Chris Claremont news? [Archive] - Comic Book Resources Forums

SUPERECWFAN1

07-31-2007, 07:27 PM

All three of those could use a cancellation or seven.

Well to be honest Cable & Deadpool continues to defy death and taxes. It stays over that 25,000 line . It keeps above that line and thus far has survived 42 issues. I mean were not in a great era for books surviving and holding a fanbase. I'm not even a fan of this series (loved Deadpool 1st series ) and I can't see the whole "I wish it was gone because it is so beneath me" stance.

The same goes with Spidergirl. Those fans will fight for her and will fight and fight. I'm not a fan of it either . I tried 2 to 3 issues never hooked me. But I won't wish a cancellation on it. Because hell...it won't do nothing for my life or what I collect.

If Claremont goes....good luck. Some of New Excalibur I enjoyed....some I didn't. I won't wish him outta the industry because thats sad and petty.

Charles RB

07-31-2007, 07:39 PM

All three of those could use a cancellation or seven.

They're presumably all still making a profit or at least not making a loss though, in which case there's not much of a point in cancelling them unless it's believed that'll strengthen other brands.

I'm presuming they make a profit coz I doubt Marvel would STILL be doing Spider-Girl if it was a constant financial loss - what'd be the point?

SUPERECWFAN1

07-31-2007, 07:51 PM

I'm presuming they make a profit coz I doubt Marvel would STILL be doing Spider-Girl if it was a constant financial loss - what'd be the point?

I've heard Quesada keeps it around since it sells well to girls in those small TPB's they do. That its pretty much the only reason its still allowed to stick. Manhunter was saved due to strong TPB sales recently as well at DC.

Dan Apodaca

07-31-2007, 08:52 PM

They're presumably all still making a profit or at least not making a loss though, in which case there's not much of a point in cancelling them unless it's believed that'll strengthen other brands.

I guess that all depends on if you think cancelling crappy series' does anything to strengthen the other brands.

Dan Apodaca

07-31-2007, 08:54 PM

I can't see the whole "I wish it was gone because it is so beneath me" stance.

That might be because it wasn't there. I don't really give a shit if it's being published or not.

I'm just making fun of it for being bad.

Jake V

08-01-2007, 12:10 AM

And yet, writers like Brian K Vaughn,Warren Ellis,and Dan Slott continue to get work at Marvel (and are even offered big name projects) despite the fact that they ALL had Marvel books that sold less then 30,000 copies a month.

Those three have the (perhaps unfair) advantage of not being old and irrelevant.

Also, last I checked, Vaughan isn't doing anything for Marvel, Slott has been removed from She-Hulk, and his Avengers: The Initiative is within the top 20. Ellis' Thunderbolts has more than doubled the sales of it's previous incarnation, his Ultimate Galactus series of minis was (I believe) within the top 20 for most of it's run. Nextwave was (appropriately) cancelled or ended when Immonen was placed on Ultimate Spider-Man, depending on who you ask.

Michael P

08-01-2007, 10:10 AM

You were apparently sleeping all last weekend, Jake. Slott is on Spider-Man, and Ellis is on X-Men.

MartinRedmond

08-01-2007, 12:32 PM

So much bile for a writer no one is forcing you to read. Hurray for diversity.

Charles RB

08-02-2007, 05:18 AM

I've heard Quesada keeps it around since it sells well to girls in those small TPB's they do.

So it appears to be making a profit then.

Those three have the (perhaps unfair) advantage of not being old

Warren Ellis has been around in comics for nearly 20 years now, and he's done Marvel work since the mid-90s. He seems to be pretty 'old'.

Jake V

08-02-2007, 11:31 AM

So it appears to be making a profit then.

Warren Ellis has been around in comics for nearly 20 years now, and he's done Marvel work since the mid-90s. He seems to be pretty 'old'.

He's 39. Claremont is 57.

Sorry for being literal.

Charles RB

08-02-2007, 07:38 PM

Being nearly 40 is damn old from where I'm standing... ;)

Sean Whitmore

08-02-2007, 08:02 PM

You were apparently sleeping all last weekend, Jake. Slott is on Spider-Man, and Ellis is on X-Men.

Which has no bearing on his point that they have books that sell and that's why they continue to get work.

He also mentioned their low-selling books to head off any arguments of, "But THEY had low-selling books too..."

SEAN

Dan Apodaca

08-02-2007, 10:11 PM

So much bile for a writer no one is forcing you to read. Hurray for diversity.

There's no bile. Just dismissal.

Blade X

08-03-2007, 09:50 PM

Those three have the (perhaps unfair) advantage of not being old and irrelevant.

Also, last I checked, Vaughan isn't doing anything for Marvel, Slott has been removed from She-Hulk, and his Avengers: The Initiative is within the top 20. Ellis' Thunderbolts has more than doubled the sales of it's previous incarnation, his Ultimate Galactus series of minis was (I believe) within the top 20 for most of it's run. Nextwave was (appropriately) cancelled or ended when Immonen was placed on Ultimate Spider-Man, depending on who you ask.

AVENGERS:THE INITIATIVE is in the top 20 because the book is part of the whole CW/INITIATIVE crossover. This (and the variant covers) is also why Ellis's T-bolts sales are up. Ellis's Ultimate Galactus mini series was an ULTIMATE title, which is why the mini series sold well. The whole excuse about NEXTWAVE being canceled because Immonen left the book, is a big load of PR BS in order to not reflect badly on both Ellis and Marvel. Sales on NEXTWAVE were plumeting and Marvel could'nt aford to keep a high paid artist like Immonen on the book (this was all said by Ellis himself, btw). Ellis also claims that Marvel offered to keep the book around with him writing it, but with a different and less expensive artist, but he "decided" to end the series with issue #12 instead of continuing the book without Immonen. The bottom line is that NEXTWAVE was selling less then CABLE & DEADPOOL, and was NOT going to get canceled regardless if Immonen stayed on the book or not.

Jake V

08-03-2007, 10:17 PM

The bottom line is that NEXTWAVE was selling less then CABLE & DEADPOOL, and was NOT going to get canceled regardless if Immonen stayed on the book or not.

Are you always this angry?

And I love the excuses made for books selling well. Waah! It was part of Civil War! Waah! It was part of the Ultimate books!

Excalibur and Exiles are X-books, and they sell like shit. Why do they sell like shit? Because barely anyone gives a flying fuck about Claremont and his pet characters anymore. He has a small core audience, so Marvel sees no reason to keep his ancient ass around on high profile books anymore.

Blade X

08-03-2007, 10:38 PM

Are you always this angry?

And I love the excuses made for books selling well. Waah! It was part of Civil War! Waah! It was part of the Ultimate books!

Excalibur and Exiles are X-books, and they sell like shit. Why do they sell like shit? Because barely anyone gives a flying fuck about Claremont and his pet characters anymore. He has a small core audience, so Marvel sees no reason to keep his ancient ass around on high profile books anymore.

You accuse me of being angry and yet you're the one who's cussing up a storm in your post in order to defend Ellis and rake Claremont over the coals. I guess I struck a nerve.

I'm NOT making up any excuses for why CERTAIN books sale. Do some research, and you will see that I am right about why CERTAIN books sale.

Yep, EXCALIBUR sales like crap, but EXILES was still selling around the same numbers about a year before CC started writing the book.

Jake V

08-03-2007, 10:54 PM

You accuse me of being angry and yet you're the one who's cussing up a storm in your post in order to defend Ellis and rake Claremont over the coals. I guess I struck a nerve.

I'm NOT making up any excuses for why CERTAIN books sale. Do some research, and you will see that I am right about why CERTAIN books sale.

Yep, EXCALIBUR sales like crap, but EXILES was still selling around the same numbers about a year before CC started writing the book.

Not really. I just cuss a lot. I've got nothing to be angry about. The writers I like are successful, and the writers that bore me are quietly being shown the door.

Looking at Exiles sales, the book dropped 14% when Claremont took over. The book is currently doing 17% worse than Bedards last issue.

Sean Whitmore

08-03-2007, 11:23 PM

I'm NOT making up any excuses for why CERTAIN books sale. Do some research, and you will see that I am right about why CERTAIN books sale.

Like X-Men. X-Men is usually a big seller, isn't it?

Except, apparenty, the last time Claremont was writing it.

SEAN

Blade X

08-04-2007, 11:19 AM

Not really. I just cuss a lot. I've got nothing to be angry about. The writers I like are successful, and the writers that bore me are quietly being shown the door.

Looking at Exiles sales, the book dropped 14% when Claremont took over. The book is currently doing 17% worse than Bedards last issue.

If you go back and check the sales figures for EXILES, you will see that the book's sales were steadily declining BEFORE CC came onto the book. So if Bedard was still writing the book, sales would most likely be where they are currently at.

Nice try though.

Jake V

08-04-2007, 12:02 PM

If you go back and check the sales figures for EXILES, you will see that the book's sales were steadily declining BEFORE CC came onto the book. So if Bedard was still writing the book, sales would most likely be where they are currently at.

Nice try though.

Really? Why did Bedard's last issue jump 19%?

Blade X

08-04-2007, 03:20 PM

Really? Why did Bedard's last issue jump 19%?

Well according to Paul O'Brien it was because of shipping problems that caused that particular to become unusually popular. West coast comic shops did not receive their copies of EXILES #89 when the book shipped in December. This caused those stores to put in a higher then normal reorder for that particular issue because of the screwed up shipping problems.

Blade X

08-04-2007, 03:50 PM

Like X-Men. X-Men is usually a big seller, isn't it?

Except, apparenty, the last time Claremont was writing it.

SEAN

Except for AXM, none of the core X-titles are selling as well as they used to. UXM was loosing sales before,during,and after CC's last run on the book. Hell, even Bru's run is dropping back down to where the book was selling before CC left UXM (though his last was selling about 2000 copies more then CC's last issue on the book). I should also point out that CC's last UXM run sold better then Austen's,Milligan's,and MOST of Carey's X-MEN run (X-MEN #200 had a huge sales increase because it was an aniversery/event issue).

