Marc Miyake left comment on "DC’s First Editorial Standards, Marvel Profanity":
ANSWER:
I won't be including Wonder Woman in my post about the essential natures of classic characters because I don't feel I have any special qualifications regarding her. The Marvel characters, yes, Superman, Superboy and the Legion, yes. Magnus, Solar, Turok and Samson, yes.
I have limited experience reading manga, but every manga story I have ever read was readable and had solid entertainment value. Even if the story wasn't about something of particular interest to me, I could see how it would be to the target audience. When the management of the big two and the creators realize what business they're actually in (the entertainment business, in case some of the aforementioned are reading this and wondering) then, maybe the American comics industry will have a chance to survive and thrive.
When Marv and Len used to say "female heros don't sell," or "westerns don't sell," or SF doesn't sell," or whatever, I'd always say "show me a good one."
Ahem....
Briefly, in shorthand....
The American comic book industry started out as a way to reprint syndicated strips and milk extra cash out of existing material. That worked, but comic book publishers quickly used up all the strips available. To keep the ball rolling, publishers commissioned new material, but they didn't want to pay more than they did for reprint rights, so new material was made for low pay under confiscatory rights conditions. No artist or writer wanted to be a comic book creator -- everyone wanted a syndicated strip, where the big money was. Therefore, comic books wound up with second-rate creators who couldn't make it in the big leagues, hacks, the rare significant talent who passed through on his or her way to greater things (Jules Feiffer comes to mind) and the occasional solid craftsman or even genius who arrived in the comic book biz for whatever reason and stuck with it.
Back in the early, big circulation days, publishers got lucky a few times with great properties created despite the lousy compensation and working conditions, creations that struck a chord -- Superman, Batman, Captain Marvel and others. Mostly super heroes. Comic books had a great advantage with super heroes back when film special effects were limited, and low-res, limited budget TV was best suited to talking heads.
Later, a few more successes came along, also created under adverse conditions for the talent. Spider-Man, the Hulk, Wolverine...you know.
The comic book industry, by and large, from its beginnings has had a schlock mentality, a quick buck mentality. Most publishers thought comic books were a fad that would run its course (Martin Goodman comes to mind). Many were surprised to find themselves still in business years later.
The quickest, easiest way to make a buck in this business since the early days has pretty much always been to stick with the heaviest hitters of the past. But decades of schlock thinking at the top, decades of unguided, misguided or just plain bad creative work has desecrated and distorted some of those characters almost to the point that they are unrecognizable (the current Wonder Woman comes to mind. And did someone say the new Superboy is a robot? What?). Their equity has eroded.
At Marvel, I used to joke about making a comic book with the same budget as a low-budget movie. The $10 million Comic Book, I called it. With the budget to do it right, with the best talent actually doing the job rather than being self-indulgent, actually creating something brilliantly entertaining for millions rather than pandering to the few hard-cores left, I know we could create the next thing to strike a chord. Of course, it wouldn't really take $10 million. It wouldn't even take a million. The point was that with the budget of a small film we'd have a shot (in truth, many shots) to come up with something that would blow people's minds and sweep the country. The world. 230 million copies sold is not out of reach.
Black and white or not, manga is relatively high budget compared to American comics. Top creators make money like rock stars. The money American top creators make, or ever made in comics does not begin to compare. Even the Image guys at their peak. Monkey Punch once came to visit Marvel. When I told him what we paid artists he was appalled.
So, to me, the answer is intelligent management and serious commitment by a major publisher. The $10 million comic book(s) need not be super hero. They need to be good ones.
Don't hold your breath.
Sounds like the author of One Piece has integrity, something in short supply in the comic book industry here.
Dear Jim,
Will Wonder Woman be in your upcoming post on the essential natures of classic characters? If she isn't, that's okay, because you've spent over a week on her.
I haven't commented lately because I felt completely lost in Aisle WW. An Azzupermarket isn't my kind of place to shop. Items arranged in a cryptic -- or chaotic? -- manner. Signs long on wordplay and short on help. A handful of customers in the store who sneer on simpletons like me who spend an hour looking for juice and leaving empty-handed. Yeah, I really want to go back there again.
Seriously, the last two posts lost me. I thought #1-3 would elucidate #4, but I ended up even more bewildered at Azzmart. I don't feel too bad since your non-comics friends were in the same boat. I've only read one WW comic since John Byrne's run in the 90s. And that issue didn't make much sense either.
