Jeph Loeb Doesn't Understand The Medium He Works In

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/newsitem.cgi?id=8722

Carlos drew it beautifully. If I have anything negative to say at all about those 26 issues it's that DC unfairly thought that Carlos was not going to finish the last issue and took three pages away from him and gave it to Ivan Reis. And I like Ivan and I like his artwork, but he had no business being in the arc. It bothers me enormously when I see in the collection that it says “penciled by Carlos Pacheco with Ivan Reis.” Ivan did three pages, I don't think that's a “with.” That's a choice DC made, and that's a choice I was very uncomfortable with. That arc will always be, for me, tainted by that little thing.

One of the things I love about Marvel is that, despite whatever you can say about the delays of “Civil War,” I know what those issues would look like with another artist. And I don't care whether you got Mike Turner to finish them, I'm not interested in seeing it.

It's unfortunate that books ship late, but they are not gum. You don't buy them in a pack and it doesn't matter what you buy. They are meant to tell stories. I just can't imagine what anyone would think if they are watching a movie with Tom Hanks, and for 80% of the movie it's Tom Hanks and then in three scenes it was Tom Cruise, and then Tom Hanks came back and finished the movie. And there was a note at the beginning of the movie that said “Tom wasn't available for those weeks so we used Tom Cruise. Hope you don't mind!”

It demeans what we are trying to do. We are trying to raise comics up beyond the place where you buy them for a dime, roll them up in your pocket and throw them away when you are done reading them. Publishers know this because they know the values of the trades. When you buy a hardcover collection, it would bother me enormously if the ninth issue of “The Long Halloween” trade was drawn by Joe Blow.


If this is how Mr.Loeb feels about artists changing, why doesn't he just do graphic novels?
When people sit down to watch Big, they don't expect the movie to stop 3/4's of a way through, while they are asked to wait a while - the film just got finished, and we're just waiting on the rest of the film print.

Movies aren't serialised in nature, and so his analogy doesn't work.
TV shows, which have to be regular, often change creatives/technicians from episode to episode, and often drop characters out if the actor couldn't do it - we have a daily soap in Australia, and when an actor got ill, they put in a replacement actor, and text piece at the start explaining it.
When John Ritter died, 8 Simple Rules For Dating My Teenage Daughters continued, they had to quickly explain it away and keep going - they had a fan base.
That was the medium/delivery of the show, it's what the customers/viewers expected, and so they had to deliever their product, at the time they said they would.

Now I agree with Mr.Loeb that it does suck when reading a trade and the artist changes for an issue, or half an issue.
However, it must suck even more for fans who have to wait 3 extra months for a book they were told would be monthly, to come out.
It hurts the comic book industry as a whole, everytime it happens.

If Mr. Loeb wants his artists to take their time, then he shouldn't do it in a format that requires a monthly output.
They could do mini's (and not ship until it's completed), or Graphic Novels.
To not expect the consumer, or the company fronting the cash, to get angry when a monthly product isn't monthly, is just plain wrong.

It troubles me when big names in the American comic book industry, names who are associated with getting the industry back on track, show so little concern/understanding what their actions do/mean.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Oh, and this may be a bit more petty, but...
Rob has a style. I don't understand when people say “oh, his anatomy is off and the feet are wrong!” Have they looked at anybody lately? I love Tim Sale, but he's an acquired taste. Not everybody loves Tim Sale. Not everybody loves Jim Lee. The people who grew up on Curt Swan hate anything that looks like art from an Image Comic.

All I can say is that when Rob came onto the scene and characters popped out of panel boxes and splashes turned sideways and there was a visceral excitement to what was going on, you can understand why he became the superstar he was.

He has talent. It may not be a talent you agree to, but it's…interesting to me that people have the problems they have. And it all comes back to the Internet chatter. It has died down significantly, by the way. Sometimes I wonder if the people making those criticisms about Rob even know who Rob is! It's become “Oh look, there's Rob's name. Now I can go say something cool and bag on him.” But it has died down.
Personally I don't like Mr.Liefield art at all - I think Tim Sale has made stylistic choices, I just don't think Rob Liefield can draw.

However, of course people aren't criticizing Rob Liefields art on the net anymore - he hasn't done anything in ages.

Comics ship weekly, and every month there is new product on the shelves - why would we still be complaining/critizing Rob Liefields art when he hasn't had any output in a long time.

Again, Jeph Loeb's understanding of monthly comics, and their fans, seems to be sorely lacking.

[the goddamn batman]

I think you're over reacting. Jeph is saying it bothers him to see a book with a different artist on a small part of it.

You yourself said you agree. Jeph feels a certain way about it and that's fine. I don't think that means he doesn't understand the industry he works in. He's just expressing his opinion on the matter.

In the specific case, I completely agree with him. 3 Fucking pages. They couldn't wait for 3 pages?


Maybe you don't understand the industry you support... I dunno.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I think you're over reacting. Jeph is saying it bothers him to see a book with a different artist on a small part of it.

You yourself said you agree. Jeph feels a certain way about it and that's fine. I don't think that means he doesn't understand the industry he works in. He's just expressing his opinion on the matter.

I agree it doesn't look as good collected, but the collection is made up of issues that shipped monthly (or were expected to do so).
If Mr. Loeb wants his artists to take their time and draw every page perfectly, then they shouldn't be doing monthly work - just big graphic novels.
If he thinks the trade should be the end product, then he shouldn't even bother working on a book that is going to be serialised.
However, that is the main output of American comics at the moment, and unless he wants to bring about change, he shouldn't get upset that companies, retailers and fans want the books to ship when they are supposed to ship.


In the specific case, I completely agree with him. 3 Fucking pages. They couldn't wait for 3 pages?

They couldn't draw the three pages faster?
It costs a lot of money to have an issue late - there's all the work that has to be done after the pencils, and then there's changing the book print time with the printer. There's also sales drop offs on late books.
For a book that shipped monthly - DC made the only call they could.
He should balme the artist, not DC.
DC did what they've always done, and what they are supposed to do, to get a monthly product out on time.


Maybe you don't understand the industry you support... I dunno.

No, I'm probably too aware of all sides.
Look, I read trades because it's more economically feasible for me, and I prefer a big chunk of a read.
Waiting for a while between chunks doesn't bother me - I expect an irregular waiting time - much like I do with books from book authors. There's no expectation that they are going to be released on a set date.

Monthly comic books however, do have set shipping dates, and these should be followed.
And if they can't be followed, one can't really complain when the company goes ' it's only 3 pages, give it to someone else, we'll lose too much money otherwise'.

It's not so much he feels this way, it's that he has the gall to complain about a system that he should know about.

[scratchie]

I think it's interesting that he says:

We are trying to raise comics up beyond the place where you buy them for a dime, roll them up in your pocket and throw them away when you are done reading them.I just had a conversation about this at my LCS yesterday. It seemed to us (from the customer/retail side) that the comic book companies should be trying to get people back into the "buy comics at the newsstand, roll them up and throw them out when you're done" if they want to insure the industry's longterm success.

Publishers know this because they know the values of the trades.The reason why trades are so valuable to the publishers is that the stories and art are already paid for by the monthlies (including their ads). Obviously a huge company like DC can afford to publish an occasional high-profile "stand-alone" graphic novel like Fables: 1001 Nights of Snowfall, but the economic engine that drives the business still seems to be the monthly books.

I've been reading a lot of "Big Two" books over the last year or so, and I'm starting to switch over to "waiting for the trades" on certain titles. Between the publishing delays and the newer trends in comic book scripting (I hesitate to call it "decompression" because the stories aren't really any longer than they were in the 70s; the problems have to do more with getting the reader up to speed at the beginning of each new issue), I just find that a lot of titles aren't as rewarding to read one at a time.

So I would love to see more of a full-blown move towards "trades-only" publishing, but I honestly doubt that the industry could support that. DC and Marvel crank out trades by the bushel-basket now because they're almost pure profit. Take away the monthlies and that whole model changes.

When you buy a hardcover collection, it would bother me enormously if the ninth issue of “The Long Halloween” trade was drawn by Joe Blow.Every form of commercial artistic expression known to mankind involves artistic compromise.