Charles RB

08-04-2007, 04:18 PM

AVENGERS:THE INITIATIVE is in the top 20 because the book is part of the whole CW/INITIATIVE crossover. This (and the variant covers) is also why Ellis's T-bolts sales are up.

Lots of books have been Civil War and Initiative tie-ins, they didn't all suddenly sell that much.

Also, the sales of the last 12 Thunderbolts can be seen here (http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/07/19/marvel-month-to-month-sales-june-2007/), and the Ellis issues are selling more on average than the Civil War tie-ins under Niesceza (sic?) did - it's not just the tie-in that's behind those sales.

Blade X

08-04-2007, 06:57 PM

Lots of books have been Civil War and Initiative tie-ins, they didn't all suddenly sell that much.

Also, the sales of the last 12 Thunderbolts can be seen here (http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/07/19/marvel-month-to-month-sales-june-2007/), and the Ellis issues are selling more on average than the Civil War tie-ins under Niesceza (sic?) did - it's not just the tie-in that's behind those sales.

I take it you really don't know or understand what makes certain books sale.

AVENGERS:THE INITIATIVE has the added benefit of being another Avengers spin off title in addition to being a tie in to CW/INITIATIVE (not to mention a brand new high profile series). This is why the book is selling much better then other INITIATIVE tie ins. I should also point out that MOST, if not ALL books that were CW/INITIATIVE tie ins had a HUGE sales increase.

Ellis's T-bolts has the added benefit of having variant covers for the first 6 issues of his T-bolts, something that Fabian DID NOT have with his CW tie in issues.

Sean Whitmore

08-04-2007, 07:02 PM

I take it you really don't know or understand what makes certain books sale.

Now, that's not nice.

It'd be like me saying you don't know or understand grammar.

SEAN

Charles RB

08-04-2007, 07:34 PM

AVENGERS:THE INITIATIVE has the added benefit of being another Avengers spin off title in addition to being a tie in to CW/INITIATIVE

The cast is made up of less popular characters and original characters, which is generally going to be a negative, and both of the other Avengers titles are by a bigger-name writer & have more of an A-List cast (which is what bumped up sales on New Avengers). And yet, still selling a surprisingly large amount.

Blade X

08-04-2007, 11:30 PM

Now, that's not nice.

It'd be like me saying you don't know or understand grammar.

SEAN

I just love it when idiots take a statement that was not meant to be rude and use it as a reason to justify their attack on the person who made said statement.

Sean Whitmore

08-04-2007, 11:33 PM

I just love it when idiots take a statement that was not meant to be rude and use it as a reason to justify their attack on the person who made said statement.

Why, does it happen to you a lot?

Maybe the problem's you, then.

SEAN

Blade X

08-04-2007, 11:37 PM

The cast is made up of less popular characters and original characters, which is generally going to be a negative, and both of the other Avengers titles are by a bigger-name writer & have more of an A-List cast (which is what bumped up sales on New Avengers). And yet, still selling a surprisingly large amount.

That is not always the case. That being said, I can tell you that at the comic shop I work at, sales on AVENGERS:THE INITIATIVE have been rapidly dropping.

Sean Whitmore

08-04-2007, 11:40 PM

That is not always the case. That being said, I can tell you that at the comic shop I work at, sales on AVENGERS:THE INITIATIVE have been rapidly dropping.

And when sales drop enough, they'll boot the writer off the book. So what's the problem?

SEAN

Blade X

08-04-2007, 11:40 PM

Why, does it happen to you a lot?

Maybe the problem's you, then.

SEAN

Nope, but I seen it done to other people in other forums.

Blade X

08-04-2007, 11:47 PM

And when sales drop enough, they'll boot the writer off the book. So what's the problem?

SEAN

That is not always the case in this age of creator butt kissing (on the part of the Big 2 publishers). That being said, Marvel would be more willing to boot a creator like Slott off a book with falling sales that was created by him, then they would an elitist critically acclaimed creators like Ellis.

Reptisaurus!

08-05-2007, 12:08 AM

Are you always this angry?

And I love the excuses made for books selling well. Waah! It was part of Civil War! Waah! It was part of the Ultimate books!

Excalibur and Exiles are X-books, and they sell like shit. Why do they sell like shit? Because barely anyone gives a flying fuck about Claremont and his pet characters anymore. He has a small core audience, so Marvel sees no reason to keep his ancient ass around on high profile books anymore.

Aaaaand... You're not trying to project anger here?

You really need to work on th' efficacy of your writing, then.

(See folks? I know I always talk shit about X-men fans, but THIS. IS. WHY.
It's the combination of anger and bizzare statistical analysis (down 19%!) that gets me.)

SUPERECWFAN1

08-05-2007, 08:48 AM

Except for AXM, none of the core X-titles are selling as well as they used to. UXM was loosing sales before,during,and after CC's last run on the book. Hell, even Bru's run is dropping back down to where the book was selling before CC left UXM (though his last was selling about 2000 copies more then CC's last issue on the book). I should also point out that CC's last UXM run sold better then Austen's,Milligan's,and MOST of Carey's X-MEN run (X-MEN #200 had a huge sales increase because it was an aniversery/event issue).

You'd be a bit wrong here. A little before and after the the House of M sales jolt....Claremont's run on Uncanny fell below Chuck Austen's sales figures . In fact Austen's final 2 issues of Uncanny did over 86,000 . While Claremont's final issue #473 did 79,000.

Blade X

08-05-2007, 10:22 AM

You'd be a bit wrong here. A little before and after the the House of M sales jolt....Claremont's run on Uncanny fell below Chuck Austen's sales figures . In fact Austen's final 2 issues of Uncanny did over 86,000 . While Claremont's final issue #473 did 79,000.

I was talking about Austen's X-MEN run, not his UXM run. My point was that CC's last run on UXM sold better then Austen,Milligan,and MOST of Carey's current run on X-MEN. During his last run on UXM, CC's book was the 2nd best seller out of the 3 main core X-Men titles (AXM, was of course, the best selling of the three).

Faded

08-05-2007, 01:23 PM

X-Men fans ROCK. I don't know what you're talking about Mr. Saurus.

Well, I rock anyway.

Faded

08-05-2007, 01:58 PM

I was talking about Austen's X-MEN run, not his UXM run. My point was that CC's last run on UXM sold better then Austen,Milligan,and MOST of Carey's current run on X-MEN. During his last run on UXM, CC's book was the 2nd best seller out of the 3 main core X-Men titles (AXM, was of course, the best selling of the three).

I believe Uncanny has always sold more than reg. X-Men, except when it was New X-Men under Morrison.

Blade X

08-05-2007, 02:25 PM

I believe Uncanny has always sold more than reg. X-Men, except when it was New X-Men under Morrison.

IIRC, X-MEN was selling better then UXM when it first started and continued to do so for a few years afterwards (but NOT by that much). In the past (before Morrison came onto the book) sales on the two core books were pretty darn close and the books sometimes flip floped for the lead.

SUPERECWFAN1

08-05-2007, 02:44 PM

I was talking about Austen's X-MEN run, not his UXM run. My point was that CC's last run on UXM sold better then Austen,Milligan,and MOST of Carey's current run on X-MEN. During his last run on UXM, CC's book was the 2nd best seller out of the 3 main core X-Men titles (AXM, was of course, the best selling of the three).

Of course if were using your comparison then Austen outsold Chris Claremont's X-Treme X-Men series as well. So its pretty much a draw on this. X-Men since Morrison hasn't outsold Uncanny. Astonishing outsells Uncanny as we see....

Blade X

08-05-2007, 08:01 PM

Of course if were using your comparison then Austen outsold Chris Claremont's X-Treme X-Men series as well. So its pretty much a draw on this. X-Men since Morrison hasn't outsold Uncanny. Astonishing outsells Uncanny as we see....

That is very true. Of course XXM had a lot of things against it from the start and throughout the entire series, which is why the book started shedding sales. Of course if Austen was on XXM and CC was on UXM, UXM would still outsell XXM. The sad truth of the matter is that the only way a 3rd ongoing core X-Men title is going to sell big numbers for a long time, is if the book is being writen by a very popular CELEBRITY writer and drawn by a damn good and/or popular artist. AXM is proof of that.

Brian "Vash" Ashby

08-05-2007, 08:30 PM

I believe Uncanny has always sold more than reg. X-Men, except when it was New X-Men under Morrison.

was that always true though?

I recall morrison taking some pretty big drops and didnt really shoot back up until 146

i recall some of his issues selling worse than Claremont revolution issues, which i always thought was odd

Faded

08-05-2007, 08:54 PM

Reptisaurus!

08-05-2007, 09:20 PM

X-Men fans ROCK. I don't know what you're talking about Mr. Saurus.

Well, I rock anyway.

I don't think you're really an X-men fan at heart. If you were you'd be angrier.

SUPERECWFAN1

08-05-2007, 09:46 PM

was that always true though?

I recall morrison taking some pretty big drops and didnt really shoot back up until 146

i recall some of his issues selling worse than Claremont revolution issues, which i always thought was odd

A few years back we looked at sales trends. When Joe Casey took over Uncanny that book started out really....REALLY strong selling over 150,000 a month. Months in as his run started to really go bonkers he was shedding readers at a fast pace. By the end at #409 he was down to 90,000 . So in 15 months he shed over 60,000 readers.

In Morrison's case from what I remember his sales never dropped below the 115-120,000 barrier. His started out at 140,000+ and leveled off pretty damn good for 30 issues.

Chuck Austen came in and the attitude from what he said in an interview was that Marvel wanted...to stop the bloodshed. Keep sales in a steady range between 80,000-90,000 range for Uncanny. And he did. His sales never went to the point they got scared and his run was 30+ issues there.

Brian "Vash" Ashby

08-05-2007, 10:11 PM

Blade X

08-05-2007, 10:27 PM

Someone needs to dig back through the archives, i recall morrison dropping below 100k

then i recall a boost up to 150K with 146 the xorneto reveal

then as that storyline kept going the numbers dropped pretty quick

then with here comes tommorow another boost

You are absolutely CORRECT. At one point, Morrison's run was selling in the 90,000-95,000 range.

You are also right about the book increasing in sales again around the Xorneto reveal, which was being hyped by Marvel as a major earth shattering event. Combine the hype with Marvel's NO OVER PRINT policy, and sales on the book naturally increased.

