Axel-In-Charge - Dec 28, 2012

[okpanic]

Why is it impossible for Alonso to conceive of the possibility that although he believed in this pitch, it might not have been the right one to make the book a success?

Because it was actually a pretty solidly written series?

I'm also beginning to understand why everyone at Marvel thinks it's perfectly normal for Peter Parker to turn to Satan for help when he gets himself into trouble...

Oh boy.
*takes a shot*

[jmac]

It's not Battle Royale with superheroes, it's Battle Royale with children. Super powers or not, that's a pretty different thing.

[MarvelMaster616]

Overall, I would say that 2012 was a pretty successful year. While I really didn't like how Avengers vs. X-men ended, there's no denying its success. The biggest highlight for me was All New X-men and Brian Bendis taking control of the X-books. I think that was by far the biggest development of 2012 and will probably continue into 2013. The X-books underwent the greatest amount of change in 2012 and I think Age of Ultron will put the Avengers through a similar change in 2013.

[JaggedFel]

I am sure no one read Avengers vs X-men thought that collaboration worked great besides Marvel Editorial.

[TheDonAbides]

It's not Battle Royale with superheroes, it's Battle Royale with children. Super powers or not, that's a pretty different thing.

Battle Royale was children.

[TheDonAbides]

I am sure no one read Avengers vs X-men thought that collaboration worked great besides Marvel Editorial.

I f*ckin loved it.

[JaggedFel]

no accounting for taste.

[TheDonAbides]

no accounting for taste.

Both ways, yes.

[jyeager11]

Because it was actually a pretty solidly written series?

Said the 3 people who liked and bought it.

[GreenComixEnvy]

Said the 3 people who liked and bought it.

yea then a lot of comic book stores must be in bankruptcy right now.

[jyeager11]

yea then a lot of comic book stores must be in bankruptcy right now.

What does that even mean? Defenders tanked. Some people liked it, most didn't. So they canceled it.

If one of the rare people who liked it says it had great writing, WTF does that mean to me? And what do comic book stores filing for bankruptcy have to do with it?

[Will.S]

I do think it's silly for Axel to not even entertain the notion that Defenders might have been hurt by the $3.99 price because for me personally it's the main reason why I didn't buy it.

It seemed like they were hoping to catch lightning in a bottle twice with Defenders so they tried to somewhat replicate the success of the New Avengers but it just didn't happen. I just wished the team didn't have Iron Fist and Dr. Strange when they were in New Avengers already but eh, not a big deal.

[Rheged]

I bought every issue of Defenders, digitally. Unfortunately, it was canceled before I bought my first issue. I find Fraction's one of those writers who either hits big or misses big with me; and after a few consecutive misses, I wasn't going to take a chance at $4. If it had been a $3 book I might have jumped on from the beginning like I did with Hawkeye. If Marvel had dropped the digital prices on the first few issues before they announced the cancellation, I might have tried it earlier.

What killed it for me was the combination of the $4 price and the pathetic delay on dropping digital.

I don't mind paying $4 for a book I know going in that I'm going to like. I just don't take many chances with $4 books, especially not when they double-ship.

Yes, more concrete reasons that may have led to the cancellation of Defenders. People who didn't like Fear Itself wouldn't be inclined to pick up a book that appeared to spin directly out of it with, with the Nul arc, written by the same author.

There was also some fumbling with the first trade. I didn't even know it was out, because they switched from HC, which I had on pre-order, to paperback.

<snip>....Defenders is just one of those titles that never seems to sell no matter how often it is repackaged or no matter how great the team or creative team. It's a good idea but fans just don't seem to go for it for some reason...

Paragraph breaks are your friend.

Defenders went over 150 issues, which is respectable by any definition. It has only been 'repackaged' twice as an ongoing. The Busiek / Larsen 12 issue run, and this run by Fraction and assortment. AFAIK, the mini-series have done well enough -- the Giffen / DeMatteis / Maguire did well enough to put in hardcover.

That said, it apparently isn't an easy concept to write or sell, as the original had a certain quirkiness to it.

[Rheged]

I commend CBR for reminding Alonso that just prior to Defenders' launch, "you both spoke a lot about wanting to find the right pitch to make that franchise a success."

So had the book succeeded, Alonso, Fraction and Brevoort would have been (rightfully) congratulated for finding the right pitch to make the book a success. Yet now that it failed, timing being blamed. Why is it impossible for Alonso to conceive of the possibility that although he believed in this pitch, it might not have been the right one to make the book a success?

I know he doesn't want to project weakness this early into his tenure as EIC, but nothing would scare me more than a leader who says "Beats me, must be the timing" when trying to analyze why a book failed.

I'm also beginning to understand why everyone at Marvel thinks it's perfectly normal for Peter Parker to turn to Satan for help when he gets himself into trouble, and why none of them seem to get that Peter used to be all about taking responsibility for your actions. That's why he didn't turn to Satan when Ben died.

Back then, people actually believed in being responsible for your choices, in the good times or the bad. How about "we thought we had the right pitch, but clearly we didn't" as an answer? It would certainly re-assure me that the next pitch will be better if these guys at least PRETENDED to know what was wrong with the last one.

I think this is part of what bothers me about Alonso's response. I understand there's a certain undefinable quality that can't be measured or predicted in creating a successful comic book, but there's plenty of qualities that can be defined and analyzed, and his response seemed to indicate none of that was looked at. Which doesn't bode well for future attempts at the Defenders or other books.

[Brannon]

I've been saying it for years that the only team that it makes sense for Spider-Man and Wolverine (apart from the X-Men) to be part of is the Defenders with their loose dynamic. If you had a core team of the Hulk, Dr. Strange, Namor, Spider-Man and Wolverine, with a good creative team, people would buy it. Add Valkyrie and Blade to the mix for historical/diversity purposes and you have a book that I'd buy--particularly if it were done by Kurt Busiek and Alan Davis or Oliver Coipel.