[ValhallaComics]

It sounds like someone's pretty bitter about Jeph Loeb. lol I like how you threw that Rob Liefeld comment in there.

I see your point, though. Loeb has been in the industry long enough to know that deadlines are needed to meet the needs of monthly titles. If an artist cannot make a deadline (or has been having difficulties along the way to meet deadlines) he/she should be replaced or substituted for. There's too much money to be lost in the production of comics. You need to pay your artists, writers and editors, as well as your printers. You also need to be able to sell your product to the likes of distributors, like Diamond; who in turn, sells to retailers, who sell to consumers. There's a chain of events. If one portion of that chain slows down or can't perform, the rest of the chain reaps the repercussions.

Getting product to the consumers, when the product is said to have been coming out, is highly important. Delaying a book certainly decreases the likeliness that you'd sell as many of that book, than you would have if it were released on time. Printers can be nasty businesses, as well. They're very particular about timing and schedules, so putting off a book can delay that and produce more trouble for a publisher.

Fun times!

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

It sounds like someone's pretty bitter about Jeph Loeb. lol I like how you threw that Rob Liefeld comment in there.


Until this interview, I had nothing against the guy - still don't, I just think he's rather silly/naive - no slight to him, but he doesn't write books I want to read, read some I didn't like, read a couple that I did - no bitterness though.

He just puzzles me that everything he doesn't like is bad business, and everything he likes is good business, despite the reality of the situation.

[ValhallaComics]

Until this interview, I had nothing against the guy - still don't, I just think he's rather silly/naive - no slight to him, but he doesn't write books I want to read, read some I didn't like, read a couple that I did - no bitterness though.

He just puzzles me that everything he doesn't like is bad business, and everything he likes is good business, despite the reality of the situation.

Oh, I definitely know where you're coming from and I completely agree with you in your argument. I'm really a huge fan of some of the things he's done, such as Kingdom Come and the multitude of Batman macro-series', as well as his stint on Superman/Batman. It's a let-down when you hear/read things like this from the people you admire or are a fan of; something you completely disagree with them about. He's a writer, though, not a businessman. So, he doesn't necessarily have the brightest business sense in the industry. Therefore, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

[StrikeForce Albert]

He just puzzles me that everything he doesn't like is bad business, and everything he likes is good business, despite the reality of the situation.

That's the making of a future EiC right there

bet on it

[ValhallaComics]

That's the making of a future EiC right there

bet on it

lol, I wouldn't doubt it for a second. Jim Shooter anyone? (though, most of his decisions were good ones, I must admit - MOST, not all) ;P

[noface]

Movies aren't serialised in nature, and so his analogy doesn't work.
TV shows, which have to be regular, often change creatives/technicians from episode to episode, and often drop characters out if the actor couldn't do it - we have a daily soap in Australia, and when an actor got ill, they put in a replacement actor, and text piece at the start explaining it.
When John Ritter died, 8 Simple Rules For Dating My Teenage Daughters continued, they had to quickly explain it away and keep going - they had a fan base.


I think the reason the analogy fails is because the artists aren't comparable to the actors. They're the directors. And second unit directors are used on almost every film to save the budget and stay on deadline.

[Reptisaurus!]

I agree with him completely.

If I was in the same situation, I'd be pissed.

If Alan Moore was in the same situation, he'd stop working in comics forever, again.

[Ryan Day]

For a guy who's worked in Hollywood, Loeb used a pretty bad comparison:

I just can't imagine what anyone would think if they are watching a movie with Tom Hanks, and for 80% of the movie it's Tom Hanks and then in three scenes it was Tom Cruise, and then Tom Hanks came back and finished the movie. And there was a note at the beginning of the movie that said “Tom wasn't available for those weeks so we used Tom Cruise. Hope you don't mind!”

He's right that audiences would be upset. But he misses the part where almost no studio would allow that to happen. If Cruise walked off the set in the middle of filming for anything other than serious illness or family emergency, he'd be looking at a massive violation of contract lawsuit. Or what would happen if the director knew that Tom Cruise was only available for 25 days of shooting and didn't finish shooting his scenes?

Most movies, particularly the big blockbuster types, have release dates chiselled in stone months, if not years, in advance. Those dates can't be missed, and that means doing whatever it takes to get the film done in time; there's no option for "Tom Cruise wants another three weeks to work on this scene." They have rigorous schedules for planning, shooting, and post-production, and every time something gets pushed back it costs money.

[Reptisaurus!]

http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/newsitem.cgi?id=8722



Movies aren't serialised in nature, and so his analogy doesn't work.
TV shows, which have to be regular, often change creatives/technicians from episode to episode, and often drop characters out if the actor couldn't do it - we have a daily soap in Australia, and when an actor got ill, they put in a replacement actor, and text piece at the start explaining it.
When John Ritter died, 8 Simple Rules For Dating My Teenage Daughters continued, they had to quickly explain it away and keep going - they had a fan base.
That was the medium/delivery of the show, it's what the customers/viewers expected, and so they had to deliever their product, at the time they said they would.


Pssst.

You have the wrong blog.

"Comics should be dragged down to the soulless, valueless, level of Hollywood Movies and Television" is next door.

[ValhallaComics]

For a guy who's worked in Hollywood, Loeb used a pretty bad comparison:



He's right that audiences would be upset. But he misses the part where almost no studio would allow that to happen. If Cruise walked off the set in the middle of filming for anything other than serious illness or family emergency, he'd be looking at a massive violation of contract lawsuit. Or what would happen if the director knew that Tom Cruise was only available for 25 days of shooting and didn't finish shooting his scenes?

Most movies, particularly the big blockbuster types, have release dates chiselled in stone months, if not years, in advance. Those dates can't be missed, and that means doing whatever it takes to get the film done in time; there's no option for "Tom Cruise wants another three weeks to work on this scene." They have rigorous schedules for planning, shooting, and post-production, and every time something gets pushed back it costs money.

You bring up a good point. The Publishing companies are entirely too leniant, at times, with their creators. If there's a deadline, make them stick to it. They do so for magazines and newspapers. Why should it be any different from any other publishing entity?

[Josh S]

They do so for magazines and newspapers. Why should it be any different from any other publishing entity?

That's a bad comparison.

[ValhallaComics]

That's a bad comparison.

Why is that? They all function on the basis of deadlines and release dates. They're all publications/periodicals. Sure, Newspapers have to deal with day-to-day "news," but they have other stories, that must be sought out, as well. They also have their deadlines for extended projects.

Care to elaborate?

[Punch]

Why is that? They all function on the basis of deadlines and release dates. They're all publications/periodicals. Sure, Newspapers have to deal with day-to-day "news," but they have other stories, that must be sought out, as well. They also have their deadlines for extended projects.

Care to elaborate?

comics are an artistic medium, not fact-based.

The best analogy is the TV show. As someone else has already stated, soap operas often change the actor for playing a particular character.

I don't know the whole story, but just from that quote he says

LOEB
DC unfairly thought that Carlos was not going to finish the last issue and took three pages away from him and gave it to Ivan Reis.

Does that mean he wasn't late, they just thought that he would be?
I agree mostly with what he's saying either way. I mean, 3 pages? DC could have waited.

And not to "go there" but I agree with what he says in his Liefield quote

[Jmacq1]

There's probably the wee problem that if you come down hard on the talent for not meeting deadlines, you'll soon whittle the industry down to the handful of writers/artists who -can- always get the books out on time reliably. But since they're now drawing 10 books a month....not so much.

It's a self-defeating circle, basically. The only way to really "penalize" them is to not pay them/not continue employing them. By doing that, you whittle away your talent pool, until there's very little left. Sure, a few people would step up and increase their output, but if they sacrifice quality in the name of quantity, the only person that really benefits in the end is the corporate bottom line.

Me? I'd much rather wait a week, or even a month for a good comic than get a mediocre one on time every month.

[Phrozen]

There's probably the wee problem that if you come down hard on the talent for not meeting deadlines, you'll soon whittle the industry down to the handful of writers/artists who -can- always get the books out on time reliably. But since they're now drawing 10 books a month....not so much.

