Axel-In-Charge - Apr 27, 2012

[PwrdOff]

I don't see what's so wrong with people complaining about comics. It shows Marvel that people care about the product they put out and means that they're still relevant to a degree. Of course fans will find reasons to bitch about even the most well thought out and compelling storylines, but there will be a lot less bitching and more praise compared to something like OMD. Even the most cynical and jaded creator would get much greater satisfaction from writing a story that is truly loved by the audience rather than one that just sold a bunch of copies because it was "shocking and controversial."

Personally, I think the entire medium could do with some more consistency overall. If you try to shake up the status quo too much, you end up desensitizing the audience and pulling out more and more ridiculous ideas to try and get a reaction out of them, and you might end up throwing away something that was really working along the way. Not to mention that once you run out of ideas, you start to recycle storylines anyway, and you end up back where you started, except you probably created one of those infamous continuity messes in the process.

[RolandJP]

Anyone else get the feeling Thanos is about to be everywhere in the MU.

I love how people who aren't all pro Marvel are somehow painted as unreasonable. Maybe it's not so much about anonimity but instead about honesty. I wouldn't go up to Bendis at a convention and tell him I think his writing sucks. That would be me being honest but it would also be rude.

It seems to me that professionals seems to be a bit confused about message boards. They are a place to share your opinion and maybe even vent. Because it's a bloody message board to discuss comics good and bad. Not the don't be honest in case you offend the talent message boards.


I liked over on the DC boards when Gail Simone asked if it was okay to post on a thread because a professionals presence causes people to feel they can't be honest.

I agree with a lot of what you have to say--but tone is important. But I also understand passion...most of the time the people who are the most passionate buy the most comics.

That being said, I think the tone has died down..subsequently sales have gone down too. I think the tenor is if you dont like something dont buy it.
A death's knell. But after the abuse people who complain receive..I think most have just moved on.

[vh4ever]

completely agree with you.


i love the refrain from marvel about anonymous internet people hiding behind screen names.... like it matters. my name is brandon yonker.. now im not anonymous.. am i allowed to be negative and critical?


does it matter if i tell you my name? im still some random person out in the world you dont really know no matter if you know me by my name or not

Exactly. It points to the fact that some,( not all,) of these creators, authors, artists, even editors are too thin skinned to constructively accept criticism of this medium without being derided as 'hateful', 'spiteful', or some other such nonsense. TV shows get cancelled, movies go direct to video ( John Carter, ahem,) causing real, tangible people to lose their jobs. As a consumer, you've made a choice, the networks/ studios don't care, they move on to the next thing. They don't zing the fanbase for what has occurred as 'nonsensical' or 'anonymous fanboys'.

At Marvel, if you drink the Kool-Aid, you're fine, you're 'loving AvX'. Dare to criticize, or demonstrate some discerning taste in this 'been-there-read-that' hobby and 'professionals' like Wacker do their damnedest to paint you as a delusional loon. I've read the Spider Forums, or the 'Business Practices' thread, seen the conversations, which instantly turned me off to supporting the books he edits. I have a degree in business management and yet am told, we know nothing about business, REALLY?? The kind of guy you'd punch in the face just on principle. Typical liberal mentality. Gonna cost Obama come November too. Then see what Amazing #583 is worth. Toilet paper.

DC's even more tone-deaf under Dictator Didio.


I'm Mike by the way. Hello.

[tolworthy]

vh4ever is right. I think this thread is missing the bigger, and more disturbing, picture. The interview was not about OMD or Spider-Man or retcons or angry fans. It was about "the relationship Marvel works on building with its fans." The article can paraphrased as follows:

Kiel Phegley: Do you listen to fans?

Alonzo: no.

Or in more detail (again, paraphrasing):

Kiel: people sometimes say they have stopped buying a comic because of X.

Alonso: I'm always a bit skeptical when people say that.

Kiel: how is it different in person compared with online?

Alonso: in person they always say they like it.

Kiel: What kinds of feedback do you get that's helpful to Marvel Editorial?

Alonso: if we get good AND bad it means people care, so we have done it right.

"there are plenty of occasions when I take to heart a reader’s thoughtful criticism. Plenty of times." ...[he gives no examples, unless this is what he means:] "there does come a time after your story has taken shape that you put on your marketing cap"

[he then gets off the topic of readers and on to listening to writers, and respecting the past]

Kiel: "can you think of any occasion where you've gotten feedback from a reader that you've taken right back into Editorial and changed a story because of it?"

