Jeph Loeb Doesn't Understand The Medium He Works In

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

http://www.comicbookresources.com/ne...em.cgi?id=8722

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Oh, and this may be a bit more petty, but...

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

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

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

Personally I don't like Mr.Liefield art at all - I think Tim Sale has made stylistic choices, I just don't think Rob Liefield can draw.

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

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

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

[the goddamn batman]

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

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

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


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

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[scratchie]

I think it's interesting that he says:

We are trying to raise comics up beyond the place where you buy them for a dime, roll them up in your pocket and throw them away when you are done reading them.

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

Publishers know this because they know the values of the trades.

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

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

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

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

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

[ValhallaComics]

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

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

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

Fun times!

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

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

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

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

[ValhallaComics]

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

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

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

[StrikeForce Albert]

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

That's the making of a future EiC right there

bet on it

[ValhallaComics]

That's the making of a future EiC right there

bet on it

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

[noface]

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

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

[Reptisaurus!]

I agree with him completely.

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

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

[Ryan Day]

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

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

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

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

[Reptisaurus!]

http://www.comicbookresources.com/ne...em.cgi?id=8722



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

Pssst.

You have the wrong blog.

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

[ValhallaComics]

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



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

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

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