It's a self-defeating circle, basically. The only way to really "penalize" them is to not pay them/not continue employing them. By doing that, you whittle away your talent pool, until there's very little left. Sure, a few people would step up and increase their output, but if they sacrifice quality in the name of quantity, the only person that really benefits in the end is the corporate bottom line.

Me? I'd much rather wait a week, or even a month for a good comic than get a mediocre one on time every month.

No, what you do is you set up the contract so that it penalizes them a percentage for late work.

Artist gets the work in a week late. 10% of his pay goes away.

Sure, the talent will bitch and complain but it isn't like there aren't a multitude of aspiring artists and writers waiting to fill the gap.

[Reptisaurus!]

No, what you do is you set up the contract so that it penalizes them a percentage for late work.

Artist gets the work in a week late. 10% of his pay goes away.

Sure, the talent will bitch and complain but it isn't like there aren't a multitude of aspiring artists and writers waiting to fill the gap.

But it's gonna hurt the upper end of your talent pool more. Sure, there's lots of people who could fill in for generic-creator-X.

But there's only one Alan Moore. His stuff is consistently late, either 'cause of the man himself or the artists he collaborates with, but CBR called him the best writer in comics. Edit: And from DC's point of view, a Consistent, year-to-year cash cow.

[howyadoin]

I'm really a huge fan of some of the things he's done, such as Kingdom Come and the multitude of Batman macro-series', as well as his stint on Superman/Batman.Who are we talkng about, again? Mark Waid wrote Kingdom Come.

[the goddamn batman]

If Mr. Loeb wants his artists to take their time and draw every page perfectly, then they shouldn't be doing monthly work - just big graphic novels.

See, I agree with this, but mainly as I think the monthly floppies are shit, and GN's are better in almost every aspect.

So, I agree with more OGN's.

If he thinks the trade should be the end product, then he shouldn't even bother working on a book that is going to be serialised.

Well, this sorta sums up your lack of understanding for the industry you support.

However, that is the main output of American comics at the moment, and unless he wants to bring about change, he shouldn't get upset that companies, retailers and fans want the books to ship when they are supposed to ship.


I'd agree with this if DC didn't ship a boat load of late titles... superman/Batman being on of them... on a regular basis.

All Star Batman is shipping with 10 months passing between issues... how is THAT ok, but 3 fucking pages need to be passed to another artist?

If DC's business model wasn't a complete contradiction to your statement, I might agree. I do on principal, though... to some extent.


They couldn't draw the three pages faster?

Obviously not. DC seems to ship lots of other books late, so why was this one not ok?

For a book that shipped monthly - DC made the only call they could.

again, the current DC business model would suggest otherwise. The ONLY decisions they could make... on ONLY this book.


He should balme the artist, not DC.

LMFAO.

DC did what they've always done, and what they are supposed to do, to get a monthly product out on time.

again, if DC and Marvel didn't both shrug off... no, support and to some extent seem to advoicate late books, to accommodate the artists, you'd have a point.


No, I'm probably too aware of all sides.

Except the side of the creative professionals working on the titles and what that requores, and that soemtimes shit does just happen.

Monthly comic books however, do have set shipping dates, and these should be followed.

SHOULD, being the key word.

And if they can't be followed, one can't really complain when the company goes ' it's only 3 pages, give it to someone else, we'll lose too much money otherwise'.

except that it doesn't seem to be the general policy enforced accross the board.

Considering the amount of late, and VERY late titles that are rampant in this industry right now, I think Jephs complaint is fair.

NO offence to you, I just think Jeph is right on on this one.

[the goddamn batman]

But since they're now drawing 10 books a month....not so much.

Who's this now? Show me ONE artist drawing 10 books a month.

Most can't handle two, let alone 10. Random fantasy numbers are not going to further this debate in any real way.

[Phrozen]

But it's gonna hurt the upper end of your talent pool more. Sure, there's lots of people who could fill in for generic-creator-X.

But there's only one Alan Moore. His stuff is consistently late, either 'cause of the man himself or the artists he collaborates with, but CBR called him the best writer in comics. Edit: And from DC's point of view, a Consistent, year-to-year cash cow.

The upper end of your talent pool should be producing. If things are late that means they are busy finishing up work that should be done already and not producing new work. The company is losing potential profits from that. Basically, all the company is asking for is a little professionalism.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I agree with him completely.

If I was in the same situation, I'd be pissed.

If Alan Moore was in the same situation, he'd stop working in comics forever, again.

Alan Moore only ever shipped late to keep the same artist when it was on a mini-series, or when it was with HIS line of books.
HIS line, his call - though he did start losing sales when he shipped late.

When Moore works for company owned product, he's always had fill-in artists and such.
Rick Veitch was constantly filling in on Swamp Thing.
WildCATS had multiple artists - often in the same issue.

He understands getting the product out on time, as should every professional person working on company owned comics.
If that means fill in artists - so be it.
If that means the editorial staff all cramming in to colour an issue or finish the inking, so be it.
It's what happens in film, TV and all print mediums.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I mean, 3 pages? DC could have waited.


No they couldn't, and no they shouldn't.
DC and retailers all would have lost money, and good will, if the book didn't ship on time.
3 pages means you can make the shipping date, and not have to re-solicit in Previews with new creator details.
They made a business desicion, and it was sound.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Well, this sorta sums up your lack of understanding for the industry you support.
No it doesn't.
A comic is supposed to come out every month, the comic should come out every month.
It's that simple.
If Loeb and other creators want to be treated like arists, and be able to get their work perfect, then they shouldn't work on monthly books - it's that simple.
There are plenty of other alternatives - and Jeph Loeb in particular, has stated many times, that he doen't even need the money he gets from comics - so why not just stick to mini's, or OGN's, if he's not happy with the business driven reality of a monthly product.


I'd agree with this if DC didn't ship a boat load of late titles... superman/Batman being on of them... on a regular basis.


This is a rather recent trend of DC's, and it is somthing I'm sad to see them get into - way to take the buzz out of Seven Soldiers Of Victory!

Perhaps they decided they couldn't afford for it to be later, or wanted to get back on track, either way, they should ship monthly - that's what the publishers advertise the books as doing - and so I don't think having a cry because an editor did their job is professional behaviour.


All Star Batman is shipping with 10 months passing between issues... how is THAT ok, but 3 fucking pages need to be passed to another artist?

Because it's only selling because of the talent?
I don't know - I think it's really wrong too, and I think Jim Lee should be ashamed of how many late books he's got shipping at the moment.


If DC's business model wasn't a complete contradiction to your statement, I might agree. I do on principal, though... to some extent.
Books shipping late is actually the break from DC's business model, same with Marvel.
Not sure how they justify it to their respective boards.

I can only imagine they claim that they'll make up the sales with the trades - which to me, means that if trades sell so well, why bother with monthly comics, if the talent can't handle it?


again, the current DC business model would suggest otherwise. The ONLY decisions they could make... on ONLY this book.
Again, this isn't their business model.
Their business model calls for monthly product.

LMFAO.
Why laugh?
The artist doesn't own the characters, and is paid a set wage.
He didn't deliver what DC asked for.
Who's fault is that?

again, if DC and Marvel didn't both shrug off... no, support and to some extent seem to advoicate late books, to accommodate the artists, you'd have a point.
I do have a point.
They are both losing money hand over fist - listen to the outcry from retailers, not fans, retailers, every time one of them doesn't ship a monthly product.
They are relying on the bookstore/TPB market to make up the gap in their profit - and it that's what their doing, why bother with monthly product?
If your going to advertise a monthly product, then you really should ship it monthly.

I hate my New X-Men run having Igor Kordey's rushed art in the middle, but I don't blame Marvel for that - the book was way too late as it was.

Except the side of the creative professionals working on the titles and what that requores, and that soemtimes shit does just happen.
Dude, they work in a industry that calls for MONTHLY product.
Plenty of artists can get it done - if they want to be professionals they should act professional.
Set upa studio system if they have to, take on an apprentice or a background drawer.
If the artist can't get an issue a month then they shouldn't be doing monthly comics.