Alonso: "Not really. At least not that I can remember. I’ve had fans say they want a certain character back, and that’s influenced me."

[the remainder is readers asking questions, but not making any suggestions]

It appears that Alonzo's idea of listening to readers is in marketing books after they are finished, and in occasionally bringing a dead character back. That second case could be called listening, but it could also be called navel gazing, that Marvel's best ideas come from older Marvel.

vh4ever mentions that he has a degree in business management. I have a degree in marketing, and what Alonzo described is not marketing but sales. Marketing, as the word implies, is about knowing the market. Listening, at every stage, not just once you have made the same thing you always make. Not listening is pretty much the definition of a dying business. Sure, everyone who thinks "I know best" thinks they are Steve Jobs, but most are not.

I realize that listening is hard when faced with thousands of shouting fans, with conflicting requests. But I cannot help drawing the comparison with Stan Lee in the early days: read the FF letters page before the Marvel Explosion of 68: he really, really cared about every single fan's opinion. Heck, even Joe Quesada, even if he didn't listen, at least tried to give the impression of listening - the "cup of Joe" image conjures up sitting around a coffee, chatting. The whole "Axel In Charge" concept seems to say "I am in charge" and "I know best."

Companies that passionately listen tend to have a better view of what their customers want.
It is not rocket science.

[CyberHubbs]

vh4ever is right. I think this thread is missing the bigger, and more disturbing, picture. The interview was not about OMD or Spider-Man or retcons or angry fans. It was about "the relationship Marvel works on building with its fans." The article can paraphrased as follows:



Or in more detail (again, paraphrasing):



It appears that Alonzo's idea of listening to readers is in marketing books after they are finished, and in occasionally bringing a dead character back. That second case could be called listening, but it could also be called navel gazing, that Marvel's best ideas come from older Marvel.

vh4ever mentions that he has a degree in business management. I have a degree in marketing, and what Alonzo described is not marketing but sales. Marketing, as the word implies, is about knowing the market. Listening, at every stage, not just once you have made the same thing you always make. Not listening is pretty much the definition of a dying business. Sure, everyone who thinks "I know best" thinks they are Steve Jobs, but most are not.

I realize that listening is hard when faced with thousands of shouting fans, with conflicting requests. But I cannot help drawing the comparison with Stan Lee in the early days: read the FF letters page before the Marvel Explosion of 68: he really, really cared about every single fan's opinion. Heck, even Joe Quesada, even if he didn't listen, at least tried to give the impression of listening - the "cup of Joe" image conjures up sitting around a coffee, chatting. The whole "Axel In Charge" concept seems to say "I am in charge" and "I know best."

Companies that passionately listen tend to have a better view of what their customers want.
It is not rocket science.

If you were making comics, would you change a storyline midway through because you hear that readers are disgruntled online?

[RDMacQ]

If you were making comics, would you change a storyline midway through because you hear that readers are disgruntled online?

You do realize that this has been done before, long before the internet, right?

[CyberHubbs]

You do realize that this has been done before, long before the internet, right?

Whether the readers are voicing their anger online or off, the point still stands. How much creative influence are you willing to give any fan that walks up to you or sends you an e-mail? Will you then change things when the next reader disagrees with what the first reader wanted?

[Zero Hunter]

Axel is funny and a bit clueless if he really thinks you have to buy the books to know whats going on in them. I have not bought an issues of Avengers since the first few issues Bendis did, but I still know what has went on in that series over the years.

I agree with what Roland says too. After hearing just how childish some creators and editors are you just get tired of even trying to talk to them and give up. There is one that come on here alot like Marvels attack dog and just beats people down until they give up disagreeing with him. I go out of my way now to avoid buying anything he is involved with just for the way he acts on line.

[RDMacQ]

Whether the readers are voicing their anger online or off, the point still stands. How much creative influence are you willing to give any fan that walks up to you or sends you an e-mail? Will you then change things when the next reader disagrees with what the first reader wanted?

Depends on what they say and how they say it.

It's really not that hard. People tend to think "Disagreement=Angry, confused, insane ranting." When you and I both know that someone can make a salient, intelligent point even if it points out a flaw in the story, or expresses some dislike of a story direction.

