When do publishers need to stop gving charactrers another book?

[Ziggy Stardust]

Whether you like a character or not, I think there comes a time when it just has to sink in that giving them a monthly book is not the best idea.

Aquaman and Namor are good examples of this.

Doc Strange, too, IMO....

Opinions?

[Free-Man]

Whether you like a character or not, I think there comes a time when it just has to sink in that giving them a monthly book is not the best idea.

Aquaman and Namor are good examples of this.

Doc Strange, too, IMO....

Opinions?

Manhunter. I know it's only a co-feature, but still. And it's a shame, because it was a great book, but how many times has it been cancelled and revived now?

[Evan Waters]

Never!

Good concepts shouldn't be left to rot for lack of marquee value.

[suedenim]

Whether you like a character or not, I think there comes a time when it just has to sink in that giving them a monthly book is not the best idea.

Aquaman and Namor are good examples of this.

Doc Strange, too, IMO....

Opinions?

Trouble is, practically NO superhero characters are capable of holding monthly books forever.

If you think about it, what characters have been able to carry a title for many years while never being cancelled or in serious danger of cancellation due to poor sales?

I think there's a grand total of two: Superman and Spider-Man. Even Batman (or so it is said - not sure I actually believe this myself) was supposedly on the bubble before the "New Look" Batman revamp. Pretty much everyone else has been there at one time or another.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Never!

Good concepts shouldn't be left to rot for lack of marquee value.

But, let's take the case of Namor on my part. I invest time and money to read about a character I love, then the series gets axed.

[Evan Waters]

But, let's take the case of Namor on my part. I invest time and money to read about a character I love, then the series gets axed.

It's heartbreaking at times, but 'tis better to have loved and lost.

[Free-Man]

Trouble is, practically NO superhero characters are capable of holding monthly books forever.

If you think about it, what characters have been able to carry a title for many years while never being cancelled or in serious danger of cancellation due to poor sales?

I think there's a grand total of two: Superman and Spider-Man. Even Batman (or so it is said - not sure I actually believe this myself) was supposedly on the bubble before the "New Look" Batman revamp. Pretty much everyone else has been there at one time or another.

But what about the ones who are only able to hold thier books for like three years at max? At a certain point, shouldn't the editors or creative team realize the concept is working and then reboot or move to someone else?

[Nick Soapdish]

For a lot of characters, something like the Japanese manga format might work best. Give them a maxiseries that is intended to run for however long the writer has ideas to play out the story and let them actually finish that run (assuming that it's not something absurdly long). Some characters may have plenty of good stories in them, but scheduling might not work out to keep a writing team constantly on them. So it should just be re-started each time.

One problem (and maybe not even the biggest one) is convincing the fans to take a chance on a book that is only going to be around for 36 issues or something. Some of us have the mindset that if it's temporary, it's not worth starting so we don't get miniseries or series that look like they'll be cancelled.

[DubipR]

But, let's take the case of Namor on my part. I invest time and money to read about a character I love, then the series gets axed.

Hey same goes for The Legion of Superheroes. It's been launched something crazy like 11 times or some shit and it still gets a chance.

Marvel has given Blade something crazy like 5 or 6 shots.

It's how the writer proposes the character to the audience, that's all

[shanejayell]

For a lot of characters, something like the Japanese manga format might work best. Give them a maxiseries that is intended to run for however long the writer has ideas to play out the story and let them actually finish that run (assuming that it's not something absurdly long).

I call this the 'Sandman' model. Tho the issue there is getting the publisher onside to finish out the run if it's a slow starter.

[Calvin Government]

But, let's take the case of Namor on my part. I invest time and money to read about a character I love, then the series gets axed.

Still better to get something than nothing, just about every time.

[FeminineMystique]

I'd say never. I think with the right writer any character can be a success, personally anyway:smile:

[dupont2005]

one book per character. no ongoing solo books for team characters.

[Bob Violence]

Whether you like a character or not, I think there comes a time when it just has to sink in that giving them a monthly book is not the best idea.

Aquaman and Namor are good examples of this.

Doc Strange, too, IMO....

Opinions?
I'd say that when the pitch calls for re-making the character radically, like Peter David's Supergirl or the bearded, one-handed Aquaman, or the OYL Legion, it's time to just introduce a new character. Crazy talk, I know, but every time an old character is radically redone, it becomes a little less real, to the point where you don't know who these characters are anymore.

[PatrickG]

But what about the ones who are only able to hold thier books for like three years at max? At a certain point, shouldn't the editors or creative team realize the concept is working and then reboot or move to someone else?

Or maybe the issue is with format.

I realize hardcore fans buy into the serial continuity stuff and are personally invested in it but I think what hurts a lot of characters is the "support a monthly, become supporting cast members (anybody remember when the X-Men were nothing but supporting characters for Captain America?) or languish in obscurity" model.