Tony Harris had trouble with Starman, so James Robinson came up with the 'Times Past' issues to fill the gap, and the book shipped monthly.
Crossgen planned for two fill in artists a year, and so everyone knew it was coming.

There are many ways around shipping late/having an second artist finish an issue, but bitching and complaining about a company wanting the product to ship when all involved agreed it would ship is just ridiculous.

SHOULD, being the key word.

If you agree, why stick up for the guy who's upset because the company tried to get that to happen?


except that it doesn't seem to be the general policy enforced accross the board.

Considering the amount of late, and VERY late titles that are rampant in this industry right now, I think Jephs complaint is fair.

NO offence to you, I just think Jeph is right on on this one.

Jeph's complaint isn't fair at all - what DC did should be the norm.
Get back to studio systems, have apprentices, get a breakdown artist/finishing artist.
It's only because of the 'good will'/blind devotion to characters of comic fans that books can ship late in the first place.
In any other industry, creative or otherwise, missing the deadline is suicide - and you've got to do everything you can to make it.

[Reptisaurus!]

Watchmen.

Sandman.

Dark Knight Returns.

Maus. (Volume two was, like, TWO YEARS late. Way to kill the buzz.)

Howard the Duck.

Hell, I'll throw Ultimates in there.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Watchmen.

Sandman.

Dark Knight Returns.

Maus. (Volume two was, like, TWO YEARS late. Way to kill the buzz.)

Howard the Duck.

Exceptions.
Works of art.
(Three of which were mini-series, not ongoings)
Bad business at the time, but history proved their worthiness.
Though when was Sandman late? It also had constant guest artists on issues - mid storyline.


Hell, I'll throw Ultimates in there.

It doesn't belong.
(Howard doesn't either, but I love the little bugger).

Ultimates I stopped getting montly when it came out - I couldn't remember what happened from one issue to the last.
I may or may not pick up the final trade.
It's compleltly irresponisble though.

[the goddamn batman]

No it doesn't.
A comic is supposed to come out every month, the comic should come out every month.
It's that simple.
If Loeb and other creators want to be treated like arists, and be able to get their work perfect, then they shouldn't work on monthly books - it's that simple.

I agree. Monthly comics SHOULD come out every month.

But, the current trend of books running really late without a fill in artist helping, I think, is what pisses Jeph off.

For me, having 3 pages handed to another guy, when several other titles are shipping ridiculously late... waiting for their artists, I'd be pissed too. Why my book?

There are plenty of other alternatives - and Jeph Loeb in particular, has stated many times, that he doen't even need the money he gets from comics - so why not just stick to mini's, or OGN's, if he's not happy with the business driven reality of a monthly product.

Again, with the amount of late books at the moment, I thinnk Jephs complaint is fair. Why does his book get 3... I can't stress that enough, 3 pages passed off?

When Travis Charrest coulnd't get but 8 pages done in 2 months, and they brought in fill in guys to finish the issues, fine. But, Lee get's 10 months to draw 22 pages.

So, I see why Jeph is mad, again, monthly comics are not shipping monthly. If DC or Marvel did it across the board, and said no more late books, period, Fine. But, they didn't. They did it to Jeph and his book, and I see nothing wrong with being a bit upset about it.

Again, I think you're making more out of it than Jeph. He just spoke his mind. That's fair.

Perhaps they decided they couldn't afford for it to be later, or wanted to get back on track, either way, they should ship monthly - that's what the publishers advertise the books as doing - and so I don't think having a cry because an editor did their job is professional behaviour.

Again, I think it's the exclusivity of the fill in artist that might be whats bothering Jeph.

I can only imagine they claim that they'll make up the sales with the trades - which to me, means that if trades sell so well, why bother with monthly comics, if the talent can't handle it?

Why not just build up a back log? And take a 3 month break when that runs dry, and build it back up, like G0dland.

There are many ways around shipping late/having an second artist finish an issue, but bitching and complaining about a company wanting the product to ship when all involved agreed it would ship is just ridiculous.

Sure, if that seemed to be what they do... but it isn't. DC books are shipping late all the time. Isn't Batman running late? I thought Batman was one of the books that... no matter what... ships on time, every time.

So, it's, to me, the lack of a standard that would piss me off.


Jeph's complaint isn't fair at all - what DC did should be the norm.

Right, SHOULD. Not IS. Jeph's complaint is fair, because DC does not use this policy as a standard practice anymore.

Forcing a fill in guy on SOME books, is crap. Jim should be pulled from both his titles right now. He simply ca not, or will not, draw his pages.

I don't care why. If it ran a few weeks late, sometimes... I wouldn't give a shit. But, 10 months?

So, for that to be acceptable, but these 3 pages need to get done NOW, so this guys going to draw them... is bullshit, and I'd be mad too. oh, I'm an artist, so there is a bit of a bias.

Get back to studio systems, have apprentices, get a breakdown artist/finishing artist.
It's only because of the 'good will'/blind devotion to characters of comic fans that books can ship late in the first place.
In any other industry, creative or otherwise, missing the deadline is suicide - and you've got to do everything you can to make it.

I agree. And again, have nothing against the fill in guy on a monthly book. But, when it isn't a standard practice being enforced on all titles... but get's enforced on you? That's crap.

So, I think Jeph has a fair complaint. And if you don't, remember, you're just complaiining about him complaining. Which is more valid?;)

Cheers.

[Ryan Day]

Dude, they work in a industry that calls for MONTHLY product.

This is the big problem - Marvel & DC can't seem to accept that certain creative teams cannot do monthly books. They put books on schedules that almost anyone could see are unreasonable - who ever thought Adi Granov could do a monthly book? - and they'll frequently continue to solicit issues even though they're already late.

Dan Didio made an interesting point a while back when talking about the Ostrander/Mandrake fill-in arc on Batman - he said that it was important that there be an issue of Batman on the stands every month, so that's why they broke up the Morrison/Kubert run. Batman is Batman, but The Ultimates is Millar & Hitch, and that's a pretty key difference.

What they need to do is establish which books need to be monthly products and which need to be creator-driven. If it's really important to keep a creative team together and that team can't be expected to do a monthly book, they need to set up a schedule that makes sense - bi-monthly, breaks between arcs, whatever.

[Agentum]

Bullshit if i say i don't like Liefelds art it's because i don't like it, is he stupid or something.
He may like it all he want i don't care or is it because all the chatter on the net with fanboys that makes him like it?

Also i think he is trying to make it sound as comics isn't comics but some kind of lasting art, i like that comic is what it is "cheap" entertainment that can be thrown away when read. But they are not that cheap anymore of course:)
Hmm Kingdom come is Mark Waid by the way, if he didn't seal it from Moore:D

I'm with those that think that a monthly books should be a monthly book if not a disaster happens, if they can't do it just advertise it as a quarterlybook or whatever, the problem is that the publishers says it's a monthly book even if they have only one book ready.
I have no problems with fil ins either a one issue self contained story, almost unique today:D
But fillins can't save some books, it would be more fillins than ordinary issues.

If he writes books like he did recently on Supergirl he can stop with that it's bad business:D

More business talk than comicstalk i think.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I agree. Monthly comics SHOULD come out every month.

But, the current trend of books running really late without a fill in artist helping, I think, is what pisses Jeph off.

For me, having 3 pages handed to another guy, when several other titles are shipping ridiculously late... waiting for their artists, I'd be pissed too. Why my book?



Again, with the amount of late books at the moment, I thinnk Jephs complaint is fair. Why does his book get 3... I can't stress that enough, 3 pages passed off?

When Travis Charrest coulnd't get but 8 pages done in 2 months, and they brought in fill in guys to finish the issues, fine. But, Lee get's 10 months to draw 22 pages.

So, I see why Jeph is mad, again, monthly comics are not shipping monthly. If DC or Marvel did it across the board, and said no more late books, period, Fine. But, they didn't. They did it to Jeph and his book, and I see nothing wrong with being a bit upset about it.

Again, I think you're making more out of it than Jeph. He just spoke his mind. That's fair.

But that isn't what Loeb is saying - he's arguing that all books should ship late if the team can't work monthly (and his reasoning seems to hint towards a book starring Superman AND Batman is art).