MartinRedmond

08-06-2007, 05:35 AM

The sad truth of the matter is that the only way a 3rd ongoing core X-Men title is going to sell big numbers for a long time, is if the book is being writen by a very popular CELEBRITY writer and drawn by a damn good and/or popular artist. AXM is proof of that.

Or if every issue ships with 2 alternate covers.

Blade X

08-06-2007, 09:45 AM

Or if every issue ships with 2 alternate covers.

LOL

Yep, you are absolutely right about the variant covers also boosting sales.

StrikeForce Albert

08-06-2007, 10:23 AM

Or if every issue ships with 2 alternate covers.
the sad truth

SUPERECWFAN1

08-06-2007, 06:44 PM

Someone needs to dig back through the archives, i recall morrison dropping below 100k

then i recall a boost up to 150K with 146 the xorneto reveal

then as that storyline kept going the numbers dropped pretty quick

then with here comes tommorow another boost

Heres the ICV2 numbers....now this took awhile...

May 2001
1- 135,394 NEW X-MEN #114

June 2001
1- 133,056 NEW X-MEN #115*

July 2001
1-120,703 NEW X-MEN #116

Aug. 2001
1-120,414 NEW X-MEN #117

Sept. 2001
2-118,542 New X-Men #118

Oct. 2001
3-115,828 New X-Men #119

Nov. 2001
3-116,782 N-XM 120#

Dec.2001
3-112,227 NXM 121#

Jan.2002
5-109,246 NXM 122#

Feb.2002
3-105,642 NXM 123#

Mar.2002
1-104,138 NXM 124#

Apr.2002
2-104,185 NXM 125#

May 2002
2-103,189 NXM 126#

June 2002
3-99,672 NXM 127#
5-99,018 NXM 128#

July 2002
8- 98,817 NXM 129#

Aug.2002
8-98,805 NXM 131#
9-98,796 NXM 130#

Sept.2002
3-99,001 NXM 132#

Oct.2002
4-98,092 NXM 133#

Nov.2002
4-97,023 NXM 134#

Dec.2002
6-96,154 NXM 135#

Jan.2003
5-93,453 NXM 136#

Feb.2003
6-92,470 NXM 137#

Mar.2003
5-92,618 NXM 138#

Apr.2003
6-95,278 NXM 139#

May 2003
5-95,981 NXM 140#
6-95,805 NXM 141#

June 2003
5-97,897 NXM 142#

Jul.2003
6-99,850 NXM 143#3

(TO BE CONTINUED LATER OK....

Michael P

08-06-2007, 06:55 PM

That is not always the case. That being said, I can tell you that at the comic shop I work at, sales on AVENGERS:THE INITIATIVE have been rapidly dropping.

Gee, I guess it's a good thing for the book that it's sold at more than one shop, isn't it?

Blade X

08-06-2007, 07:02 PM

Gee, I guess it's a good thing for the book that it's sold at more than one shop, isn't it?

Gee, I guess it's a good thing that I was SPEAKING ONLY FOR MY SHOP ALONE and NOT ALL comic shops.

Michael P

08-06-2007, 07:07 PM

Gee, I guess it's a good thing that I was SPEAKING ONLY FOR MY SHOP ALONE and NOT ALL comic shops.

You were responding to an assertion about the overall sales. Context is everything.

This is the big leagues, kid. Don't step into the batter's box if you're afraid to get hit.

Blade X

08-06-2007, 07:40 PM

You were responding to an assertion about the overall sales. Context is everything.

This is the big leagues, kid. Don't step into the batter's box if you're afraid to get hit.

And taking someone's statement out of context in order to prove your point, is proof that you can't backup your own argument.

You need to check yourself, kid.

OMT, I'm enjoying AVENGERS:INITIATIVE (despite the problems I have with the over all concept and premise of the book) and I am NOT hating on the book. When I speak about the sales of ANY book (regardless if I like or dislike the book ,the characters,or the creators) in our store, or in the market in general, I'm doing so honestly.

Sean Whitmore

08-06-2007, 07:42 PM

And taking someone's statement out of context in order to prove your point, is proof that you can't backup your own argument.

Kinda looks like he put your statement IN context.

SEAN

Blade X

08-06-2007, 07:59 PM

Kinda looks like he put your statement IN context.

SEAN

Well since I was speaking ONLY for the store I work at, I don't think he did.

DanDeRuff

08-07-2007, 03:44 PM

A:I is dropping like a rock at the store I work at, too. Sure, it got a bit of a bump for WWH, but after that it's going to keep falling. The shop I work at seems to follow the trends in the market pretty well so I can confidently apply what's happening at my store to all other stores.

But even if I didn't work at a shop a person would have to be a complete idiot not to predict that this book would've seen a significant drop after reading the first issue. With no big name characters it'll be in the 50s by the end of the year, still good, but no where near the numbers it is now.

Tinmansstory

08-09-2007, 08:30 PM

You know, I actually have liked Excalibur (picked it up starting with the Albion stuff). I have nothing else to add, really.

david r

08-09-2007, 09:03 PM

Pach!

08-10-2007, 06:43 AM

Chris Claremont has done good work since returning in 2000.

Chris Claremont/Salvador Larroca run on X-TREME X-MEN is good, old-school adventure. "Schism" is arguably his best modern X-story.

MEKANIX

The first 10 issues of Claremont/Alan Davis' run on Uncanny X-Men is overlooked, but had many great X-Men material. Wrongly criticized.

End of Greys: Claremont and Chris Bachalo's shocking tale of the Sh'iar massacring the Grey family. No Claremont haters saw this coming.

For every good issue he's put out there (which from your list I'll say End of Greys" and that's about it.) he's put out 3 issues of really bad stuff. Dino R'chll, X-23 was horrible when he wrote her, The chasing hellfire arc was really bad, His NEW EXCALIBUR is really really really bad. Exiles had been ruined even before he got on the book, but he isn't doing anything to fix it.

Most of his ideas now seem recycled so maybe it is time he get less gigs. I'm happy Cornell might be getting the book. I'll give it a second chance when he does.

david r

08-10-2007, 06:51 PM

Dino R'chll

And for every Dino Rachel, I'll throw out..........oh, let's say SEAGUY. Yes, even the Great Bald One comes up with lame and idiotic characters. So let's all lay aside the tired "Dino Rachel" cliche to put out Chris Claremont.

Oh yes, I'm sure DC Comics was OVERJOYED with Seaguy. Grant Morrison, the man who saved X-Men. If only all his legions of fans were aware of all the sci-fi ideas he's stolen from science fiction books by other writers.

Jake V

08-10-2007, 07:04 PM

And for every Dino Rachel, I'll throw out..........oh, let's say SEAGUY. Yes, even the Great Bald One comes up with lame and idiotic characters. So let's all lay aside the tired "Dino Rachel" cliche to put out Chris Claremont.

Oh yes, I'm sure DC Comics was OVERJOYED with Seaguy. Grant Morrison, the man who saved X-Men. If only all his legions of fans were aware of all the sci-fi ideas he's stolen from science fiction books by other writers.

There was nothing lame or idiotic about Seaguy. It was essentially a comedy book.

Nice attempt at deflection though. Really, saying "but this other guy did something I think is dumb too!" is really the worst of all arguments.

But since I'm curious, what ideas did Morrison steal?

Sean Whitmore

08-10-2007, 07:30 PM

And for every Dino Rachel, I'll throw out..........oh, let's say SEAGUY.

Seaguy beats Dino Rachel.

And I've never read Seaguy.

But I would rather be beaten to death with a Seaguy trade paperback than read about Dino Rachel.

I would rather slip on a promotional postcard for Seaguy and fall into an open sewer and dash my head apart than read about Dino Rachel.

I would rather suffer a fatal papercut from an issue of Seaguy and bleed to death in the middle of my own wedding reception than read about Dino Rachel.

So your argument, while already a pointless deflection, also stems from a false premise.

SEAN

SUPERECWFAN1

08-10-2007, 10:29 PM

Even though I've never read Seaguy or Morrison's works with the 7 Soldiers of Victory ...I gotta give it to Morrison. At least him not at his creative peak is better than the storyline we got in Uncanny with Dino Rachel.

Gingold

08-10-2007, 10:49 PM

Defending Claremont by claiming other writers stole ideas from people? That's pretty funny.

Seaguy is good. Dino Rachel is retarded.

Charles RB

08-11-2007, 06:34 AM

It was essentially a comedy book.

Except for all the really, really horrific and disturbing stuff. Like that end of #2... :eek:

Jake V

08-11-2007, 09:42 AM

Except for all the really, really horrific and disturbing stuff. Like that end of #2... :eek:

You didn't find it funny?

Stephane Garrelie

08-11-2007, 09:58 AM

SUPERECWFAN1

08-11-2007, 01:58 PM

Seaguy was awfull. (On the other hand Seven Soldiers is good. And SS Zatana is Great. "SS of Victory" -thats the prologue, right?" is just that: a prologue.).

Dino Rachel was a lame idea, but in a great story-arc.

The whole going to the Savage Land pretty much spelled the end of the X.S.E plot Claremont was pushing. Hell talk about un-resolved plot. You make the X-Men a type of police force and then after a story-arc do nothing with it. Hell after House of M he could have at least put the nail into it. Instead it was a forgotten thing all the way.

Blade X

08-12-2007, 01:41 AM

And for every Dino Rachel, I'll throw out..........oh, let's say SEAGUY. Yes, even the Great Bald One comes up with lame and idiotic characters. So let's all lay aside the tired "Dino Rachel" cliche to put out Chris Claremont.

Oh yes, I'm sure DC Comics was OVERJOYED with Seaguy. Grant Morrison, the man who saved X-Men. If only all his legions of fans were aware of all the sci-fi ideas he's stolen from science fiction books by other writers.

LOL

You forgot to mention that MOST of his NXM run was a rehash of CC's X-Men stories, but with his own (IMO, crappy) spin.

Blade X

08-12-2007, 01:46 AM

And for every Dino Rachel, I'll throw out..........oh, let's say SEAGUY. Yes, even the Great Bald One comes up with lame and idiotic characters. So let's all lay aside the tired "Dino Rachel" cliche to put out Chris Claremont.