What I don't understand is ... DC is part of a mass market entertainment company. Why can't its comics be as accessible as its movies? What if editors treated the New 52 like 52 movies on paper? Why keep producing niche products for the cognoscenti?
I keep hearing the argument that comics can't compete with movies, video games, whatever. So how was Shueisha able to sell over 230 million volumes of One Piece manga so far [as of 2010]; volume 61 set a new record for the highest initial print run of any book in Japan in history with 3.8 million copies (the previous record belonging to volume 60 with 3.4 million copies). Volume 60 is the first book to sell over two million copies in its opening week on Japan's Oricon book rankings. One Piece is currently ranked as the best-selling series of all time in manga history.
It's not as if the Japanese are lacking in entertainment options. Millions are choosing to read black and white manga without all the full-color bells and whistles that are standard in the US. Why? What are they doing right? Or even wrong, in your opinion?
What impresses me about the Japanese is how they manage to keep on coming up with new properties in new genres that are hard to pigeonhole. Calling One Piece a pirate comic makes one think of Pirates of the Caribbean or EC's New Trend Piracy. That label doesn't do One Piece justice. It's set in its own universe. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Piece#Setting>
I saw DEFIANT and Broadway as being in the Japanese genre-bending tradition. Those lines would have become even more diverse over time. If I had to pick one unreleased property to read, it'd be Spire. I'm listening to Ukrainian music at the moment. Fitting.
Why does diversity in comics work over there but not here? Yes, I know there are lots of nonsuperhero comics. I don't think comics will ever die because there will always be Alison Bechdels and the like who will express themselves through the medium. But the core of the industry remains a set of decades-old properties. Very different from the Japanese scene where series come and go and end. One Piece was planned to last five years -- it's lasted almost fifteen so far -- and "the author states, as of July 2007, that the ending will still be the one he had decided on from the beginning and he is committed to seeing it through to the end, no matter how many years it takes."
I've never read One Piece. But I respect creators who think things through. Who have structure in mind. Who know where they're going. That makes me want to invest in an epic. I don't want to deal with improv, with whatever stimuli the creators toss around to distract me while they figure out their next move.
Language and violence are stimuli. They really stir up some part of the audience. Anyone here remember a certain word in the Transformers movie from 1986? Shocking then, nothing now.
As we become accustomed to one level of stimuli, the creators feel they have to amp 'em up. More extreme! Push that button harder! Faster! Brute force is easy. Inspiring thoughts is hard.
But surely somebody among 300 million Americans can do that in comics.
As I read about Wonder Woman #1-4, I kept thinking, is this the best DC can do? Don't Diana and her audience deserve better?
Posted by Marc Miyake to Jim Shooter <http://www.jimshooter.com/> at January 27, 2012 1:45 PM
ANSWER:
I won't be including Wonder Woman in my post about the essential natures of classic characters because I don't feel I have any special qualifications regarding her. The Marvel characters, yes, Superman, Superboy and the Legion, yes. Magnus, Solar, Turok and Samson, yes.
I have limited experience reading manga, but every manga story I have ever read was readable and had solid entertainment value. Even if the story wasn't about something of particular interest to me, I could see how it would be to the target audience. When the management of the big two and the creators realize what business they're actually in (the entertainment business, in case some of the aforementioned are reading this and wondering) then, maybe the American comics industry will have a chance to survive and thrive.
When Marv and Len used to say "female heros don't sell," or "westerns don't sell," or SF doesn't sell," or whatever, I'd always say "show me a good one."
Ahem....
Briefly, in shorthand....
The American comic book industry started out as a way to reprint syndicated strips and milk extra cash out of existing material. That worked, but comic book publishers quickly used up all the strips available. To keep the ball rolling, publishers commissioned new material, but they didn't want to pay more than they did for reprint rights, so new material was made for low pay under confiscatory rights conditions. No artist or writer wanted to be a comic book creator -- everyone wanted a syndicated strip, where the big money was. Therefore, comic books wound up with second-rate creators who couldn't make it in the big leagues, hacks, the rare significant talent who passed through on his or her way to greater things (Jules Feiffer comes to mind) and the occasional solid craftsman or even genius who arrived in the comic book biz for whatever reason and stuck with it.
Back in the early, big circulation days, publishers got lucky a few times with great properties created despite the lousy compensation and working conditions, creations that struck a chord -- Superman, Batman, Captain Marvel and others. Mostly super heroes. Comic books had a great advantage with super heroes back when film special effects were limited, and low-res, limited budget TV was best suited to talking heads.