That's where my problem is - the book is monthly, and if the teams can't do it, then they shouldn't be trying to, and if they do try to, they shouldn't be shocked when they get a replacement artists.

If Loeb was saying it should happen to all company owned ongoing monthly books - I'd be there with him.
But he's not.

Again, I think it's the exclusivity of the fill in artist that might be whats bothering Jeph.

He doesn't say that's what bothers him - I could understand if it was, but I still wouldn't be sympathetic.
He made a blanket statement that books should ship late - and that ignores the reality of the situation.


Why not just build up a back log? And take a 3 month break when that runs dry, and build it back up, like G0dland.

Indeed, why not?
Or why not have someone else work on filler issues to plug the gap?

The difference with Godland though, is that Joe Casey and the artist own that book, so they can do what they want.
DC owns Superman and Batman, and they expect it to ship monthly, so they don't.
Hence, there shouldn't be shock when they get fill-ins to get the book out on time.


Sure, if that seemed to be what they do... but it isn't. DC books are shipping late all the time. Isn't Batman running late? I thought Batman was one of the books that... no matter what... ships on time, every time.

So, it's, to me, the lack of a standard that would piss me off.

If I read any of those books, it would piss me off as well - it should piss everyone off, in fact it does, and sales suffer.

However, Loeb is saying that books should ship whenever the creatives deem to get the work done on a character they don't own.
That's ridiculous, and it's killing American superhero comics.

Right, SHOULD. Not IS. Jeph's complaint is fair, because DC does not use this policy as a standard practice anymore.
No, he never mentions that it only happened on his book, he thinks it should be standard on all books.
That's why he is wrong, and doesn't understand the medium he works in.
He's not making a movie, he's making a comic.
Different rules.

Forcing a fill in guy on SOME books, is crap. Jim should be pulled from both his titles right now. He simply ca not, or will not, draw his pages.

I don't care why. If it ran a few weeks late, sometimes... I wouldn't give a shit. But, 10 months?

Yep.
However, the big selling point on that Batman book is Miller and Lee, so they won't - even if they should.
The big selling point on Superman/Batman is there in the title.

Why Lee is so late on Batman, I don't know.
How he can let it happen on Batman and he's own creaton, is beyond me.

So, for that to be acceptable, but these 3 pages need to get done NOW, so this guys going to draw them... is bullshit, and I'd be mad too. oh, I'm an artist, so there is a bit of a bias.
Again, your saying his angry because it happened only to him, he never says that.
He says companies should just sit and wait for freelancers to get the companies characters/books out on time.


I agree. And again, have nothing against the fill in guy on a monthly book. But, when it isn't a standard practice being enforced on all titles... but get's enforced on you? That's crap.
Is is, and it should be.

However, which other ongoings from DC isn't it being done on?
Not mini's but ongoings?

Remeber, DC, unlike Marvel, had the sense to make Kevin Smith hand in a years worth of scripts, before they even solicited Green Arrow #1.

So, I think Jeph has a fair complaint. And if you don't, remember, you're just complaiining about him complaining. Which is more valid?;)

Cheers.

I don't think your logic leads to either being more valid.

It comes down to this - you want all your books to be late?

Then Loeb is right.

If you want books to come out when they are advertised as coming out?

DC is right.

[alextron]

I feel sorry for people who wanted to see Loeb and Campbell's Spider-man. First off, Campbell has 'scheduling issues'. Secondly, if that's Loeb's attitude then expect Spider-man never to make a come back. I don't. He's pretty much done as a character.

He's doing a Ultimate Wolverine thing with Turner. Ultimate Wolverine, as opposed to the really lame Wolverine from the original books. The six inches height difference sure must supe this Ultimate Logan... I'm sorry... James up. Loeb refers to Wolverine as 'James' now. How lame is that?

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

He's doing a Ultimate Wolverine thing with Turner.

Well it's been announced - but the two of them are just talking about it at the moment.

[diablo7]

in last month's wizard they showed some of turner's sketches for ultimate wolverine..i think it's coming out sometime next year. turner's not much better on deadlines so this book will be extremely late, much like batman/superman. but it's ok because loeb thinks it's okay for a book scheduled monthly to come out quarterly.

[ValhallaComics]

There's probably the wee problem that if you come down hard on the talent for not meeting deadlines, you'll soon whittle the industry down to the handful of writers/artists who -can- always get the books out on time reliably. But since they're now drawing 10 books a month....not so much.

It's a self-defeating circle, basically. The only way to really "penalize" them is to not pay them/not continue employing them. By doing that, you whittle away your talent pool, until there's very little left. Sure, a few people would step up and increase their output, but if they sacrifice quality in the name of quantity, the only person that really benefits in the end is the corporate bottom line.

Me? I'd much rather wait a week, or even a month for a good comic than get a mediocre one on time every month.

So how do you feel about Spiderman/Black Cat: The Evil Men Do, by Kevin Smith and Terry Dodson? Did you wait for that one? Three years in the making, attributed to lazy writing.

Lateness can make or break a title. Would you rather replace an artist or have a title fail? These are the questions a publisher needs to ask itself. I, personally, would replace the artist. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, or not, but there are a plethora of very talented artists out there that would jump at a chance to draw comics. A publisher only need place an ad in a magazine, paper, online forum and they'll receive a ton of feedback. Don't believe me? Check out deviantart.com.

[ValhallaComics]

Who are we talkng about, again? Mark Waid wrote Kingdom Come.

lol, good point. They all just run together, sometimes. =X

[ValhallaComics]

comics are an artistic medium, not fact-based.

The best analogy is the TV show. As someone else has already stated, soap operas often change the actor for playing a particular character.

I don't know the whole story, but just from that quote he says


Actually, TV is a horrible comparison, because they play re-runs when they don't have a fresh episode.

Sorry, I'm still sticking by my Newspaper/Magazine comparison. ;P

[Matt Algren]

So how do you feel about Spiderman/Black Cat: The Evil Men Do, by Kevin Smith and Terry Dodson? Did you wait for that one? Three years in the making, attributed to lazy writing.Really? The report I read was that Marvel accepted the story and decided to change it after Smith was already committed to a couple movies and didn't have time to redo the story.

That problem's on Marvel.

[Reptisaurus!]

Actually, TV is a horrible comparison, because they play re-runs when they don't have a fresh episode.

Sorry, I'm still sticking by my Newspaper/Magazine comparison. ;P

I can't believe I'm explaining this to someone. What do I know from TV.

(A) Huh. You've never read any seventies Marvel comics, have ya'?

(B) Television show-maker-guys (See! Don't even know the terminology) are contracted to produce a certain number of episodes a year. (Buffy and Lost had 22 a year.)

NOT one episode a week.

It's not a perfect comparison, but it's a thousand percent better than TV or magazines.

They both produce a certain ammount of Fictional, Entertainment-oriented, (Read: Not art. Usually), Serial, entertainment. They both have specific deadlines, which create approximately th' same amount of time pressure to get product out to the audience.

Sometimes, TV shows are LATE. Like comics. (I know Lost was.)



* I could be completely full of shit here. WhadoIknow from TV? But it's a reasonable assumption.

[StrikeForce Albert]

Really? The report I read was that Marvel accepted the story and decided to change it after Smith was already committed to a couple movies and didn't have time to redo the story.

That problem's on Marvel.

Sorry, I can buy a few months, but not years. That's being lazy.

[StrikeForce Albert]

in last month's wizard they showed some of turner's sketches for ultimate wolverine..i think it's coming out sometime next year. turner's not much better on deadlines so this book will be extremely late, much like batman/superman. but it's ok because loeb thinks it's okay for a book scheduled monthly to come out quarterly.

you didn't get the memo?

That later the comics is the better the comic. Just ask Joe Q. :rolleyes:

[Tommy]

I can't believe I'm explaining this to someone. What do I know from TV.

(A) Huh. You've never read any seventies Marvel comics, have ya'?

(B) Television show-maker-guys (See! Don't even know the terminology) are contracted to produce a certain number of episodes a year. (Buffy and Lost had 22 a year.)

NOT one episode a week.

It's not a perfect comparison, but it's a thousand percent better than TV or magazines.