Oh yes, I'm sure DC Comics was OVERJOYED with Seaguy. Grant Morrison, the man who saved X-Men. If only all his legions of fans were aware of all the sci-fi ideas he's stolen from science fiction books by other writers.

LOL

You forgot to mention that MOST of his NXM run was a rehash of CC's X-Men stories, but with his own (IMO, crappy) spin.

Dan Apodaca

08-12-2007, 02:04 PM

an elitist critically acclaimed creators like Ellis.

So you've met Warren Ellis, then, and know his personality pretty well?

Or are you just full of it?

Sean Whitmore

08-12-2007, 02:55 PM

You forgot to mention that MOST of his NXM run was a rehash of CC's X-Men stories, but with his own (IMO, crappy) spin.

He might've forgotten to mention it because it's bullshit. Just possibly.

SEAN

SUPERECWFAN1

08-12-2007, 03:32 PM

LOL

You forgot to mention that MOST of his NXM run was a rehash of CC's X-Men stories, but with his own (IMO, crappy) spin.

I'd think we'd have to have a vote on that. Yeah a lot of it touched bases on what Claremont did. But Grant came in and kicked the X-Men into this era. Its Marvel who dropped the ball and decided that X-Men should run ass backwards to 1960.

StrikeForce Albert

08-12-2007, 04:31 PM

Reptisaurus!

08-13-2007, 11:43 AM

Seaguy was/is great

Not morrison's fault you don't get it

I'm not sure there was that much in SeaGuy to get. Retro-Futurist heroes journey stuff dealin' with the basic Morrison theme of individual vs. society. With giant pink sperms!

I can see bein' dissapointed with the ending, since it was designed to be Part 1 of 3. But by'n large it was very readable, and surprisingly well paced and coherent... for a Morrison book.

Blade X

08-13-2007, 05:23 PM

So you've met Warren Ellis, then, and know his personality pretty well?

Or are you just full of it?

No, I read his many comments from interviews and his defunct message board to lead me to believe that he has an elitist attitude.

Blade X

08-13-2007, 05:47 PM

He might've forgotten to mention it because it's bullshit. Just possibly.

SEAN

Casandra Nova = the Entity (from the X-MEN/MICRONAUTS mini series)

CC (and before CC, Roy Thomas) did secondary mutation before Morrison. Hell, Ellis did it with Warpath and Jessie Bedlam during his X-FORCE run

CC did the whole illegal mutant power enhancing drug before Morrison.

Magneto joining the X-Men was first done by CC. However, it should be noted that the reasons why Magneto joined the X-Men during Morrison's run, were completely different from the reasons why he joined during CC's run.

Prof X walking was first done by CC.

Sublime was nothing more then a biological/bacterial version of the Shadow King.

Morrison had characters being mind controlled during his run. Just like CC does in many of his stories.

Blade X

08-13-2007, 05:50 PM

I'd think we'd have to have a vote on that. Yeah a lot of it touched bases on what Claremont did. But Grant came in and kicked the X-Men into this era.

I have to ask this. How did Morrison "kick the X-Men into this era"? I hear this claim made numerous times, and I just don't get how this is true.

SUPERECWFAN1

08-13-2007, 06:32 PM

I have to ask this. How did Morrison "kick the X-Men into this era"? I hear this claim made numerous times, and I just don't get how this is true.

Go back and read the X-Men from the late 80's thru the 1990's. Its like they existed in a pure world where things seemed frozen in time. The issues beyond AoA were just stagnet and Claremont did no better in 2000 with his Revolution run that decided to toss a bunch of new villains at readers every issue.

When Grant came on...the book , the feel and the characters all had this attitude of today. Wolverine remarking that he always wondered why he wore a gaudy costume all those years seemed to reflect todays culture and how many would laugh at the costumes if someone walked down the street in them.

Its a shame. That era... and all its hipness reflected the era of today and culture. Marvel having no clue how really to write the books for today's era after Morrison left , rewinded the clock back to the 1960's sadly.

Charles RB

08-13-2007, 06:40 PM

Casandra Nova = the Entity (from the X-MEN/MICRONAUTS mini series)

Not familiar with the Entity. Was it a living force of pointless, malicious destruction that existed solely to wipe up species, took great pleasure from making people destroy their own works, and was linked to both fetal Xavier & the Shi'ar? Was it turned into a small girl and made a student at Xavier's to reform it?

CC (and before CC, Roy Thomas) did secondary mutation before Morrison. Hell, Ellis did it with Warpath and Jessie Bedlam during his X-FORCE run

I'll give you this one.

CC did the whole illegal mutant power enhancing drug before Morrison.

So what? It's a bloody obvious plot to use for teenage mutants.

Magneto joining the X-Men was first done by CC. However, it should be noted that the reasons why Magneto joined the X-Men during Morrison's run, were completely different from the reasons why he joined during CC's run.

So it's a completely irrelevant comparison then, since you're saying a story where Magneto reforms is the same as him infiltrating the X-Men to undermine and kill them.

Sublime was nothing more then a biological/bacterial version of the Shadow King.

The Shadow King was an immortal, cruel entity out for evolutionary supremacy that lives aside all humans and had deliberately created all the Weapon [numeral] programs & sparked mutant hatred because mutants taking over would mean his extinction?

Prof X walking was first done by CC.

Did Morrison ever claim it was his own idea?

Morrison had characters being mind controlled during his run. Just like CC does in many of his stories.

"Hero is mind controlled by villain" is a stock genre plot, anyone can use it.

Sean Whitmore

08-13-2007, 07:40 PM

So it's a completely irrelevant comparison then, since you're saying a story where Magneto reforms is the same as him infiltrating the X-Men to undermine and kill them.

That was my favorite one.

"He did the same thing, but completely different!"

SEAN

mattx110

08-13-2007, 08:07 PM

wait, so morrison isn't the irreverent whippersnapper we once thought? he used concepts from claremont in his x-men run, and put a new spin on a couple?

isn't that what we want from an x-writer? he's usually so "out there" that people are too busy accusing him of trying to be weird to finish his books. i thought all the "secondary mutation" stuff was silly, and just a way to make black and white pictures of beast and wolverine have a different haircut so you can tell them apart. with thomas' and claremont's precedent, i'm a bit more accepting of it. there's not many people who have had the influence on the x-books that claremont has.
i think morrison was just "using the tools". i prefer this to "revolutionary while ignoring the old tools cause the new ones are shiny".

Blade X

08-13-2007, 10:18 PM

Go back and read the X-Men from the late 80's thru the 1990's. Its like they existed in a pure world where things seemed frozen in time. The issues beyond AoA were just stagnet and Claremont did no better in 2000 with his Revolution run that decided to toss a bunch of new villains at readers every issue.

When Grant came on...the book , the feel and the characters all had this attitude of today. Wolverine remarking that he always wondered why he wore a gaudy costume all those years seemed to reflect todays culture and how many would laugh at the costumes if someone walked down the street in them.

Its a shame. That era... and all its hipness reflected the era of today and culture. Marvel having no clue how really to write the books for today's era after Morrison left , rewinded the clock back to the 1960's sadly.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I still don't think the things GM did "kicked the X-Men into this era".

1. What many comic book fans and creators have either forgotten or do not want to admit, is that it's always been about the ILLUSION OF CHANGE when it came to the X-Men and the other Marvel (and DC) superheroes. Changes made to these characters were always meant to be superficial and easily reversable (if those changes don't work out).

2. Wolverine's remark about the costumes was out of character and flat out stupid. And the only people who would laugh at the X-Men costumes (or superhero costumes in general) are those people who (a) hate superheroes (b) have OUTGROWN superhero comics or (c) jaded depressed fans who STILL READ superhero comics, but are no longer interested in them and who refuse to stop reading them and move onto different material that reflects their changing tastes. OMT, the HUGE box office success of all 3 SPIDER-MAN movies and BATMAN BEGINS, seems to indicate that MOST people in "today's culture" WOULD NOT laugh at superheroes running around in colorful costumes. And wearing leather costumes is NOT "hip". Leather costumes are just as silly looking as colorful costumes, not to mention that the whole "leather = cool" thing is so played out.

3. Actually, Marvel rewound the books back to the 80's and 90's. Remember, it was the colorful costume wearing SUPERHERO X-Men from that era, that made the book the mega hit and multi media franchise that made these characters a HUGE hit.

Blade X

08-13-2007, 10:54 PM

Not familiar with the Entity. Was it a living force of pointless, malicious destruction that existed solely to wipe up species, took great pleasure from making people destroy their own works, and was linked to both fetal Xavier & the Shi'ar? Was it turned into a small girl and made a student at Xavier's to reform it?

So what? It's a bloody obvious plot to use for teenage mutants.

So it's a completely irrelevant comparison then, since you're saying a story where Magneto reforms is the same as him infiltrating the X-Men to undermine and kill them.

The Shadow King was an immortal, cruel entity out for evolutionary supremacy that lives aside all humans and had deliberately created all the Weapon [numeral] programs & sparked mutant hatred because mutants taking over would mean his extinction?

Did Morrison ever claim it was his own idea?

"Hero is mind controlled by villain" is a stock genre plot, anyone can use it.

1. Different origins, similar goals. The Entity was basicly all of Xavier's evil (forced out by Xavier himself) and has taken on a life of it's own. The Entity murdered and enslaved millions of beings in the Microverse.

2. An obvious plot to use for teenage mutants that GM is often wrongly given credit for originating.

3. I was being honest and saying that while the basic idea itself of Magneto joining the X-Men was unoriginal, the reasons for him joining THIS TIME were completely different.

4. GM DID NOT claim that Xavier walking was his original idea, but DIE HARD GM fans CLAIM that his entire NXM run was original. I'm just providing proof that his run was'nt as original as some of his DIE HARD fans claim it is.

5. And yet, whenever CC uses the "hero is mind controlled by the villain" stock genre plot, internet fans b**** and moan about how they are tired of mind control plots.

Sean Whitmore

08-13-2007, 11:40 PM

2. An obvious plot to use for teenage mutants that GM is often wrongly given credit for originating.

Though he is rightly given credit for actually doing something interesting with it.