Later, a few more successes came along, also created under adverse conditions for the talent. Spider-Man, the Hulk, Wolverine...you know.
The comic book industry, by and large, from its beginnings has had a schlock mentality, a quick buck mentality. Most publishers thought comic books were a fad that would run its course (Martin Goodman comes to mind). Many were surprised to find themselves still in business years later.
The quickest, easiest way to make a buck in this business since the early days has pretty much always been to stick with the heaviest hitters of the past. But decades of schlock thinking at the top, decades of unguided, misguided or just plain bad creative work has desecrated and distorted some of those characters almost to the point that they are unrecognizable (the current Wonder Woman comes to mind. And did someone say the new Superboy is a robot? What?). Their equity has eroded.
At Marvel, I used to joke about making a comic book with the same budget as a low-budget movie. The $10 million Comic Book, I called it. With the budget to do it right, with the best talent actually doing the job rather than being self-indulgent, actually creating something brilliantly entertaining for millions rather than pandering to the few hard-cores left, I know we could create the next thing to strike a chord. Of course, it wouldn't really take $10 million. It wouldn't even take a million. The point was that with the budget of a small film we'd have a shot (in truth, many shots) to come up with something that would blow people's minds and sweep the country. The world. 230 million copies sold is not out of reach.
Black and white or not, manga is relatively high budget compared to American comics. Top creators make money like rock stars. The money American top creators make, or ever made in comics does not begin to compare. Even the Image guys at their peak. Monkey Punch once came to visit Marvel. When I told him what we paid artists he was appalled.
So, to me, the answer is intelligent management and serious commitment by a major publisher. The $10 million comic book(s) need not be super hero. They need to be good ones.
Don't hold your breath.
Sounds like the author of One Piece has integrity, something in short supply in the comic book industry here.
226 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 226 of 226On a more sorrowful note, R.I.P Angelo Dundee.
Another legend lost.
"I'm fairly certain no one wants to have to continue to argue with those two nerds every time they comment from here until the blog ends, which is what will happen if the "anonymous" tag isn't used."
Interesting; so you want to be able to post in a hit-and-run style, where you can make snarky little comments yet avoid having to own up to them. Very brave.
And Jim didn't defend anyone; rather, it seems you're angry that he didn't condemn the people poking fun at you.
It's up to Jim and JayJay how they want to run the blog, but I will say you make a powerful argument (better than any I could make) for not allowing anonymous commenting, by coming right out and admitting you use it say things you wouldn't say if you could be identified... which is commonly known as trolling.
Anonymous who wrote:
On the anonymous thread: If folks want to post anonymously, I don't see the problem with it; it is an option for a reason. As Mary Poppins stated, we are all fairly anonymous anyway.
Brent E and Matt Adler seem to want to lay out ground rules for everyone else on this blog. Jim, if you don't want the anonymous feature used, just say so; your passive aggressive defense of a couple of guys who are clearly going out of their way to kiss your ass isn't the way to go about it.
Brent E and Matt seem to just want to argue with everyone else and then complain when the responses come in anonymous; I'm fairly certain no one wants to have to continue to argue with those two nerds every time they comment from here until the blog ends, which is what will happen if the "anonymous" tag isn't used.
Best post, the "anonymous" explaining why Brent E is the guy constantly arguing with everyone at every gathering he has ever been invited to and, because of it, not finding any *ahem* companionship."
Just out of curiosity, where did I mention wanting rules for the blog? My response was to somebody's thoughts on laws/rules in general. Also, when did I complain about anonymous posts? I stated I would not post on here if I had to disclose my real name. Also, where did I use name calling? Btw, I enjoy how your favorite post was in fact a personal attack on me.
Matt Adler,
Anonymous did not "come out and say" any such thing. What anonymous said, in a nut shell, was that people like you don't know when to drop arguments and like to keep things going until the end of time.
I would suggest you calm down and take some time to read more carefully before misrepresent someone else's opinion to fit your own argument.
Putting words in someone's mouth because you don't like their opinion is pretty pathetic.
Here is a suggestion, why don't you just let folks state their opinion without calling them names and insulting them because they don't agree with you and/or do things the way you want them to. That way, we can all stick to what this blog is (primarily) about--comics.
Otherwise, keep arguing, name calling, and pointing fingers. You seem to be very good at it.