They both produce a certain ammount of Fictional, Entertainment-oriented, (Read: Not art. Usually), Serial, entertainment. They both have specific deadlines, which create approximately th' same amount of time pressure to get product out to the audience.

Sometimes, TV shows are LATE. Like comics. (I know Lost was.)



* I could be completely full of shit here. WhadoIknow from TV? But it's a reasonable assumption.
I will throw my two cents in since I studied TV production.

Networks give TV shows a certain number of episodes to produce per year. Then the executive producers of the show assemble a group of writers, directors, and producers. The show itself is usually shot between five to ten days (sometimes more sometimes less). At which point postproduction steps in.

TV differs from comics in several ways. The most obvious is the concept of reruns. Since television production is a grueling schedule to make up for any delays in the season they can just fill in with an old episode. Comics don't have thus luxury.

Another important difference is that generally a TV show is written by either different people each week or by a group of people. And it is often directed by someone different each week. Translating to comics it would be similar to a title that changes writers and artists each month.

[ValhallaComics]

Really? The report I read was that Marvel accepted the story and decided to change it after Smith was already committed to a couple movies and didn't have time to redo the story.

That problem's on Marvel.

Last report I read was that it was Kevin Smith's fault for delaying his writing. He admits it. Go read another interview. Hell, look it up on wikipedia, it's there.

[diablo7]

yup smith's the reason for the delay...he got caught up in making jerseygirl...smart move on that one kev

[NickThompson]

Personally, I'm with Loeb. It bugs me when a book has fill-ins within the 22 pages. I don't even like when it happens within arcs.

[ValhallaComics]

I can't believe I'm explaining this to someone. What do I know from TV.

(A) Huh. You've never read any seventies Marvel comics, have ya'?

(B) Television show-maker-guys (See! Don't even know the terminology) are contracted to produce a certain number of episodes a year. (Buffy and Lost had 22 a year.)

NOT one episode a week.

It's not a perfect comparison, but it's a thousand percent better than TV or magazines.

Do you mean newspapers and magazines? ;P


They both produce a certain ammount of Fictional, Entertainment-oriented, (Read: Not art. Usually), Serial, entertainment. They both have specific deadlines, which create approximately th' same amount of time pressure to get product out to the audience.

Sometimes, TV shows are LATE. Like comics. (I know Lost was.)

* I could be completely full of shit here. WhadoIknow from TV? But it's a reasonable assumption.

You're comparing apples to oranges, still. TV production requires much more time to produce one episode; that's why there are only about 22 episodes per year, using an entire team for the production staff, whereas each comic produced requires a minimum of 3-4, maximum of 5-8 (writer, penciller, inker, colorist, editor, publisher, printer). The venue allows for re-runs, to spread the 22 episodes out in a year.

I've yet to figure out why reading 1970s Marvel comics has anything to do with anything about this argument... What're you getting at?

[Agentum]

I think that Kevin Smith comic writing wasn't something to wait for, who cares if he ever comes back to comics?

[the goddamn batman]

Or why not have someone else work on filler issues to plug the gap?

Because, that is teh artistic suck.

The difference with Godland though, is that Joe Casey and the artist own that book, so they can do what they want.

The difference is that Godland is treated as a piece of art by it's creative team.

The difference is that they saw their problem coming, made a statement, did the delay, are back now, offering 60 cent issues, and I've not seen one complaint, or "Well, I'm dropping this" come out of it.

They know that the creative team is the most important part of that book, creator owned or not, and are not willing to sacrifice any part of what makes Godland, Godland. As it should be.

DC owns Superman and Batman, and they expect it to ship monthly, so they don't

I'm sorry, but isn't Batman late at the moment? I thought that was THE big no-no. And yet.

Hence, there shouldn't be shock when they get fill-ins to get the book out on time.

When it isn't happening as a company policy, or on said book, which had already been shipping late, it not only should be, but would be. And it was.


If I read any of those books, it would piss me off as well - it should piss everyone off, in fact it does, and sales suffer.

Again, Godland seems to be doing just as well as it ever was. Besides, Joe and Tom are willing to take a pay cut for their art. A 60 cent issue? They want more people to pick it up, as you should, it''s awesome, and they will. Guess what? Some of those people will continue to buy the series, and get the trades and BAM! Sales improve. They even had a 3 month delay.

Godland is the perect example of how to handle a delay with class.

If DC can't understand it, then I'm glad I don't really read their books. Fuck them. To DC it's only a product. Grant Morrison is only a big name that will bring in bi sales. Frank Miller and JIm Lee. Big names, big sales. Big steaming piles of late shit, both of 'em.

So, no, I don't think Jeph is out of line with his complaint, how ever he meant it.

If you do have an issue with a creative persons creativity being fucked with, then obviously the only thing you've ever made was on the shitter.

However, Loeb is saying that books should ship whenever the creatives deem to get the work done on a character they don't own.
That's ridiculous, and it's killing American superhero comics.

Actually, shitty stories aimed at the current buyer, while ignoring the new buyer, continuity nuts, the monthly concept, the direct market, and the bottom of the barrel pay for artists and writers is probaly what's killing American comics. Not delays. The people who buy this shit already, are going to keep buying it no matter how late it is.

Those people might be a part of what's killing comics too.

The French ship 48 pages a year. Their market is doing fine. Japanese comics ship in weird intervals too, the're doing ok as well.


That's why he is wrong, and doesn't understand the medium he works in.


I think Jeph understands it fine. He just doesn't agree with it's ethics.

I think you don't understand that. Jephs dislike for how his story was treated doesn't mena he doesn't understand it. It means he dislikes it.

What's wrong with thinking comics could be improved as an art form?

Are comics just an endless product that has no soul or artistic merits to it?

If they are, nno wonder they get looked down on, and treated as such. I know American Suoerhero comics are, but that could change too.

It comes down to this - you want all your books to be late?

No. I want them when they are done.

Most of the comics I buy don't come out monthly. Some of them even ship... when they do. No solicit 8 months ahead of time. No monthly plan of attack. Just a 'hey, it's coming out this month!" Never missed even one of them yet.

They are, to me, quality books worth the time it takes to make them. And as such I stick with them. I give my money to quality books. NOt the timely ones. Art often takes time. I think the monthly format is one of the biggest hinderences(sp) on most American comics.

I'd much rather wait for a quality book then get a shit one on time.

Though, I'd prefer a switch over to GN's completely. Fuck floppies.

[Agentum]

Still i think books that they think of that real art shouldn't be advertised as monthly books anyway.

People still want their mainstream big seller books monthly, there is still a lot of room for artbooks or whatever to be done.

I could live with only trades an hardcovers, but as this monly book thing seems so big for many people.

I think Marvel is better than DC on this, DC trades only what they think it worth trading and sells much nothing else.

I understand that comics is an artform, but i want entertainment, like watching TV or reading a book.

It's a hard work to do comics i'm sure but noone force them to do it, i don't always get the time to do everything i want on work either, thats life.

They can quit and became creating artist and prose writers or whatever if they think they are good enough to live on that.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

This is like talking to a wall - you can see what I've typed, but I don't think your actually reading or understanding it.
Several times I've mentioned what DC strive, or claim to strive, to do.
What's actually happening is neither here, nor there, but is an example of how bad things have gotten.
And remember - every time you point out a book being late, it's the exception at DC.

Because, that is teh artistic suck.


Are comic art?
They can be.
Is a superhero book, owned by a company, art, or just entertainment?
I know we like to think there is a crossover, but there isn't really.
DC publishes their characters to make money.
So they can do what it takes to make money - and money is made, and the majority of the readership placeted, with a fill in artist.
If you want comics that are 'art', monthly books - which is what 'floppies' are called - aren't the place to look.

The difference is that Godland is treated as a piece of art by it's creative team.

It may be - OR they own it, so the can decide wether or not an issue ships late.
It's their call - that's why their doing it at image - so they have control.
Loeb works at DC, who's books have gone for decades before he came, and could well go on decades now that he's left, so he doesn't get a say.

The difference is that they saw their problem coming, made a statement, did the delay, are back now, offering 60 cent issues, and I've not seen one complaint, or "Well, I'm dropping this" come out of it.