Think about how Harry Potter or Twilight work. They tell contained arcs. When a new story is released, they get a lot of attention but their success isn't based on supporting a monthly magazine.

[PatrickG]

I'd say that when the pitch calls for re-making the character radically, like Peter David's Supergirl or the bearded, one-handed Aquaman, or the OYL Legion, it's time to just introduce a new character. Crazy talk, I know, but every time an old character is radically redone, it becomes a little less real, to the point where you don't know who these characters are anymore.

I've said for some time that I think PAD is one of the most gifted authors in comics but his approach to characters and serial storytelling is IMPOSSIBLE to follow-up on. I get the same vibe off JMS honestly, a bit off of Wolfman and Claremont and to a much lesser extent off Millar and Morrison.

PAD remakes the characters effectively as his own new characters that nobody else can touch. The problem is, he generally starts by remolding characters who, ordinarily, would be open to a number of interpretations and creates a definitive interpretation that doesn't really resemble prior ones.

Heck, isn't the story that a lot of his Supergirl motifs and elements started from a Phoenix revamp he'd pitched at Marvel? That's the problem. They're original. Good. And totally not integral to the characters as they exist before him.

[FeminineMystique]

Or maybe the issue is with format.

I realize hardcore fans buy into the serial continuity stuff and are personally invested in it but I think what hurts a lot of characters is the "support a monthly, become supporting cast members (anybody remember when the X-Men were nothing but supporting characters for Captain America?) or languish in obscurity" model.

Think about how Harry Potter or Twilight work. They tell contained arcs. When a new story is released, they get a lot of attention but their success isn't based on supporting a monthly magazine.

Why would I want to think about that?:tongue:

[thedanofsteel]

I dont know if you can rule a character out of their own self-titled series once and for all. Personally I find it bizarre that the Silver Surfer has never managed to keep his own book - yet it's one of comics sweetest concepts.

And then there are books that were awesome in their day - like the New Teen Titans, who since have been on a sea-saw from creative team to creative team as to how much fans respond to their adventures. Sure the series has been cancelled and relaunched a few times, but it wouldn't feel like DC if there wasn't a 'Titans' book on the racks.

[FeminineMystique]

I dont know if you can rule a character out of their own self-titled series once and for all. All it takes is the right perspective.

Personally I find it bizarre that the Silver Surfer has never managed to keep his own book - yet it's one of comics sweetest concepts.

And then there are books that were awesome in their day - like the New Teen Titans, who since have been on a sea-saw from creative team to creative team as to how much fans respond to their adventures. Sure the series has been cancelled and relaunched a few times, but it wouldn't feel like DC if there wasn't a 'Titans' book on the racks.

I think the problem with the Silver Surfer is that he's so powerful it's hard to create a sense of drama.

[AllisterH]

I'd say that when the pitch calls for re-making the character radically, like Peter David's Supergirl or the bearded, one-handed Aquaman, or the OYL Legion, it's time to just introduce a new character. Crazy talk, I know, but every time an old character is radically redone, it becomes a little less real, to the point where you don't know who these characters are anymore.

Wait...You're using PAD as an example of what NOT to do?:confused:

PAD's limited series REVIVED interest in Aquaman who had at the time been seen as nothing more than a joke. A limited series of 7 issues, then a quick series of 1-13 issues and then 75 issues of the regular series.

I'm sorry but Iconsider Aquaman a rousing success. Why do people think a character is unsuccessful if it can support 75 issues continuously and be published almost continuosuly for 10 years.

Similarly, Supergirl lasted 76 issues and I wonder why people think this is not a success. We had the same discussion recently about Ms. Marvel and it ending with issue #50. Really, if in 50 issues you can't grow the character and tell a good story then you should not even be a comicbook writer IMO.

(Beside, look at Dark Knight for example....It basically changed Batman as even the Golden Age Batman was nowhere near as grimdark as Miller's version)

[Libaax]

Manhunter. I know it's only a co-feature, but still. And it's a shame, because it was a great book, but how many times has it been cancelled and revived now?


Thats not respectsful to other fans of comic books.

Sure everyone didnt love Manhunter and the comic got canceled.

I have always been a big fan and now you are begrudging fans of Manhunter even a co-feature ?

Even if you hate the comic, les us have a few pages of co-feature.....

I mean we cant all like the same superheroes.

This made me a little sad. I always see events books,team books top the list, there are fans that are against Manhunter co-features.....

In a better market there would be place smaller comics like Manhunter.

[FeminineMystique]

Wait...You're using PAD as an example of what NOT to do?:confused:

PAD's limited series REVIVED interest in Aquaman who had at the time been seen as nothing more than a joke. A limited series of 7 issues, then a quick series of 1-13 issues and then 75 issues of the regular series.

