduled your event when all the issues were actually drawn and done? Kind of a no-brainer, don't you think?

Ah, but Breveroot still has his job when he should have been fired for his insults, or at least reprimanded, but such was not the case. Maybe Quesada has a liking for bad attitudes, considering his own. Ever been to a comics convention? It amazes me that DC panels are always more attended than Marvel panels at these conventions, considering that Marvel supposedly outsells DC. The DC panels are lively, fun, and its attendees are given enough teasers to whet their appetites for what's to come, without the big reveals, making fans eager for what's to come. Does Quesada do this? Does Joe Q appreciate the fact that people pay money, and stand in lines in all sorts of weather conditions to attend conventions? No, he tells his fans nothing, and that he "wants their money, and that they should buy the books,"... literally. He gives fans who attend conventions nothing to come home with and crassly tells them he wants their hard earned bucks. Nice.

It doesn't end there. So JMS continued writing AMAZING SPIDERMAN, already peeved at the editorial changes mandated by Joe Q, and then something even worse happened. Joe Q has always felt that the Peter-Mary Jane marriage was detrimental to the Spiderman character and he wanted to put an end to it. Again, he felt it aged Peter and somehow prevented better stories from being told. Hmmm, okay, I'll give him some points on this. MJ has never been more than a shallow character, no matter how many writers tried to give her a backstory to explain her flightiness, and quite frankly, MJ was a runner-up. She only moved into first position because Gwen Stacy, the TRUE love of Peter's life had been killed off years ago. Yet another column will deal with death in comics and go into Gwen there. If you don't believe me, just read Jeff Loeb and Tim Sale's SPIDERMAN: BLUE to see how true this is. So, I was in agreement and quite happy when I heard that the Peter/MJ union would bite the dust in the contraversial "One More Day" storyline. How it got there, was one of the worst ideas in the history of Marvel. Once again, JMS had one idea to put an end to the marriage, but was overriden by Joe Q again. You see, Quesada for some reason believed that divorce was wrong for a comic character like Peter Parker. Why? Peter has always been the most "relatable" hero, and since the divorce rate is so high, I bet many would have felt empathy for him; many because maybe they've been there too, or their parents have. That would have been the way to go, but no, Joe Q comes up with this infintely stupid idea that MJ and Peter make a deal with Mephisto (the devil, essentially) for the life of Peter's Aunt May, and that the marriage gets "magically" disolved and so does Peter's unmasking in CIVIL WAR. HA! Joe Q pulled a DC continuity gaffe that made anything done by their competition, in terms of continuity problems, look like nothing! So, JMS once again was pissed about Quesada's editorial meddling, that he requested his name be removed as writer of the last two chapters of "One More Day." Moreover, when Joe Q took heat for this, He said something along the lines about the story that HE wrote, that it wasn't Peter who acted out oc character by making a deal with the devil, but it was MJ. Uh, did Joe even read his own story. PETER WENT ALONG WITH IT!

And now we're in the present, where continuity is a mess in the current slew of "Brand New Day" storylines which among other things has the decades dead Harry Osborn alive and well with no explanation... and Gwen is still dead... and Joe Quesada is still running Marvel.