-Matt Adler
Jim Shooter wrote: "...Another thing I've been considering is analyzing early works by Byrne, Miller, Giffen, Stern and others and comparing them with their current or more recent works. Worth doing? Or not? Suggestions welcome..."
Count me in as one in favor of you doing that!
Holy Terror might blow up this comments section
Heh. Why not blow it up now? I understand what Miller was driving at when he was talking about shameless, propaganda driven comic books. I loooooove action films, and wish there were more "topical" villains then what we usually see.
However and this is the big qualifier here - one of the reasons why we "remember" those earlier WW II efforts so fondly is because they were timely. Simon and Kirby came out with Captain America in 1941, the same year as the actual attack on Pearl Harbor. Frank Miller unveiled his efforts at patriotic propaganda ten years after 9/11.
Wow. Matt Adler has some serious internet/reality issues.
Dude, I'd leave mom's basement every once in a while.
Holy crap.
Personally, I am holding out hope for DC's new Watchmen based stuff. I think that there is a lot of fertil ground that could be tilled out of the framework of the original story. Now, I won't be shocked if it sucks, but I see the potential at least that it could be very good.
And I mean the real Matt Adler.
-Matt Adler
Back to the topic of comic sales in North America - I think the Big 2 gave up. They relied only on the comics book stores to sell their product and didn't look for additional avenues to move their product.
Sure, the Direct Market would yell and complain - but then it would be up to them to fight for their dollars too. (Same issue with digital comics and the brick an mortar. Come on retailers. YOU HAVE TO WORK AT IT) Y'know, make it easier and more accessible for new people to come through their door.
Right now - lack of incentive.
IF I were DC or Marvel, why not build competing stores with ONLY DC product or ONLY Marvel, and then you can add all the statues, movies, ancillary crap to go along with the related brand in that specific store...and force each other to compete - not only for the pre-existing customer, but for new ones.
(But where does that leave all the indies...well, they can run to the book stores or come up with something of their own.)
Anyway...only an idea. Not completely thought through - but an idea.
RE: "Jim, if you don't want the anonymous feature used, just say so; your passive aggressive defense of a couple of guys who are clearly going out of their way to kiss your ass isn't the way to go about it."
What? I let everybody say what they want. Passive aggressive? What? People say what they want about me, positive or negative. I don't care, frankly. In the words of a squinty sailor, "I yam what I yam." I'll live with whatever people think. I know myself. I have no need to defend anybody's opinion.
Jim,
I was told by another comic fan that writer Steven Grant read some of my posts on the usenet back in 1999 and thought that it was you writing under an alias. It really shocked me that someone who knew you would think that my words were yours. I've had to tell people more than once that I'm not you.
I've fallen back on a standard reply now. I just tell people that you are nicer than me. A few people know me now, so it hasn't been an issue in the past few years.
I agree that Holy Terror would have been better if it came out years ago
I also believe that most of the shocked reaction to it is due to people being unwilling to confront or discuss some of the issues that Miller addressed in it
We live in PC times now
Dear Defiant1,
RE: "I was told by another comic fan that writer Steven Grant read some of my posts on the usenet back in 1999 and thought that it was you writing under an alias. It really shocked me that someone who knew you would think that my words were yours. I've had to tell people more than once that I'm not you."
A long time ago, a friend of mine showed me how to go into the CBR chat room in stealth mode. I didn't want to chat, I just wanted to see what people were talking about. One evening, someone signed in as me. Weird. The fake pontificated a lot but wasn't too nasty. I wonder how often that happens.
I also believe that most of the shocked reaction to it is due to people being unwilling to confront or discuss some of the issues that Miller addressed in it.
I don't want this comment to be construed as an endorsement of Mr. Miller's opinions. However, I believe most of the shocked reaction was immature. All those disillusioned fans and critics were I suspect, shocked and appalled when they realized that the guy who drew Batman in combat boots and driving a tank, did, in fact, have a set of attitudes and opinions to match those of his fictional creation.
"Another thing I've been considering is analyzing early works by Byrne, Miller, Giffen, Stern and others and comparing them with their current or more recent works. Worth doing? Or not? Suggestions welcome."
[MikeAnon:] I'm reading back through some DEFIANT comics. Here's Jim Shooter in 1994:
"A long time ago I worked with George Perez on AVENGERS at Marvel, and I think we were a pretty good combination. The power in George's art brought out my best. Power is, of course, the essence of Rob Liefeld's work -- thundering, crackling, EXTREME power. NOBODY does it better."