They know that the creative team is the most important part of that book, creator owned or not, and are not willing to sacrifice any part of what makes Godland, Godland. As it should be.


Great, so you agree.

I don't know why you're writing like you disagree, but you do.
The monthly rule doesn't apply to them, because they own it!
They could stop for ten years and then come back, and who can complain?
It's theirs!


I'm sorry, but isn't Batman late at the moment? I thought that was THE big no-no. And yet.
Read what I said last time you brought up late books.


When it isn't happening as a company policy, or on said book, which had already been shipping late, it not only should be, but would be. And it was.


No, still no shock.
They do work for hire - DC can change anything they want - both DC and MArvel are well known for re-drawing/scripting pages.
As I've said, the only shock should be that they aren't doing it more.
You can down play it all you want, but books that ship late, lose readers - lots of readers.

Again, Godland seems to be doing just as well as it ever was.
which isn't great - it's a niche book, with a niche audience.

Besides, Joe and Tom are willing to take a pay cut for their art. A 60 cent issue? They want more people to pick it up, as you should, it''s awesome, and they will. Guess what? Some of those people will continue to buy the series, and get the trades and BAM! Sales improve. They even had a 3 month delay.
Now you're talking into the future, you don't know what will happen.
I imagine a possible slight increase, and then sales back to normal. I like the book, but I think it's fan base thinks it's better than it is - I keep hearing it praised to the moon, but it doesn't really deserve that much.

The three month delay was planned, readers and retailers knew.
Also, the book doesn't sell truck loads, so retailers probably weren't as fussed.

And again, THEY OWN IT.
Different rules.

If DC can't understand it, then I'm glad I don't really read their books. Fuck them. To DC it's only a product. Grant Morrison is only a big name that will bring in bi sales. Frank Miller and JIm Lee. Big names, big sales. Big steaming piles of late shit, both of 'em.
To hear that said about DC, and not about MArvel, is hilarious, to any fan with only a slight knowledge of comic history.
Vertigo, Starman, and many other titles attest to that - they've kept many a series alive past it's cut off to try and get readers onto a quality title.
It's just a product to Marvel as well, yet they're playing the gamble that names will keep readers coming back, and the loss from delays will be covered by trade sales - look at the amount of spin they did for Civil War.
DC prefers to cover it's bets, and if a contractor can't keep up, the page gets given to someone else - the way American comics has run for 40-50 years.

So, no, I don't think Jeph is out of line with his complaint, how ever he meant it.
He can complain - but it's a silly complaint.
He's ust not facing the reality of the medium - a monthly product is required monthly.

If you do have an issue with a creative persons creativity being fucked with, then obviously the only thing you've ever made was on the shitter.
What in god's name are you talking about?
1. You spelt that wrong, so the way it's phrased it actually insulting people who agree wuth you.
2. My job requires creativity - I meet my deadlines.
3. This isn't a creative person 'being fucked with'. This is a creative not meeting the deadline set out for him.
The company gave the pages to someone else.
Who was fucked with?
He didn't meet his deadline.


Actually, shitty stories aimed at the current buyer, while ignoring the new buyer, continuity nuts, the monthly concept, the direct market, and the bottom of the barrel pay for artists and writers is probaly what's killing American comics. Not delays. The people who buy this shit already, are going to keep buying it no matter how late it is.

Sales figures show there is a drop when issues are late.
I'm not making my side up from what I think the problem is - late issues are a problem.
As for new readers, how are they supposed to know when the next issue is out if they don't ship reguarly?
And the only reason a book that is late sells is because of the people who would buy it no matter what - however, there isn't enough of them to keep a book going, hence the need to be regular.

The French ship 48 pages a year. Their market is doing fine. Japanese comics ship in weird intervals too, the're doing ok as well.

Not sure where you pulled the french figure from.
48 pages is the size of a Graphic Album, their standard unit, some self contained, some not - sometimes released stand alone, sometimes as teasers to an upcoming graphic novel.
Either way, they meet their deadlines - they aren't shipping late, they are shipping on time.
The Japanese do a similar thing - sometimes GN's in the works are released as chapters, in anthologies - but a lot of their work comes out on time - they use a studio system to make sure it does.

Beyond all that, America's comic industry is quite different to those - it's not successful.

I think Jeph understands it fine. He just doesn't agree with it's ethics.
Well those ethics have been in place for 40 years - and they sold a lot more when they were followed - Loeb probably doesn't understand this.
As for his cry of trying to raise the artform - was Superman/Batman really ever going to do that?

What's wrong with thinking comics could be improved as an art form?

Are comics just an endless product that has no soul or artistic merits to it?

If they are, nno wonder they get looked down on, and treated as such. I know American Suoerhero comics are, but that could change too.

Comic don't need to be improved as an artform - they are perfect - look at comics biggest successes, in America and overseas - the one's that have sold millions.

And again, monthly company owned comics have to ship monthly, no matter what. I'm not saying they can't have art to them, but that's not their primary function, it's to entertain, and more importantly, to SELL.

No. I want them when they are done.

Most of the comics I buy don't come out monthly. Some of them even ship... when they do. No solicit 8 months ahead of time. No monthly plan of attack. Just a 'hey, it's coming out this month!" Never missed even one of them yet.

They are, to me, quality books worth the time it takes to make them. And as such I stick with them. I give my money to quality books. NOt the timely ones. Art often takes time. I think the monthly format is one of the biggest hinderences(sp) on most American comics.

I'd much rather wait for a quality book then get a shit one on time.

Though, I'd prefer a switch over to GN's completely. Fuck floppies.

That's you, not everyone.

Look, if you've got the contract to build a bridge, but it has to be done by a certain date, or it reverts to the company, and you don't get it done by that date - can you blame the company who gave you the contract for giving it to someone else?

If not, your not understanding the realities of business.
There's a reason DC is one of the 'big two', and it's because they do understand business - they have to, to be able to keep putting the books the fans want out.

[ValhallaComics]

I think that Kevin Smith comic writing wasn't something to wait for, who cares if he ever comes back to comics?

I couldn't agree more. He pisses me off, anyway, with his smug attitude.

[Matt Algren]

Last report I read was that it was Kevin Smith's fault for delaying his writing. He admits it. Go read another interview. Hell, look it up on wikipedia, it's there.Interesting. I know I read that the problem came from logistics with other commitments. Ah well.

Thanks for the clarification.

[the goddamn batman]

This is like talking to a wall

Yet, you keep talking.


Are comic art?
They can be.

Can and should be. To me anyway.

Is a superhero book, owned by a company, art, or just entertainment?
I know we like to think there is a crossover, but there isn't really.

I don't see why it can't be both.

If you want comics that are 'art', monthly books - which is what 'floppies' are called - aren't the place to look.

Actually, they are called 'floppies' by a good amount of comic professionals. So, don't try to tell me what they're called, or put " "'s on it as if isn't a valid term.

oh and, I know. That's why I don't buy them anymore. I like art. If I want shitty entertainment I'll watch my free tv, not pay for a crap comic.

Though, I don't watch tv.

It may be - OR they own it, so the can decide wether or not an issue ships late.
It's their call - that's why their doing it at image - so they have control.

My point is that they handled the same situation with grace. WHy can't DC OR MARVEL (ok?) do that too?


The monthly rule doesn't apply to them, because they own it!
They could stop for ten years and then come back, and who can complain?
It's theirs!

I don't think ownership is the issue or my point. My point is the way in which they handled their inability to ship a monthly comic without running late.

To hear that said about DC, and not about MArvel, is hilarious, to any fan with only a slight knowledge of comic history.

Well, we ARE talking about DC. Not Marvel. I guess I could have said Marvel as well, but I didn't think it was relevant... as we were not talking about Marvel. But, yes, Marvel is ass too.

DC prefers to cover it's bets, and if a contractor can't keep up, the page gets given to someone else - the way American comics has run for 40-50 years.

Doesn't change the fact that it is no longer DC's standard practice. If it was they wouldn't have a bunch of late books waiting for their artists to finish ther books.


What in god's name are you talking about?
1. You spelt that wrong, so the way it's phrased it actually insulting people who agree wuth you.