3. I was being honest and saying that while the basic idea itself of Magneto joining the X-Men was unoriginal, the reasons for him joining THIS TIME were completely different.

You seem to be confusing "joining" with "infiltrating". They're actually very different things. And Magneto infiltrating the X-Men was, far as I can remember, a new idea.

4. GM DID NOT claim that Xavier walking was his original idea, but DIE HARD GM fans CLAIM that his entire NXM run was original.

No, they mostly just claim that it's good.

But I'll even argue your strawman. Xavier's ability to walk was only a scam created by Magneto to trick him into thinking he was a healing mutant. That's a new twist on the idea.

5. And yet, whenever CC uses the "hero is mind controlled by the villain" stock genre plot, internet fans b**** and moan about how they are tired of mind control plots.

Yeah, y'know why that is?

Because Claremont uses the mind control plot at every available opportunity.

People aren't sick of mind control, they're sick of Claremont running the concept into the fucking ground.

SEAN

StrikeForce Albert

08-14-2007, 07:36 AM

Casandra Nova = the Entity (from the X-MEN/MICRONAUTS mini series)

CC (and before CC, Roy Thomas) did secondary mutation before Morrison. Hell, Ellis did it with Warpath and Jessie Bedlam during his X-FORCE run

CC did the whole illegal mutant power enhancing drug before Morrison.

Magneto joining the X-Men was first done by CC. However, it should be noted that the reasons why Magneto joined the X-Men during Morrison's run, were completely different from the reasons why he joined during CC's run.

Prof X walking was first done by CC.

Sublime was nothing more then a biological/bacterial version of the Shadow King.

Morrison had characters being mind controlled during his run. Just like CC does in many of his stories.

I thought it was pretty well known Morrison just did different takes on standard X-Men stories

He said it himself

Blade X

08-14-2007, 04:35 PM

Though he is rightly given credit for actually doing something interesting with it.

You seem to be confusing "joining" with "infiltrating". They're actually very different things. And Magneto infiltrating the X-Men was, far as I can remember, a new idea.

No, they mostly just claim that it's good.

But I'll even argue your strawman. Xavier's ability to walk was only a scam created by Magneto to trick him into thinking he was a healing mutant. That's a new twist on the idea.

Yeah, y'know why that is?

Because Claremont uses the mind control plot at every available opportunity.

People aren't sick of mind control, they're sick of Claremont running the concept into the fucking ground.

SEAN

1. He's often wrongly given credit for originating the drug idea, NOT for doing something interesting with it.

2. I'm not confusing "joining" with "infiltration". Remember, for Magneto to "infiltrate" the X-Men, he had to "join" them.

3. Yes, I know Prof X walking was a scam by Magneto. My point was, and still is, that it's NOT original. However, you are right that the reasons for him walking again were COMPLETELY different from the last time he regained the ability to walk.

4. I said it before, and I'll say it again. Most, if not ALL, writers constantly reuse or revisit concepts they have used numerous times in past stories they have writen. I'm willing to bet that if you look hard enough, you will see that even GM has reused/revisited concepts that he has used numerous times in past stories he has writen. With CC, it's a lot more easier to spot his reused story ideas since he tends to stay on books for longer periods of times then most other writers.

Blade X

08-14-2007, 04:38 PM

I thought it was pretty well known Morrison just did different takes on standard X-Men stories

He said it himself

IIRC,after his run was over, Morrison admitted that the first half of his NXM run was him channeling CC (or something like that).

Charles RB

08-14-2007, 05:56 PM

The Entity was basicly all of Xavier's evil (forced out by Xavier himself) and has taken on a life of it's own. [/QUOTE}

So, not much like Cassandra then.

[QUOTE]The Entity murdered and enslaved millions of beings in the Microverse.

Yeah, you're going to have to give me more than "he's a villain kills and enslaves lots of people!" as a reason for why Cassandra's like the Entity, since that's regular villain stuff.

2. An obvious plot to use for teenage mutants that GM is often wrongly given credit for originating.

Hardly his fault.

3. I was being honest and saying that while the basic idea itself of Magneto joining the X-Men was unoriginal

Does it really count as "Magneto joining" when nobody knows it's him and he's infiltrating them for evil purposes? Joining would surely means he's openly in the X-Men?

And yet, whenever CC uses the "hero is mind controlled by the villain" stock genre plot, internet fans b**** and moan about how they are tired of mind control plots.

I've only seen them bitching and moaning they're tired of Claremont writing them coz he does them so much.

Sean Whitmore

08-14-2007, 07:08 PM

Does it really count as "Magneto joining" when nobody knows it's him and he's infiltrating them for evil purposes?

It shouldn't. Seeing as they're, y'know, different things.

SEAN

Citizen V

08-14-2007, 08:05 PM

SUPERECWFAN1

08-14-2007, 11:05 PM

Is Claremont`s reputation really in the gutter?Im an old X-Men reader,and i doubt i will ever really think bad of him because i cant ever forget the classic stories he wrote.

But i do see differences,i saw a recent Uncanny comic of his..and there was less text than when he was first on Uncanny.Is he doing this on purpose,because he truely lost his edge?Or higher ups is telling him to write less on purpose?

Comics have changed a lot. Today its a more visual media and the comic is supposed to play more or less like a movie. Claremont has had to slowly ease down on his verbage and all because todays fan really...if the 1st few pages don't hook em...nothing else will.

I can see that CC wants to stay competitive in this era so he's slowly eased down on a lot of narration , word balloons ect ect...

Jake V

08-14-2007, 11:33 PM

Doom Hammer

08-15-2007, 12:10 AM

Oh, forget it.

Dan Apodaca

08-16-2007, 12:38 AM

Guys, you're just arguing with a wall. He has no idea what he's talking about, and you've proven it publicly. You might just want to save yourself the headache and forget about him.

Unless you're having fun, and then by all means...

Jake V

08-16-2007, 02:47 AM

MartinRedmond

08-20-2007, 08:06 AM

Jake V

08-20-2007, 09:32 AM

Grant Morrison borrows alot. If you think he's innovative it's because you haven't read many comics. Jimmy Olsen in drag? Been done. Batman with a kid? Been done. Etc...

Chris' problem is that he is too repetitive. Once he finally strays from his basic "I HAVE BECOME A NAUGHTY DOMINATRIX 4 NO REASON" plot, the editors either steer him right back into one or the book gets cancelled.

I don't think anyone has made the argument that Morrison doesn't borrow. Morrison's name only came up in this thread as a deflection because Claremont was taking heat. What Morrison does or doesn't do is irrelevant in this thread.

Reptisaurus!

08-20-2007, 01:00 PM

Grant Morrison borrows alot. If you think he's innovative it's because you haven't read many comics. Jimmy Olsen in drag? Been done. Batman with a kid? Been done. Etc...

And which Western comics have EVER used the structure of a Bollywood musical? (Vinamarama)

Which comics had the villain being injected by a drug that makes him see language as truth? (And then have him killed by a gun that shoots a flag that says "Bang!" (Invisibles)

And, heck, which comics want the reader to participate in a magic ritual?

Or the Scissormen? (Doom Patrol)

Or the one which inspired the hunting for the "Man who killed God" in Mystery Play?

Because I really, really want to read those comics.

MartinRedmond

08-20-2007, 02:43 PM

What Morrison does or doesn't do is irrelevant in this thread.

I know, but there his name is.

Because I really, really want to read those comics.

How would I know? I'm not the copy police. I just know that when he takes over a title I've read before he kind of copies really old stuff from it. I had flashback of X-Factor often reading his New X-Men.

So I wouldn't be surprised if Invisibles borrowed heavily from books I've simply never read. Not that it really matters, but he isn't reinventing the wheel that's for sure. Heck, Fantomex was a blatant stolen property yet most of his fans seemed to think it was the greatest idea ever. So even when he steals it's somehow classified as a brilliant move of invention. He seems to inspire alot of blind fanatism.

Paul McEnery

08-20-2007, 04:28 PM

That is not always the case in this age of creator butt kissing (on the part of the Big 2 publishers). That being said, Marvel would be more willing to boot a creator like Slott off a book with falling sales that was created by him, then they would an elitist critically acclaimed creators like Ellis.

Maybe I'm out of date, but isn't this still code for "I'm a sad fanboy"?

Reptisaurus!

08-21-2007, 04:25 PM

So I wouldn't be surprised if Invisibles borrowed heavily from books I've simply never read. Not that it really matters, but he isn't reinventing the wheel that's for sure.

So.

Despite the fact that you have ... lessess here, absolutely no evidence to support your position you feel fully justified in making accusations of creative theft.

That's pretty fuckin' low, man.

Also, and I'm sure the whole "logic" thing ain't your forte', but you just completely changed your argument from

Grant Morrison borrows alot. If you think he's innovative it's because you haven't read many comics.

To

borrowed heavily from books I've simply never read

Which is a *completely* different argument. Which is an admission that your first argument "Morrison steals from comics" is completely wrong, yes?

Reptisaurus!

08-21-2007, 04:48 PM

I don't think anyone has made the argument that Morrison doesn't borrow. Morrison's name only came up in this thread as a deflection because Claremont was taking heat. What Morrison does or doesn't do is irrelevant in this thread.

Because, specifically, YOU came into this thread to make a spurious 'n ill conceived argument about Claremont's popularity.

Did Seaguy sell more than 30,000 copies because of Morrison's name? (Maybe it did. I HOPE it did. But I heard that sales weren't so good.)

I don't participate in (or even, frankly, understand) the strange statistical fetishisation of the Diamond Top 100 charts, but a quick glance at 'em shows that the titles are grouped much more by BIG EVENT status and CHARACTER - and to a lesser degree by ARTIST than they are by writer. Slap CIVIL WAR presents EXILES on the front of a Claremont comic and you got a hot ten book with a bullet!