Hee, hee, hee....
Who wants a review of Rob Liefeld's work circa 1994 -- *whatever* it was that got such a glowing review from Mr. Shooter -- compared against Rob's upcoming first issue of DEATHSTROKE? [--MikeAnon]
RE: "A long time ago I worked with George Perez on AVENGERS at Marvel, and I think we were a pretty good combination. The power in George's art brought out my best. Power is, of course, the essence of Rob Liefeld's work -- thundering, crackling, EXTREME power. NOBODY does it better."
There was discussion of a joint project with Rob. At that time his books were selling huge numbers, and maybe DEFIANT would have gotten a boost out of the deal. I tried to find something nice to say about Rob's work without lying. Okay, I exaggerated a little, but come on, his exaggerations and extremes gave his work impact/power. Seemed like a fair-enough bit of hype.
"I tried to find something nice to say about Rob's work without lying. Okay, I exaggerated a little, but come on, his exaggerations and extremes gave his work impact/power. Seemed like a fair-enough bit of hype."
[MikeAnon:] Yeah, but I just had to give you some shit for putting Rob Liefeld even in the same *paragraph* as George Perez. Can you imagine Rob Liefeld as the artist on AVENGERS/JLA? (If you haven't read that, you should. Kurt Busiek doesn't just take characters from both universes and throw them into a cosmic fight -- he actually uses the characters' reactions to their displacements to point out thematic differences between the two universes, such as how the citizens of the DC Universe generally revere their heroes, whereas the Marvel heroes are always just one step above being treated like mutants.) [--MikeAnon]
Jim,
It's fairly common for people to post as you, especially on the Valiantfans site. I encountered some people pretending to be me on the Bleedingcool site when the news broke about VEI suing you. Some people were trying to discredit my opinions because they didn't want to believe any information based on facts. The term for it is "spoofing" in the hacking world. Some people do it for fun. Some people do it as a form of social engineering. When people impersonate me, I use it as a means to shed online grief people try to give me for expressing my opinions. I dump it all on them. They usually give up pretty quickly after that and regret their decision.
As far as I know, Jim has never posted in a forum anywhere. In a couple of forum I was part of, I've relayed questions to him and posted his answers (as me, not as him) but Jim doesn't generally read any forums I think.
The imposters usually step in when there is an absence of news or updates about his activities. I will confess that I'm guilty of impersonating Mary Poppins, but it was all for the sake of making a point that you can't take a person's name online at face value. In this age of data mining, I like a certain degree of misinformation being out there. So many people have claimed to be Jim Shooter at the Valiant messageboard that I don't think anyone takes any of it seriously.
"As far as I know, Jim has never posted in a forum anywhere. In a couple of forums I was part of, I've relayed questions to him and posted his answers (as me, not as him) but Jim doesn't generally read any forums I think."
True.
Avoiding reading forums is a wise policy. Even the good ones are pretty much devoid of any thoughtful discourse
Digger says:
Marc Mikaye wrote: "DC and Marvel, OTOH, are extremely conservative on one level (using the same characters for the past 50-70 years) while at the same time altering them beyond recognition, defeating the point of keeping them...."
From around 1990 till recently, I wondered about this tendency of the industry majors, and of DC in particular, to keep using the same old characters (or character names) in new series while often keeping little in the way of character traits that had once made those characters appealing. Surely there would be no less opportunity for success in developing completely new features.
Recently, though, an idea occurred to me that seems to explain (to me, at least) why companies do this. It's often not the characters so much as the trademarks that are being preserved and propagated. And the reason this is appealing to the industry giants is (I believe) because of the history of unchallenged ownership of these trademarks, considered against the possibility of a challenge based on prior ownership of the trademark in a newly created feature.
Let me cite a salient example: Jim, during his Defiant start-up, came up with an original comics feature, and called it Plasm. Marvel got wind of it, and it didn't matter that Defiant's concept had nothing to do with Marvel's Plasmer; Marvel challenged the trademark legally, and Defiant was unable to recover.
For these reasons, I am not the sort of fan who gives undying fidelity to a comics character. In practical terms, the most that a fan can do is give loyalty to a trademark, and I have no interest in that.
Dear James,
RE: Kevin Smith's "Comic Book Men": Thanks for the heads up.
Freddy and I watched Comic Book Men. It was watchable. I love Kevin Smith's stuff, mostly, so I was very curious and it seemed no worse than many of the better reality shows.
Post a Comment