[tolworthy]

If you were making comics, would you change a storyline midway through because you hear that readers are disgruntled online?

Yes! I grew up in an era of fast moving stories, where most stories took only a single issue. It was standard practice for a writer not to know what would happen the following month, or to only have a rough idea.

The great irony is that these early stories had a stronger long term structure. Characters grew and developed. Events has consequences. The ability to change direction on a dime seemed to make stronger long term stories. Odd that.

Take Fantastic Four 34 for example. Stan and Jack tried something totally off the wall, a non-super powered villain. In the letters page they asked for feedback - do readers like that kind of thing? In the same letters page they said they had not decided the details on the nest story yet, but it would take place on campus. It ended up being one of the best FF stories ever (the first Dragon man) and the start of the greatest comic run ever (FF35-66). And as it happened the fans did not like the non-powered story (I did, but that's OK) so the ideas was not repeated.

Back then things happened quickly. Everything was changing. The fans opinions mattered. Read the letters pages - Stan was genuinely worried if a fan didn't like something, he remembered what it was like to stare bankruptcy in the face with no brands or franchises to rely on.

Today's six issue stories (or in the case of Hickman, 36 issue stories) may be beautifully planned in great detail, but they can be boring as heck. They drag on for year after year, and what is the point in all this careful planning? The stories will be retconned or forgotten anyway. Give me the rawness, the white heat of the early stories any day. You never knew what was happening next! You'd be crazy to miss an issue. It was like real life war, or real life romance, or real life politics, everything could change from day to day. It was like real life, but bigger and more colorful and faster moving.

These old comics were a partnership. The customer knew he was king. His dime (or later his 60 cents) meant that he called the shots.

Of course, maybe this only works if you have highly talented writers. It takes great skill to write a story where everything changes in unexpected ways yet the story still hangs together. Maybe you needed people like Stan Lee who had been writing like that since 1940: three stories per issue, constant change, and they all had to appeal to non-fans. He could handle the pace. I don't think anybody today has that skill or experience.

So, yes, I would listen.

[Herring]

And I said, “Mission accomplished.”

Extremely stupid line to be proud of, Axel. It invites an immediate comparison with George Bush Jr.

[CyberHubbs]

Depends on what they say and how they say it.

So you're willing to say that the writer should not have full command of where their story goes?

It's really not that hard. People tend to think "Disagreement=Angry, confused, insane ranting." When you and I both know that someone can make a salient, intelligent point even if it points out a flaw in the story, or expresses some dislike of a story direction.

I'm not saying that. I'm asking how much are you willing to support a story that you work on.

[RDMacQ]

So you're willing to say that the writer should not have full command of where their story goes?

You do realize that this isn't the case, even as of now, right?

I'm not saying that. I'm asking how much are you willing to support a story that you work on.

A writer can have a great idea for a story. A story that they think is brilliant. That is groundbreaking. That will be their magnum opus and will be a game changer.

And then it comes out and the readers hate it and think it ruins anything.

Shouldn't a writer be open to feedback and try to make his or her story better? Should their pride come before the customers satisfaction?

[CyberHubbs]

You do realize that this isn't the case, even as of now, right?

I'm asking what YOU are willing to believe. 'Cause folks complain about editorial mandates, but they wouldn't mind working their own ideas into a writer's stories.

A writer can have a great idea for a story. A story that they think is brilliant. That is groundbreaking. That will be their magnum opus and will be a game changer.

And then it comes out and the readers hate it and think it ruins anything.

Shouldn't a writer be open to feedback and try to make his or her story better? Should their pride come before the customers satisfaction?

Pride in one's work is not a bad thing. If he or she still believes it's a good story, why should they apologize (outside of some extreme reason)?

[RDMacQ]

I'm asking what YOU are willing to believe. 'Cause folks complain about editorial mandates, but they wouldn't mind working their own ideas into a writer's stories.

I believe that this is the nature of the business.

You wanna work on a comic like Superman or Spider-Man- it comes with strings. You want to tell your own story, create your own IP over at Image or Dark Horse so you can tell whatever story you want.

Pride in one's work is not a bad thing. If he or she still believes it's a good story, why should they apologize (outside of some extreme reason)?

Because humility is not a bad thing either. No one starts out as a great writer or artist. And even talented creators can still make mistakes. And if one does not learn from their mistakes, or take the advice from others in how to improve, then they can't grow as an artist.