Here's my pet theory. I don't know if it jibes with the numbers on the Diamondbillboard chart, but I suspect it's pretty close. You got yer BIG NAMES from OUTSIDE THE INDUSTRY. (Yer Gaiman's, yer Whedon's, yer Kevin Smith's.) And they do generate sales. Other writers - Not so much. There's probably a couple of thousand folks who'll buy any Grant Morrison book, a couple thousand who'll buy any Chris Claremont book, me and four other guys who'll buy any Steve Gerber book... And their might be a few Alan Moore or Art Spiegelman types who have a little bit bigger audience based on name alone. But since none of them are BIG NAMES FROM OUTSIDE THE INDUSTRY they're a relatively minor factor in the overall sales of a comic.

Plus, geez. Poor CC's in the hospital. It feels well, (And this is a word I rarely feel I can use without being a big 'ol hypocrite) tactless to dump on him.

Paul McEnery

08-21-2007, 06:00 PM

So.

Despite the fact that you have ... lessess here, absolutely no evidence to support your position you feel fully justified in making accusations of creative theft.

That's pretty fuckin' low, man.

Also, and I'm sure the whole "logic" thing ain't your forte', but you just completely changed your argument from

To

Which is a *completely* different argument. Which is an admission that your first argument "Morrison steals from comics" is completely wrong, yes?

Ooh, ooh, I know this one!

Grant Morrison deliberately and blatantly swipes like crazy in order to create a hypertextual bricolage, whose content then interacts directly as an emotional interface between the individual reader and the entirety of human culture.

Reptisaurus!

08-21-2007, 07:14 PM

Ooh, ooh, I know this one!

Grant Morrison deliberately and blatantly swipes like crazy in order to create a hypertextual bricolage, whose content then interacts directly as an emotional interface between the individual reader and the entirety of human culture.

Ok, then... *Googles*

to use something that is easy at hand for a tool it was not designed for. A brick used for a hammer, for exaple, is bricolage. Postmodern authors talk about the way language grows by the means of established terms being used as a kind of bricolage, as a brick might be used for a hammer.

Just to save everybody else the trouble.

How's that different than anybody else's swiping? I mean, I see art pretty much all art as remixing reality - or certain specific elements of reality.

Are you talking about, like, the intersection of truth and fiction? Like the Doom Patrol as "When Rabbit Howls" plus superheroes. Or New X-men as hitting the Chris Claremont beats but mixing them in with real sociology?

(Assuming we count When Rabbit Howls - or, for that matter current sociological theory - as "true." Although if not they're both kinda interesting symbolic truths, which are better than real truth.)

Kid Monster

08-21-2007, 11:01 PM

One of my favorite things about Claremont's work is the strange undercurrent of sexual obssession: Glove fetishism, bondage, dominant women, etc.

Seriously, when Claremont is good, it adds a quirky, personal dimension to the story (The Death of Phoenix Saga, the character of the White Queen) when Claremont is bad, it allows an otherwise mediocre comic to at least work as cheesecake (X-Treme X-Men). I would pay good money to see him do an XXX title for Avatar... it might be great, it might be hideous, but it would certainly be interesting.

mattx110

08-21-2007, 11:32 PM

Jake V

08-21-2007, 11:38 PM

Because, specifically, YOU came into this thread to make a spurious 'n ill conceived argument about Claremont's popularity.

Did Seaguy sell more than 30,000 copies because of Morrison's name? (Maybe it did. I HOPE it did. But I heard that sales weren't so good.)

I don't participate in (or even, frankly, understand) the strange statistical fetishisation of the Diamond Top 100 charts, but a quick glance at 'em shows that the titles are grouped much more by BIG EVENT status and CHARACTER - and to a lesser degree by ARTIST than they are by writer. Slap CIVIL WAR presents EXILES on the front of a Claremont comic and you got a hot ten book with a bullet!

Here's my pet theory. I don't know if it jibes with the numbers on the Diamondbillboard chart, but I suspect it's pretty close. You got yer BIG NAMES from OUTSIDE THE INDUSTRY. (Yer Gaiman's, yer Whedon's, yer Kevin Smith's.) And they do generate sales. Other writers - Not so much. There's probably a couple of thousand folks who'll buy any Grant Morrison book, a couple thousand who'll buy any Chris Claremont book, me and four other guys who'll buy any Steve Gerber book... And their might be a few Alan Moore or Art Spiegelman types who have a little bit bigger audience based on name alone. But since none of them are BIG NAMES FROM OUTSIDE THE INDUSTRY they're a relatively minor factor in the overall sales of a comic.

Plus, geez. Poor CC's in the hospital. It feels well, (And this is a word I rarely feel I can use without being a big 'ol hypocrite) tactless to dump on him.
He's been out of the hospital for around a year now. Maybe 9 months.

He's a big boy. I'm sure he can take whatever people say about him.

Syzygy

08-22-2007, 01:05 AM

ISo I wouldn't be surprised if Invisibles borrowed heavily from books I've simply never read. Not that it really matters, but he isn't reinventing the wheel that's for sure. Heck, Fantomex was a blatant stolen property yet most of his fans seemed to think it was the greatest idea ever. So even when he steals it's somehow classified as a brilliant move of invention. He seems to inspire alot of blind fanatism.

Actually, while I positively love Grant Morrison's comics work, you are correct. Fantasy author Michael Moorcock is of the opinion that Grant's Invisibles is heavily borrowed from his Jerry Cornelius books.

Scroll down to one of the lower posts with several Moorcock quotes:

http://www.multiverse.org/fora/showthread.php?t=2853

Myself, I'm a fan of both GM and MM. As for CC: used to love him, but now....:(

Sean Whitmore

08-22-2007, 03:11 AM

Fantasy author Michael Moorcock is of the opinion that Grant's Invisibles is heavily borrowed from his Jerry Cornelius books.

Did Moorcock likewise get pissed at The Matrix when it came out?

SEAN

Reptisaurus!

08-22-2007, 07:43 PM

Actually, while I positively love Grant Morrison's comics work, you are correct. Fantasy author Michael Moorcock is of the opinion that Grant's Invisibles is heavily borrowed from his Jerry Cornelius books.

Scroll down to one of the lower posts with several Moorcock quotes:

http://www.multiverse.org/fora/showthread.php?t=2853

Myself, I'm a fan of both GM and MM. As for CC: used to love him, but now....:(

Anyone read the Morcock books and can confirm? I think Morrison's certainly proved that he CAN write original material. Doom Patrol is about the most creative comic I've ever read.

- I'm not sure it was a good run, mind. There were huge, huge craft-type flaws in the writing, and Richard Case was... well, dude just needed more time. There are things no man should be called to draw in a monthly comic. But bursting with cool ideas.

Did Moorcock likewise get pissed at The Matrix when it came out?

Hehheh.

I've read the first book of the Invisibles 3-4 times, and I don't really see it. They're both kind of rooted in Alice in Wonderland Down-the-Rabbithole-Who's-the-Dreamer-Who's-the-Dream far as I can tell.

Expletive Deleted

08-22-2007, 10:15 PM

I've read the first book of the Invisibles 3-4 times, and I don't really see it. They're both kind of rooted in Alice in Wonderland Down-the-Rabbithole-Who's-the-Dreamer-Who's-the-Dream far as I can tell.I don't think it was the broader stuff since, like you said, that's stuff that pops up in all sorts of different contexts. I think Morrison's problem was more the little, specific things. The jump off the building, the magic mirror, the torture scene, the virus speech, and so on.

Reptisaurus!

08-23-2007, 12:36 PM

He's been out of the hospital for around a year now. Maybe 9 months.

Oh. Oops. Sorry, my memory is bad and I shoulda done some basic research before I posted.

I AM glad he's feeling better though. And I hope he continues to get work.

Although what I really hope is that he can maneuver out of the X-men ghetto -heck, super team books in general, and do something more in line with his science fiction sensibilities.

I don't think it was the broader stuff since, like you said, that's stuff that pops up in all sorts of different contexts. I think Morrison's problem was more the little, specific things. The jump off the building, the magic mirror, the torture scene, the virus speech, and so on.

Oops.

OK, in all honesty I haven't seen the Matrix since it was in theatres, haven't seen the sequels and, again, didn't do basic research. And now that I think about it I do remember the jump scene in both. (And forget the virus speech and torture scene in both. My memory - not that good.)

STILL - Plot ain't everything, y'know, and the two works had major differences in tone. (The Matrix had this kind of cool William Gibson/Fritz Lang meets Birth of the Cool thing goin' on, while the early Invisibles was more first-persony and had more of a sense of fun.) And they had a completely different visual aesthetic to them. - ANd in the sense of providing consistently interesting visuals I think the Matrix was way successful and the Invisbles, due to the replacement artist tango and (what I have to assume) are Morrison's problems tailoring his work to his artist's strength.*

* An area he IS getting better at. Stuff like the Filth and Arkham Asylum suffered hugely 'cause of writer/artist disconnect, but he felt almost completely in sync with alla the Seven Soldiers crew.

Kid Omega

08-23-2007, 03:00 PM

Anyone read the Morcock books and can confirm?

I have.

The problem is not that THE INVISIBLES as a work is a Moorcock rip, it's that the Kirk Morrison character Gideon Stargrave (the one he uses as a psychic defense, so that people see fiction rather than his actual history under psychic attack) is a clear and direct pastiche of Jerry Cornelius.

The problem is that a) Jerry Cornelius has been used by other authors multiple times, as he was a "open source" character at one point, and b) he's supposed to be a clear pastiche, as he is a character created by a young King Mob, when he was a young writer and a big Moorcock fan.

So the fact that Stargrave is so much like Cornelius is part of the point. It's basically a psychic Jerry Cornelius disguise.... so it's not so much that he "ripped off" Moorcock, as much as he used a Moorcock concept in homage in the plot.

If any if that makes sense.

Adam C

08-23-2007, 03:19 PM

Just to save everybody else the trouble.

How's that different than anybody else's swiping? I mean, I see art pretty much all art as remixing reality - or certain specific elements of reality.

Are you talking about, like, the intersection of truth and fiction? Like the Doom Patrol as "When Rabbit Howls" plus superheroes. Or New X-men as hitting the Chris Claremont beats but mixing them in with real sociology?

Well I suppose what Paul means is it's the difference between Sean Combs recording "Kashmir" and just rapping over it and the productions of the Bomb Squad during peak era Public Enemy. (Or similarly the stuff DJ Shadow pulls.) Instead of swiping as a manifestation of talentless hackery it's swiping to recontextualise and reform existing material into new forms.