I'm sorry but Iconsider Aquaman a rousing success. Why do people think a character is unsuccessful if it can support 75 issues continuously and be published almost continuosuly for 10 years.

Similarly, Supergirl lasted 76 issues and I wonder why people think this is not a success. We had the same discussion recently about Ms. Marvel and it ending with issue #50. Really, if in 50 issues you can't grow the character and tell a good story then you should not even be a comicbook writer IMO.

(Beside, look at Dark Knight for example....It basically changed Batman as even the Golden Age Batman was nowhere near as grimdark as Miller's version)

PAD's Supergirl run WAS pretty fun. Though I'll say this Buzz? Spike more like it:biggrin: PAD MUST have watched Buffy before creating that character. Same goes for Manchester Black over in the Superman books

[Free-Man]

Thats not respectsful to other fans of comic books.

Sure everyone didnt love Manhunter and the comic got canceled.

I have always been a big fan and now you are begrudging fans of Manhunter even a co-feature ?

Even if you hate the comic, les us have a few pages of co-feature.....

I mean we cant all like the same superheroes.

This made me a little sad. I always see events books,team books top the list, there are fans that are against Manhunter co-features.....

In a better market there would be place smaller comics like Manhunter.

Did you not read the part where I said I liked Manhunter? I just don't get why despite the fact that it continually fails, DC keeps bringing it back. They don't seem to do that for a good deal of other books.

[Libaax]

Did you not read the part where I said I liked Manhunter? I just don't get why despite the fact that it continually fails, DC keeps bringing it back. They don't seem to do that for a good deal of other books.

Ah my bad, i get ahead of myself. Thinking its enough losing it as monthly.

I think its a known fact Didio likes it, he or someone in charge must to give a couple of chances.

I dont think it would have get canceled with a bigger name writer wise(no matter how good Andreyko is) and in Marvel the land of street level heroes like Daredevil,Punisher and co.

[DHacker615]

Most comic book heroes are going to spend some time "on the bench" over the decades. So, the idea that multiple cancellations merits purgatory really does not hold water. Hal Jordan is a pretty hot property at DC and is one his fourth on-going.

To me, a successful on-going is one that runs sixty issues without being cancelled or getting a Bold New Direction. That gives a new creative team something to build upon. There are the elements of an effective story-telling engine (http://fraggmented.blogspot.com/2006/12/storytelling-engines-introduction.html). There are recurring antagonists, setting(s), a supporting cast and everything else. Once a character has had a successful on-going solo title, they should get three strikes to see if they can re-capture the magic.

So, Hawkman would be out. He has never sustained 60 issues as a solo character.

In contrast, Aquaman has only had one mis-fire since the successful PAD version. Prior to that Aquaman had one mis-fire between his prior 60+ issue run and the PAD revamp. So, he would merit another couple at-bats with someone who feels like they know why Skeates-Aparo and PAD worked.

[ScottyQuick]

Did you not read the part where I said I liked Manhunter? I just don't get why despite the fact that it continually fails, DC keeps bringing it back. They don't seem to do that for a good deal of other books.

Because there's no such thing as a casual fan of Manhunter. When Manhunter got canceled, oh, the letters I mailed in. The online support that was given! The amount of people saying "not buying SOG for anything other then NINE PAGES OF KATY!".

[Ziggy Stardust]

I think the problem with the Silver Surfer is that he's so powerful it's hard to create a sense of drama.

Same argument for Superman. At least Surfer's primarily in space fiughting galaxylevel threats, not patrolling a city.

[Bob Violence]

Wait...You're using PAD as an example of what NOT to do?:confused:

PAD's limited series REVIVED interest in Aquaman who had at the time been seen as nothing more than a joke. A limited series of 7 issues, then a quick series of 1-13 issues and then 75 issues of the regular series.

I'm sorry but Iconsider Aquaman a rousing success. Why do people think a character is unsuccessful if it can support 75 issues continuously and be published almost continuosuly for 10 years.

Similarly, Supergirl lasted 76 issues and I wonder why people think this is not a success. We had the same discussion recently about Ms. Marvel and it ending with issue #50. Really, if in 50 issues you can't grow the character and tell a good story then you should not even be a comicbook writer IMO.

(Beside, look at Dark Knight for example....It basically changed Batman as even the Golden Age Batman was nowhere near as grimdark as Miller's version)

Your Batman analogy doesn't work.. the dark elements were there from the beginning, Miller just emphasized them. What PAD did was take the name "Supergirl" and graft a whole new set of concepts on to it. My point isn't that these were good or bad ideas, but it should have been a new book, with a new character.
The same thing with the Pantheon, from PAD's Hulk run. It was good, but for a long while the Hulk was a supporting character in "The Incredible Pantheon".