What in god's name are you talking about? What did I spell wrong? And, don't you mean "with" not "wuth"?

And the only reason a book that is late sells is because of the people who would buy it no matter what - however, there isn't enough of them to keep a book going, hence the need to be regular.

Who else is buying superhero books? Comics aren't attracting new readers like they used to. IF it weren't for the people who will buy it no matter what, there might not even be comics today. So, those people are enough.


Not sure where you pulled the french figure from.

From the French comic market. They publish in a differnt format than American comics. They don't use fill in artists, they don't ship monthly and their sales are fine. I don't see why Americans act like the monthly floppy is the only way to publish comics.

48 pages is the size of a Graphic Album, their standard unit, some self contained, some not - sometimes released stand alone, sometimes as teasers to an upcoming graphic novel.
Either way, they meet their deadlines - they aren't shipping late, they are shipping on time.

My point is that they use a different model than we do and it works fine. They don't publish in a monthly format. Their books don't ship late because of it and their comics are much more 'art' than ours are.

So, why can't American comic companies use a model like that? Why is the monthly floppy the only acceptable way to publish a story?

The Japanese do a similar thing - sometimes GN's in the works are released as chapters, in anthologies - but a lot of their work comes out on time - they use a studio system to make sure it does.

Japanese comics were bad example on my part. They use... no, FORCE a specific style, and if a fill in artist were, and they are, used you can hardly even tell.

Modern American comics do not force the same level of house style, so you can tell.

As for his cry of trying to raise the artform - was Superman/Batman really ever going to do that?

Ha ha, probably not.

Comic don't need to be improved as an artform - they are perfect - look at comics biggest successes, in America and overseas - the one's that have sold millions.

Wow... ok. If you really feel that way.

And again, monthly company owned comics have to ship monthly, no matter what.

No they don't. American comics could adapt the French model. There is no real reason that comics have to be 22 pages that ship every month. There just isn't.


I'm not saying they can't have art to them, but that's not their primary function, it's to entertain, and more importantly, to SELL.

Well, as an artist, I think that's sad. Maybe if they had a better level of quality to them, they would sell better and be a respected form of art and literature like they are in many other parts of the world.

Look, if you've got the contract to build a bridge, but it has to be done by a certain date, or it reverts to the company, and you don't get it done by that date - can you blame the company who gave you the contract for giving it to someone else?

No. But, lets keep it about comics.

[Dan Apodaca]

Yet, you keep talking.

This isn't a fight. You can leave out the "comebacks".

Oh, and you just agreed that you were playing the part of the wall.

[yo go re]

Actually, they are called 'floppies' by a good amount of comic professionals. So, don't try to tell me what they're called, or put " "'s on it as if isn't a valid term.

And reputable news outlets use names like "TomKat." Doesn't mean it's any less stupid when CNN does it than it is when it's in the Weekly World News.

When Cerebus phonebooks started coming out, people began to insist that only those deserved to be called "graphic novels," while normal GNs should be called "comic books." Real comics then got the dismissive title of "pamphlets," which is only slightly less insulting than "floppies." Comic professionals call them floppies? Good for comic professionals. Doesn't mean we need to encourage use of the term...

[the goddamn batman]

And reputable news outlets use names like "TomKat." Doesn't mean it's any less stupid when CNN does it than it is when it's in the Weekly World News.

When Cerebus phonebooks started coming out, people began to insist that only those deserved to be called "graphic novels," while normal GNs should be called "comic books." Real comics then got the dismissive title of "pamphlets," which is only slightly less insulting than "floppies." Comic professionals call them floppies? Good for comic professionals. Doesn't mean we need to encourage use of the term...

What's wrong with 'floppies'? It isn't intended as a condescending term.

Fucking comic fans, everything is an insult isn't it?

Maybe if comcs were treated as art by the companies that make them, or if DC and Marvel would pull their heads out of their spandex asses,comics wouldn't be looked down on, and no one would be on edge about something as silly as the term "floppies". Which, I can't seem to understand as a negative term.

[yo go re]

and I can't seen to understand it as a positive one, though that doesn't mean I in any way dislike you because of it...

[trickster]

When you buy a hardcover collection, it would bother me enormously if the ninth issue of “The Long Halloween” trade was drawn by Joe Blow.



Every form of commercial artistic expression known to mankind involves artistic compromise.

Well, I'm sorry, no. There are other kinds of compromises. But DC cut a lot of corners for Infinite Crisis, and it really showed. And they knew it, and they knew that it was very obvious they cut a lot of corners. That's why they made so many changes to the hardcover.
Contrast this with Marvel. They held back Civil War so they could get it right. And they took a chance that sales might drop. But they didn't. And even they had dropped, the fact that they kept their quality high for CW is commendable. So, I'm sorry but Loeb is right.

[the goddamn batman]

and I can't seen to understand it as a positive one, though that doesn't mean I in any way dislike you because of it...

I didn't think you did.

But, I suppose I was asking if you could perhaps explain what about 'floppy' is negative. Can you?

[dancj]

"Floppies" isn't really negative - it's just descriptive.

hmmm... but then again so is "floppy easily damaged comics that you have to pissarse around with a comic bag and avoid getting sellotape on every 22 pages and get interupted by adverts every 3 or 4 pages"...

[yo go re]

What's wrong with just saying "comics?"

"Yeah, I like comics, but I mainly read trades."

"Really? I'd rather go every month and get the comics."

In cases where "comics" is too vague to differentiate between the issues and the industry, I like "monthlies," even if that isn't technically accurate:

"I'm buying All-Star Batman and Robin in the mothlies."

When "pamphlets" first came about, it was a condescending term from people who were saying that monthlies weren't good enough to be called comicbooks. I guess I just see "floppies" as an extension of that. If I may get really offensive and out of perspective for a moment, "pamphlets" is "negros" (or worse) and "floppies" is "colored."

So by that logic, the only acceptable term is "printed Americans?" Hmm, that doesn't seem right...

[the goddamn batman]

See, comics is the medium.

Singles, pamphlets, floppies, monthlies.... are the single issues

Trades, are collections of the singles

GN/OGN is not a collection of singles


To me, floppies is just a term for a 22 page comic in that specific format.

It generally doesn't have a thick card stock cover, and it isn't bound.

It's flimsy, and stapled.

As Dancj said, it's descriptive.

[Alan2099]

They held back Civil War so they could get it right.
and fauiled misserably.
(Insert cheesy drum roll here).


In cases where "comics" is too vague to differentiate between the issues and the industry, I like "monthlies," even if that isn't technically accurate:
I've never really noticed a problem. Most people that just read the trades seems to say that and the others jsut refer to comics like they always have.

Issues might be a good way to seperate them though.

[Evan Waters]

But it's gonna hurt the upper end of your talent pool more. Sure, there's lots of people who could fill in for generic-creator-X.

But there's only one Alan Moore. His stuff is consistently late, either 'cause of the man himself or the artists he collaborates with, but CBR called him the best writer in comics. Edit: And from DC's point of view, a Consistent, year-to-year cash cow.

Not the best choice for an example, as Moore has stated he's pretty much done with DC. He's not too keen on going with Marvel at the moment either.

[glennsim]

I've yet to figure out why reading 1970s Marvel comics has anything to do with anything about this argument... What're you getting at?

Back in the 1970s, if the writers or artists at Marvel got behind schedule, they would just insert a reprint from a previous issue. Maybe with a framing sequence like "Hey, you remember when this happened...?"

This would be similar to today's TV inserting reruns.

Which reminds me that the use of reruns today is a relatively new trend. In the past, networks would show "movies of the week" or whatever to fill out the more-than-22-week span of the TV seasons. With the advent of HBO and whatnot, that has gone away, and now we get the reruns.

So in a way, those movies of the week were like having short runs by alternate writers and artists on a book to give the regular crew time to catch up. Sorta. Kinda.

[StrikeForce Albert]

Fucking comic fans, everything is an insult isn't it?




You call me a fan?! Why I oughta? :evilangry

;)

[the goddamn batman]

:D I include myself in that comment, of course.;)


but, you already knew that.