And keyword there: "hypertext" the computer text that leads users to other related textual material. (Basically all the links that festoon blogs and wikis.) Morrison's using the matter he draws off of to make commentary on human culture and human personal development while drawing people's attention to related material they might be interested in but have not seen before. Thus Invisibles not only draws off of Michael Moorcock, but Lovecraftian mythos, Situationist theory, Chaos Magick, spy novels, Nanotechnology, William S. Burroughs, romantic-era poetry, Narrative theory, etc. etc.

And "New X-men as hitting the Chris Claremont beats but mixing them in with real sociology"? I LOVE that analogy! That's brilliant!

Anyone read the Morcock books and can confirm? I think Morrison's certainly proved that he CAN write original material. Doom Patrol is about the most creative comic I've ever read.

As a Moorcock and Morrison reader I can confirm that some elements of the Invisibles bear relation to Moorcock's excellent Jerry Cornelius novels (which really should be read, they are the Stooges/Velvet Underground to the whoole rest of cyberpunk). King Mob's whole cool super-spy persona bears some resemblance to Cornelius, as does Morrison's subsequent deconstruction, though he takes it in a completely different direction within regards to the character. He riffs Moorcock's chaos/order dichotomy in the universe, but ends up taking that in a completely new direction and making a statement about personal growth. Oh and then there's Gideon Stargrave, a character who appears in King Mob's mind in a story where he's being interrogated who's a blatant Jerry Cornelius tribue.

Other than that I'd say that claiming Morrison rips off Moorcock is like saying Sonic Youth ripped off the Stooges.

Ed Cunard

08-23-2007, 03:21 PM

Maybe I'm out of date, but isn't this still code for "I'm a sad fanboy"?

No.

Codes are supposed to be hard to decypher.

Kalen O.

08-23-2007, 03:50 PM

I don't think it was the broader stuff since, like you said, that's stuff that pops up in all sorts of different contexts. I think Morrison's problem was more the little, specific things. The jump off the building, the magic mirror, the torture scene, the virus speech, and so on.

Also the fact that people working on The Matrix were given The Invisibles to use as reference material.

Lol, like ED said, the little specific things.

Dan Apodaca

08-23-2007, 04:55 PM

There is an important difference between ripping something off, and being influenced by it.

MartinRedmond

08-24-2007, 11:23 AM

"Influenced" means you can't trace back the original material. That's obviously not his case.

Kid Omega

08-24-2007, 11:59 AM

"Influenced" means you can't trace back the original material. That's obviously not his case.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Paul McEnery

08-24-2007, 12:26 PM

Actually, while I positively love Grant Morrison's comics work, you are correct. Fantasy author Michael Moorcock is of the opinion that Grant's Invisibles is heavily borrowed from his Jerry Cornelius books.

Scroll down to one of the lower posts with several Moorcock quotes:

http://www.multiverse.org/fora/showthread.php?t=2853

Myself, I'm a fan of both GM and MM. As for CC: used to love him, but now....:(

Actually, I talked to Michael about this at length, and his real issue was the direct lifts of dialogue and plot. By all means do a Cornelius story, but do your own Cornelius story.

Which of course misses the multilayered purpose of Grant's use of lifting. Not least of which being that Mob is Morrison's fleshsuit, and what happens to Mob in some sense happens to Morrison, so it's natural that Mob's inner self-image is built out of pure Cornelius.

Sean Whitmore

08-24-2007, 01:10 PM

"Influenced" means you can't trace back the original material.

On what fucking world?

SEAN

Kid Omega

08-24-2007, 01:18 PM

On what fucking world?

SEAN

On the annoying troll jerk-off homeworld, apparently.

Blade X

08-25-2007, 01:59 AM

Maybe I'm out of date, but isn't this still code for "I'm a sad fanboy"?

IMO, a "sad fanboy" is someone who over analysis/tries to find deeper meaning and worship's every damn thing writen by his favorite writer. They are also more prone to call/label other fans "fanboys" in order to make themselves seem more "kewl".

Blade X

08-25-2007, 02:12 AM

Also the fact that people working on The Matrix were given The Invisibles to use as reference material.

Lol, like ED said, the little specific things.

From what I heard online, the ideas for the MATRIX came from the short lived ECTO KID comic which was writen by the Wachowskie (sp) brothers and pre-dated the INVISIBLES by a few years. Now it's been years since I read ECTO KID, but I can't recall any similarities between that series and the MATRIX.

On a related note, there is a news article that went online a year or two ago, that talked about a lawsuit filed against the Wachowskie brothers and Warner Brothers which claims that the whole MATRIX concept and script were stolen from a black women who submitted the MATRIX screenplay to the bothers and WB in response to an add in the paper for original screenplays.

Sean Whitmore

08-25-2007, 03:22 AM

IMO, a "sad fanboy" is someone who over analysis/tries to find deeper meaning and worship's every damn thing writen by his favorite writer.

Yeah, that's pretty much what Paul was saying, actually.

Though I'd broaden the definition to include people who can't understand why writers whose books don't sell keep losing work while writers whose books do sell keep getting work.

SEAN

StrikeForce Albert

08-25-2007, 06:18 AM

"Influenced" means you can't trace back the original material. That's obviously not his case.

whatt he hell are you talking about?

Blade X

08-25-2007, 01:29 PM

Though I'd broaden the definition to include people who can't understand why writers whose books don't sell keep losing work while writers whose books do sell keep getting work.

SEAN

How about we flip the script to include people who either don't understand or can't accept that MOST of those writers, who's books do sell, do so MAINLY because of gimmicks and speculators.

mattx110

08-25-2007, 02:55 PM

IMO, a "sad fanboy" is someone who over analysis/tries to find deeper meaning and worship's every damn thing writen by his favorite writer. They are also more prone to call/label other fans "fanboys" in order to make themselves seem more "kewl".

actually a "sad fanboy" is the look when that guy finds out from an interview transcript that his favorite writer is really a hack who doesn't care about analyzing anything, and hates all his fans because he assumes they are all like the folks who dress up for comic-con, only he thinks they dress like that all the time. (ps, people that dress up at comic conventions are very brave, i don't think i'd ever do that, and i will never go to a halloween costume type party unless i have a 6 year old child who is the primary attendant, and i'm ok with being a coward).

Sean Whitmore

08-25-2007, 03:54 PM

MOST of those writers, who's books do sell, do so MAINLY because of gimmicks and speculators.

Prove it and we'll talk.

SEAN

SUPERECWFAN1

08-25-2007, 06:20 PM

Yeah, that's pretty much what Paul was saying, actually.

Though I'd broaden the definition to include people who can't understand why writers whose books don't sell keep losing work while writers whose books do sell keep getting work.

SEAN

How about we flip the script to include people who either don't understand or can't accept that MOST of those writers, who's books do sell, do so MAINLY because of gimmicks and speculators.

Immortal Iron Fist negates this. Its sales are actually good for the pure fact its fucking amazing as hell. And everywhere I go into LCS's people want the TPB or the issues.

Blade X

08-25-2007, 07:05 PM

Immortal Iron Fist negates this. Its sales are actually good for the pure fact its fucking amazing as hell. And everywhere I go into LCS's people want the TPB or the issues.

I said MOST of those writers, NOT ALL of them. While sales on IMMORTAL IRON FIST not all that spectacular, they are pretty damn good for a book starring Iron Fist.

Reptisaurus!

08-25-2007, 08:43 PM

Actually, I talked to Michael about this at length, and his real issue was the direct lifts of dialogue and plot. By all means do a Cornelius story, but do your own Cornelius story.

Which of course misses the multilayered purpose of Grant's use of lifting. Not least of which being that Mob is Morrison's fleshsuit, and what happens to Mob in some sense happens to Morrison, so it's natural that Mob's inner self-image is built out of pure Cornelius.

Huh.

I should probably try to read these Morcook books, huh.

Also the Invisibles in order. I still haven't made sense of the whole thing. (And the constant artist switch-off gets on my damn nerves - It's pretty clear that Morrison either didn't know or, worse, didn't care who was drawing most of the series.)

IMO, a "sad fanboy" is someone who over analysis/tries to find deeper meaning and worship's every damn thing writen by his favorite writer. They are also more prone to call/label other fans "fanboys" in order to make themselves seem more "kewl".

It's because my favorite writers don't write no shit, and their works are always interesting. (And tend to write stuff that works on a deeper level than pure entertainment.) I'm sorry if your favorite writers aren't as worthy of worship as my favorite writers. But that's because I have really, really, good taste.

Blade X

08-25-2007, 11:13 PM

It's because my favorite writers don't write no shit, and their works are always interesting. (And tend to write stuff that works on a deeper level than pure entertainment.) I'm sorry if your favorite writers aren't as worthy of worship as my favorite writers. But that's because I have really, really, good taste.

Hey, whatever floats your boat.

Reptisaurus!

08-26-2007, 12:41 AM

Hey, whatever floats your boat.

You know how you get really, really good taste?

Stop using cliches.

And stop trying to rhyme, unless you are Flava Flav.

Syzygy

08-26-2007, 02:57 PM

Huh.

I should probably try to read these Moorcock books, huh.

I recommend starting either with Elric of Melnibone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elric_of_Melniboné), The Dragon In The Sword, or An Alien Heat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Alien_Heat).

Blade X

08-26-2007, 04:49 PM

Prove it and we'll talk.

SEAN

Watch the huge sales drop on Ellis's T-bolts now that the book no longer has variant covers and the INITIATIVE banner on the cover.

Blade X

08-26-2007, 04:53 PM

You know how you get really, really good taste?

Stop using cliches.

And stop trying to rhyme, unless you are Flava Flav.

YEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH BOOOOOOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Good taste is in the mouth of the taster.

Sean Whitmore

08-26-2007, 04:53 PM

Watch the huge sales drop on Ellis's T-bolts now that the book no longer has variant covers and the INITIATIVE banner on the cover.

Pretend for a moment that I don't follow sales. What drop has there been?

