Should Marvel go back to the Big Events being based in Annuals?

[firstmode]

Do you guys think that Marvel should have 2 or 3 big events each year that are tied into all the annuals at the end of the year. That way The whole story would come out in two months covering the annuals of every comic. Right now the Annuals are kind of pointless and are basically just one shots that many times are crappy stories.

Imagine if all the Cosmic characters had their annuals tied into a cosmic event, all the avengers and maybe other characters had their annuals tied into a big Marvel universe / avengers type event, all the Mutant titles could have a big event tying in all the annuals.

I am not saying that there cannot be multi comic stories between titles throughout the year, but they would just be like how all the xmen books have an event together or how all the cosmic books could get together and have a story.

Marvel could even release a large issue the month before the annuals kicking off the main story to the big event, like a big One-shot book of 32 to 64 pages. Then the annuals would come out being the event books and actually just being the story told in however many parts.

This would be different than it is now because Big events would be told in a 2 to 3 month period with lots of story and books, but would then be OVER in close to a quarter rather than trying to tell a story of what went on for 3 days in the marvel universe over a 10 month period.......

[firstmode]

One more point in this:

What this does for the reader is that they would only have to buy the annuals to get the full story, no side stories told in minor side books, no continuity issues with 12 books a month coming out trying to tell the same story from 12 different perspectives over a 10 month period.

The One Shot then the annuals following would be read in order, like part 1 through 10, etc. Full story contained in those 10 books.

The ramifications and changes caused by the events could then be integrated into the individual series during the normal year of story telling.

[_OM_]

...You should have run this as a poll, because it only requires a little logic to see what the rational answer would be, and it would be a hoot to see that big long bar denoting the number of people who'd want events just to be annual-based next to that damn-near-zero reading on those who like the events as overbloated as they've been the past decade-plus.

[Ex_]

I agree with one things--annuals have been shitty ancillary stories for a while now.

[striderhirryu2]

I agree with one things--annuals have been shitty ancillary stories for a while now.

Well we did get a New Avengers vs the Hood and Emma Frost in the Cabal. Those were continuations rather than ancillary.

[Will.S]

I agree with one things--annuals have been shitty ancillary stories for a while now.I don't necessarily agree that applies to all of the Annuals.

[Superbeast]

Dear God YES. Make Annuals mean something again. I'd much rather read 3 or 4 annuals than 30 titles a month to keep track over every little part of a crossover.

[Expletive Deleted]

I wouldn't mind seeing annuals used more effectively, but I don't see Marvel cutting down on big, sprawling crossovers until it becomes less profitable.

[GHalecki]

Here is why they WON'T do it. The stories are being done WAY too big to fit into a series of annuals. Actually the actul stories would fit into a series of annuals, but they pad them so much that they are too big.

Take secret invasion as an example.
How many issues of New Avengers were directly involved with that particular big story event, either lead ins, tie ins, or follow ups? Ten.That is about four sixty four page books, more or less. Just for the New Avengers portion of the story. Plus the seven issues each of the two main minis. That is another 300 plus pages. Add in another three to five hundred pages from all of the other tie ins. We are looking at about 800 to 1000 pages worth of product for that story.

Also. that is pretty much a whole year's worth of the title that people have to get in order to get the full effect of the big event. If people are on the fence about a title, (New Avengers as an example) but they have a big event tied into the titles that they really like (say Iron Man, Fantastic Four and Ms Marvel as examples), they are far less likely to drop that title that they don't like as much because of the tie in.

Lastly, that is one central idea that ran for ten issues of New Avengers. That means for most of a year, they don't need to come up with new story ideas for that book. Don't underesimate this as a factor.

[redsea66]

I really don't feel there are enough auxiliary characters to pad an event without huge page counts as someone stated. I've always felt oneshots and annuals were worthless within the same universe. Why not just tell those stories in the books themselves? 5 issue + mini-series I can understand but not with oneshots and annuals.

[Omega Alpha]

I wouldn't mind seeing annuals used more effectively, but I don't see Marvel cutting down on big, sprawling crossovers until it becomes less profitable.

Pretty much.

Also, I don't really see the point of having an Annual these days. Wasn't already proven that is better to simply release an ordinary issue of the book, even if double-sized?

[_OM_]

Here is why they WON'T do it. The stories are being done WAY too big to fit into a series of annuals

...Correct. They're being deliberately padded and/or decompressed in order to sell more books. Which is one of the reasons most of the major events in recent years have sucked the sweat off of a donkey's nuts. It's like taking the Super Bowl, putting the two *WORST* teams against one another, having a lame halftime show in between each quarter that's twice the length of the average quarter of play accounting for a reasonable amount of penalties, and then requiring at least six overtimes because neither team has scored one point, only to have the game called because of rain. A dark one, at that.

[Hamdinger]

I'd vote for annuals in a heart beat but it will never happen until the cash stops flowing for the bloated crossover traditions. Bummer.

[Maestro]

Annuals should have their main purpose. Bendis does a great job of writing annuals for his titles. they are not fill-ins but important stories in their own way

[Patrick Hultquist]

I think if the main title doesn't tie into the big event, then the annual should.

[earl]

I don't think Marvel will go back as they are having too much success turning their whole line into a soap opera. Not saying this is completely bad or anything, but you have to admit the word 'the end' has not really been in the current Marvel vocabulary. In doing this, Marvel don't want you to just buy some titles, they hope to get you hooked in and buy the whole line or as much as possible to keep up. That tie in list for Secret Invasion was insane.

I've got to say I like the concept of Dark Reign much more than either the Invasion or Civil War, as it is more of a theme than some over arching storyline where every single story has to fall into some sequential order. I started reading comics again around the time Civil War started and it was completely impenetrable to follow, especially since so many issues were impossible to find. I gave up on it and then reading it in trade, the thing is really disjointed, especially the main series which seems to be missing a whole lot.

[machbear]

I have vague memories of some of the big events in the annuals being for want of a better term ropey. I always prefered them as an excuse to do a one shot with guest creators telling a fun story. The X-Babies with Arthur Adams brings back fond memories or the Alan Davis ones featuring Captain Britain.