Is Marvel following DC's example of rotating writers?

[Joe Zool]

(on its flagship X-titles?)

Claremont and (possibly) Milligan are being shuttled off the X-titles and there will be new writers. We know that D.C. likes to change writers every now and then for their Batman and Superman titles. Do you think that Marvel sees this as THE example to follow, and if so, is this a good idea or not?

Personally, I'd rather one stable, ongoing writer and artist. But Marvel has so much instablity with the X-Books--replacing Morrison with Whedon, replacing Casey with Austen, and then Claremont, replacing Austen with Milligan.

I'd prefer it if there weren't no writer changes for a X-title for at least FOUR years. Just give me that, Marvel. (with the expection that the writer reaches Howard Mackie levels in medicory, of course) For good or for worse, at least four years of a constant X-writer.

What do you think?

[Beast]

It's the new thing, and I think we'll see more of it. I can almost bet that Brubaker will only be on Uncanny for 24 issues, and we'll get a big name replacement for Issue #500. It just seems like the thing to do to keep sales and interest up now, even if the books are selling even moderatly well. :)

[Register]

(on its flagship X-titles?)

Claremont and (possibly) Milligan are being shuttled off the X-titles and there will be new writers. We know that D.C. likes to change writers every now and then for their Batman and Superman titles. Do you think that Marvel sees this as THE example to follow, and if so, is this a good idea or not?

Personally, I'd rather one stable, ongoing writer and artist. But Marvel has so much instablity with the X-Books--replacing Morrison with Whedon, replacing Casey with Austen, and then Claremont, replacing Austen with Milligan.

I'd prefer it if there weren't no writer changes for a X-title for at least FOUR years. Just give me that, Marvel. (with the expection that the writer reaches Howard Mackie levels in medicory, of course) For good or for worse, at least four years of a constant X-writer.

What do you think?
Four years is a long time, but I like the idea of a long term writer.

[The Fury]

I think it depends on a few factors. Changing writers too often can cause confusion and maybe bad characterisation.

Writers should be allowed to tell stories, and most writer nowadays like to tell long running ones. Morrison, Claremont and even Austen (the evil dad thing) all did this.

I personally think it is better to have long runs, Let the writer tell the story and finish it and don;t leave a half sotry up in the air for someone else to finish.

[cable guy]

It's been heading this route for awhile now.

I hate it.

You have to blow people out of the water with-in the first few issues or Else! :eek:

And if you are good, you get gobbled up by other companies or titles.

[fishtaco]

Marvel doesn't let writers have long enough runs. They kick people off way too fast.

[Neolucifer]

I disagree , so far Claremont , Morrison, Austen , Milligan had plenty of time to deliver , and well only a few did .
Austen has been there for quite a while so i wouldnt even include him (especially if you add up both adjectiveless and uncanny) . He could do pretty much most of what he wanted , especially things fan despised like Draco .

Milligan was there for the shortest time i believe , but everything is his damn fault ....he was taking the reins after a long austen run that at least a good chunk (not everyone despised austen , despite what the web claims) found lackluster , if not crappy ... yet the best he could bring at first was Golgotha , a even more bland and boring kind of arc ? Later followed up by as crappy the Foxx/Mystique one? Both leaving possibly promising subplots (dont care about doop , but i'd go through anything to see her with powers and with Alex:D As for the other one , someone getting between Rogue and gambit is always good imo) but style born from crappy arcs ...

Claremont sadly imo , despite my fondness for his writing , took too much time . His run has been average at worst , but average at best as well ...
I always like how he plant subplots , but sadly it hasnt lead to anything really thrilling . Now i find his Post-HoM work quite good , but again he took to much time ...

[Loestal]

Marvel keeps writers for a long time actually. Look at the examples above, plus JMS has been doing Spider-man since the Cold War I think.

[Twigglet]

Marvel doesn't let writers have long enough runs. They kick people off way too fast.

Bendis on 100+ issues of Ultimate Spider-man
Bendis on about 60 issues of Daredevil
The wirter on Spider-girl for about 100 issues
JMS on Spider-man fro ages, must be over 50 issues by now?


If the title is good quality, and fans like it, they won't kick someone off.

[Babylon23]

I just assumed that the X-editors don't really have a plan for where they'd like to go with the books, so they keep shaking things up in order to get the short-term sales boost these shakeups always provide.

[fishtaco]

Bendis on 100+ issues of Ultimate Spider-man
Bendis on about 60 issues of Daredevil
The wirter on Spider-girl for about 100 issues
JMS on Spider-man fro ages, must be over 50 issues by now?


If the title is good quality, and fans like it, they won't kick someone off.Bendis is an exception, because Marvel plays favorites. Marvel just just boots off writers to replace them with industry superstars to boost up sales.

[Jack Flash]

Fishtaco, Marvel isn't a Highschool cafeteria, they don't "play" favorites to spite this writer or that one. I think Marvel thinks that certain titles need shake ups, consistently. X-men titles tend to be those. Even Bendis's run on Ultimate X-men didn't last long. Higher profile books tend to get reboots more often than the lower tier ones. with the exception of Ultimate Spidey, (and maybe DD - but pre-relaunch DD was a B list title). Busiek had a huge run on Avengers too. Same with Niceiza on Tbolts. They are just lower tier, so they get more leeway.