SEAN

Kid Omega

08-26-2007, 04:54 PM

Watch the huge sales drop on Ellis's T-bolts now that the book no longer has variant covers and the INITIATIVE banner on the cover.

a) I'm willing to bet there won't be a "huge" sales drop, and if so, it will be due to shipping delays.

b) One book does not a point prove.

Blade X

08-26-2007, 05:33 PM

a) I'm willing to bet there won't be a "huge" sales drop, and if so, it will be due to shipping delays.

b) One book does not a point prove.

1. Shipping delays will add to the huge drop.

2. CAPTAIN AMERICA #25. NUFF SAID.

Blade X

08-26-2007, 05:36 PM

Pretend for a moment that I don't follow sales. What drop has there been?

SEAN

With this month's issue of T-bolts we will see a huge sales drop on the book.

Sean Whitmore

08-26-2007, 05:43 PM

2. CAPTAIN AMERICA #25. NUFF SAID.

Obviously not nuff said, cause I don't have the slightest idea what you're trying to say. The issue where Captain America died sold more than the issue before or afterwards? GASP!!!!!

With this month's issue of T-bolts we will see a huge sales drop on the book.

"This month's" meaning the nest one to come out, you mean?

So you're just making shit up.

SEAN

Kid Omega

08-26-2007, 05:55 PM

I spend an awful lot of time tracking sales patterns...

I have to tell you that you're overestimating gimmicks and whatnot in the long term. And the longterm is what matters.

Blade X

08-26-2007, 06:00 PM

Obviously not nuff said, cause I don't have the slightest idea what you're trying to say. The issue where Captain America died sold more than the issue before or afterwards? GASP!!!!!

"This month's" meaning the nest one to come out, you mean?

So you're just making shit up.

SEAN

CA #25 and the issues following it with the HUGE INITIATIVE logo on the cover are GIMMICKS that are boosting sales on the book. To be fair, it should be noted that sales on CA were seeing some slightly upward bumps before issue #25. However, I highly doubt that the series (which is pretty damn good, btw) would have gained 30,000 new readers without the sales gimmicks.

Meaning the issue of T-bolts that SHIPPED this month. When you see the sales chart for the month of August NEXT month, I predict you will see that the August issue of T-bolts had a huge sales drop from the last Ellis issue because the book no longer has a variant cover or the INITIATIVE banner plastered on the cover.

Blade X

08-26-2007, 06:01 PM

I spend an awful lot of time tracking sales patterns...

I have to tell you that you're overestimating gimmicks and whatnot in the long term. And the longterm is what matters.

Only time (and sales) will tell if I'm right or wrong.

Kid Omega

08-26-2007, 06:07 PM

Only time (and sales) will tell if I'm right or wrong.

My point is that you're throwing guesses and suppositions out willy nilly, and I spend a good part of every week actually tracking hard data on this very subject.

Blade X

08-26-2007, 06:37 PM

My point is that you're throwing guesses and suppositions out willy nilly, and I spend a good part of every week actually tracking hard data on this very subject.

I work in a comic book store and I follow comic sales monthly (not weekly like you). So I just don't throw out guesses and suppositions all willy nilly.

david r

08-26-2007, 07:01 PM

Kid Omega

08-26-2007, 09:04 PM

I work in a comic book store and I follow comic sales monthly (not weekly like you). So I just don't throw out guesses and suppositions all willy nilly.

Okay. Nevermind. You win.

Sean Whitmore

08-26-2007, 09:09 PM

Okay. Nevermind. You win.

Alex, you have a passing interest in comic stores, don't you? Maybe he'd give you a job.

SEAN

Kid Omega

08-26-2007, 09:12 PM

Alex, you have a passing interest in comic stores, don't you? Maybe he'd give you a job.

SEAN

I dunno, Sean. It looks like I don't know what I'm talking about here.

I'm out of my element, I guess.

MartinRedmond

08-27-2007, 08:46 AM

I am CHRIS CLAREMONT™ She, who must be obeyed. *cracks whip* >:0

MartinRedmond

08-27-2007, 08:50 AM

One thing that annoyed me about Kid Omega is how all those kids he led got life sentence of forced labor in Africa or even their legs crippled by Cycklops, while Quentin, who was responsible for all that shit, through some magical Morrison leap of logic, ended up being turned into a saint.

I'm also still peeved the Invisibles left Jolly Rogers to be dumped in a land fill without so much as a memorial service for her while they were crying over poor poor Sir Niles. 6 years of devout buying that book only to have a crap non interesting conclusion like that.

GM= Big bunch or Random nonsense and unsympathetic characters.

Kid Omega

08-27-2007, 09:31 AM

One thing that annoyed me about Kid Omega is how all those kids he led got life sentence of forced labor in Africa or even their legs crippled by Cycklops, while Quentin, who was responsible for all that shit, through some magical Morrison leap of logic, ended up being turned into a saint.

Wow- you really missed the point there.

I'm also still peeved the Invisibles left Jolly Rogers to be dumped in a land fill without so much as a memorial service for her while they were crying over poor poor Sir Niles. 6 years of devout buying that book only to have a crap non interesting conclusion like that.

Well, for starters, that wasn't the conclusion, and aslo, you missed the point.

GM= Big bunch or Random nonsense and unsympathetic characters.

WHy even bother fucking responding to this bullshit?

Sean... talk me off the ledge!

Reptisaurus!

08-27-2007, 11:28 AM

For all the negativeness modern fans say about Chris Claremont now, I can't dislike him. He's always been completely professional towards fans and pros. Even when personal attacks have been made against him (online and by John Byrne), Claremont has never responded back angrily. Also:

1) Claremont seems to be the only X-writer who feels passionately about them. From interviews, I have never seen the same passion from any modern X-writer. They all seem to take it as a job, or a way to pad their resume/wallet. Chris Claremont sees the X-Men as part of his family, and his excitement for them has never waned.

I completely agree with your overall point. I haven't, like, slavishly followed his recent work (Or Morrison's either, for that matter) but I thought Xtreme X-men was a quite solid comic, and showed especially skillful juggling and around-moving of subplots and character bits.

And he didn't FEEL passionate about the characters.. Which is a good thing. :) He kept the authorial distance needed to look at the X-men and say "What's the most interesting way to make these guy's lives hell?"

2) Claremont's plans for X-Men in the 1990s was truly ambitious. Far more ambitious than anything Marvel Comics ever produced. And I can't hold it against Claremont for wanting to take the X-Men into new horizons and provocative directions.

Huh. You got links?

Sean Whitmore

08-27-2007, 02:35 PM

WHy even bother fucking responding to this bullshit?

Sean... talk me off the ledge!

Serenity now!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/91/Seinfeld_s9e3.jpg/200px-Seinfeld_s9e3.jpg

SEAN

Michael P

08-27-2007, 02:58 PM

I work in a comic book store and I follow comic sales monthly (not weekly like you). So I just don't throw out guesses and suppositions all willy nilly.

Alex owns a comic book store.

Michael P

08-27-2007, 02:59 PM

CA #25 and the issues following it with the HUGE INITIATIVE logo on the cover are GIMMICKS that are boosting sales on the book. To be fair, it should be noted that sales on CA were seeing some slightly upward bumps before issue #25. However, I highly doubt that the series (which is pretty damn good, btw) would have gained 30,000 new readers without the sales gimmicks.

Meaning the issue of T-bolts that SHIPPED this month. When you see the sales chart for the month of August NEXT month, I predict you will see that the August issue of T-bolts had a huge sales drop from the last Ellis issue because the book no longer has a variant cover or the INITIATIVE banner plastered on the cover.Wanna put some money on it?

DanDeRuff

08-27-2007, 03:33 PM

Let's do it like a Superbowl pool, I'll put $M5 down on [T-Bolts] losing [4,000-5000] issues next month.

Blade X

08-27-2007, 07:45 PM

Alex owns a comic book store.

So what, it still doesn't negate my point. My point was, and still is, that I'm not just making crap up or speaking without any kind of knowledge and experience.

OMT, just because someone OWNS a comic shop or WORKS in a comic shop, DOES NOT mean that we are always right when it comes to predicting what will and will not sell. All we can do is go on our own personal experience and by following sales trends and charts. And even then we can't be 100% sure of what will and will not sale.

Blade X

08-27-2007, 07:47 PM

Wanna put some money on it?

Only if it's virtual money.

Michael P

08-28-2007, 12:58 PM

Only if it's virtual money.
Bawk-bawkbawkbawk!

Blade X

08-28-2007, 04:59 PM

Bawk-bawkbawkbawk!

You'll be singing a different tune once I'm proven right.

Citizen V

08-28-2007, 07:32 PM

What is Claremont doing right now?

Sean Whitmore

08-28-2007, 07:33 PM

What is Claremont doing right now?

Exiles.

SEAN

Jake V

08-28-2007, 07:51 PM

What is Claremont doing right now?

His left hand.

Michael P

08-28-2007, 07:54 PM

You'll be singing a different tune once I'm proven right.

So why not make it interesting, if you're so sure?

By the way, how are you defining "huge drop?" 10%? 20%?

david r

08-28-2007, 08:44 PM

Huh. You got links?

No link, but in the X-Men thread, find the Claremont's Abandoned Plots thread. Much material is there, it helps if you've read the last few years of Claremont's seventeen year X-run.

Claremont had ambitious plans. Charles Xavier was to die. Permanently. The X-Men were to find themselves in a far more dangerous world. The Shadow King was bringing the world to the brink of war. The Australian outback era was going to last longer. X-Men were going to die. New members were going to join, etc.

Reptisaurus!

08-28-2007, 10:33 PM

His left hand.

Aaaaand the dumbfuckedness express jes' keeps on chuggin' along, don't she?

No link, but in the X-Men thread, find the Claremont's Abandoned Plots thread. Much material is there, it helps if you've read the last few years of Claremont's seventeen year X-run.

Claremont had ambitious plans. Charles Xavier was to die. Permanently. The X-Men were to find themselves in a far more dangerous world. The Shadow King was bringing the world to the brink of war. The Australian outback era was going to last longer. X-Men were going to die. New members were going to join, etc.

I dunno. Are people in that thread acting like Civil Human Beings or X-men fans?