Here Here
Thank you, Tom. You are exactly what the industry needs. I love your work and I love hearing what you think. This is the best blog out there.

Posted by kolee on 2006-07-14 12:07:45
this is coherent
but informitive

Posted by tarhaun on 2006-07-14 12:48:43
Well put
I was reading this blog without having an opinion either way...until the Pete Rose comparison. That is a perfect example of what you are trying to say, and kudos for getting your point across so simply.

Posted by Gwaihir on 2006-07-14 13:10:50
CILVIL WAR
Civil War has reached Professor Xavier’s Institute for Gifted Youngsters and the 198 have decided to take up arms against the Sentinels keeping watch over the remaining mutants in Civil War: X-Men #1. In this issue we will see the reunion of the surviving original X-Men as Cyclops, Iceman, Angel, and Beast try to quell the 198 insurrection.

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:00:44
JOKA
The X-Men have been spread thin following the Decimation of most of the world’s mutants and the tension has finally reached its breaking point in the pages of Civil War: X-Men #1.

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:09:33
SPIDERMAN
The Avengers were disassembled and then reassembled with a new team, including Spider-Man. He died, then came back with new powers. He got a new costume.

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:12:14
Spider-Man
And now, there is another big change in the life of everyone’s favorite wall-crawling superhero

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:14:31
CIVIL WAR #2
In order to come out in support of the Superhero Registration Act, Spider-Man (after a discussion with his wife and aunt in an issue of Amazing Spider-Man) went to a press conference where he revealed his identity not only to the government, but to the general public, pulling his mask off and revealing himself to be Peter Parker.

If you know anything about comics fandom, you won’t be surprised to hear that this has gotten quite a vocal reaction from readers. Peter David, in an attempt to keep people from revealing spoilers elsewhere on his blog, devoted a post to discussion about the revelation.

This is the sort of thing that doesn’t really bother me. I have a reasonable amount of faith in two of the regular Spider-Man writers (J. Michael Straczynski and Peter David), and while admitting it might get me lynched by a good number of old-school Avengers fans, I’m also enjoying Brian Michael Bendis’s New Avengers, and I’m interested to see how all three of those writers might address this revelation. Besides, this being comics, I can think of a dozen ways to undo this (my personal favorite is having Ben Reilly return and stand in for Peter Parker at a second press conference, where Peter-as-Spidey shows up, and they reveal some reason for the “fraud”).

I do have to confess, though, that I’m a little distraught by the recently revealed cover for Civil War #5, which seems to reveal that some of Spider-man’s biggest bad guys are coming after him now that his identity’s been revealed. Many of Spider-Man’s biggest foes (the Green Goblin and the Venom symbiote included, and they’re two of the three featured on that cover) already knew Spider-Man’s identity. To have them suddenly attack him after this “revelation” seems… contrived. I’m reserving judgement, though, even though Mark Millar (who’s writing the Civil War title) is only a couple of notches above John Byrne as far as Spider-Man scribes go in my book (he writes other things well, which puts him far above John Byrne in general, but I’ve not liked his Spider-Man). The story might still be told well.

So, in general, my stance is to reserve judgement on this storyline, but I’m cautiously optimistic about the potential for a good story.

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:19:00
Discovering Wolverine's Origins
Following the events of House of M, Wolverine regained all of his memories. The false details of his life, implanted by the Weapon X program, are gone. Wolverine remembers everything. As Way explains, Origins is "the untold secret history of Wolverine. This is the stuff that's always been suspected and always talked around, but never talked about."

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:42:46
WOLVERINE'S ORIGINS
How does WOLVERINE: ORIGINS differ from Logan's current series? Marvel Editor Axel Alonso chomps at the bit to spill his guts to curious readers: "Well, as we all know, in the aftermath of HOUSE OF M, Logan has regained his memory. He knows his past -- all of it. Armed with a clearer sense of who he is, why he is, and who done him wrong, Logan's got a whole new set of priorities. WOLVERINE: ORIGINS will see Logan don his brown costume and embark on a private mission to set wrongs right, get some revenge, deal with some demons, rekindle some lost relationships, and come to terms with major revelations about the complicated tapestry of his origin...and the patterns he seems doomed to repeat."

"In short, fans should expect major revelations about Wolverine's past."

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:45:54
"WOLVERINE: ORIGINS is the Official Record,"
"WOLVERINE: ORIGINS is the Official Record,"

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:47:29
Gotta Love The WAR!!!!
Hundreds of children have died. Captain America is a fugitive. Iron Man is once more a government lackey, and he is hunting down his fellow heroes. Spider-Man has revealed his identity to the world. Marvel has only published two issues so far. Each chapter of this amazing blockbuster gets better and better

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 15:56:42
CIVIL WAR FRONT LANE
If you read Civil War then you should read Front Line. While Marvel is correct when it says that the main series can be read alone, they neglected to mention that this series, helmed by Paul Jenkins and Ramon Bach, fills in so much back story that it is necessary for any fan of Marvel Comics. Full of great surprises and touching moments, this is not to be missed.

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 16:04:42
Peter Parker in the WAR!
Make no mistake about it, Spider-Man is the focal point of Civil War. Iron Man and Captain America might represent the ideology of the fight, but Peter Parker is the one being torn at from all sides. Amazing captures that inner-turmoil to a near-perfect degree, making it one of the most important tie-ins to the summer mini-series. Be sure to pick this one up if you care about Spider-Man's fate.

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 16:09:24
JOKA
A cargo ship churns its way across the Atlantic, only to be intercepted by helicopter-borne terrorists. The crew manages to get off a mayday, but the ship is captured without a fight.

Meanwhile, in an unknown location, Joka broods about whether or not he can continue as Dog Track Employee and Superhero. Mera helpfully suggests he give up the Dog Track. Their conversation is interrupted by SEVEN - NATO has an urgent message.

The message? Kiss a bunch of your people goodbye, Joka, because we're gonna blow that captured cargo ship out of the water over your primary food source. Turns out the ship is carrying radioactive materials, and is heading for a terrorist camp in Africa. So sorry, but hey, you've got 28 minutes before everything goes glowie.

Of course, Joka isn't going to just accept that. He's off. After that, He summons two grey eagles (being eagles, they're under his command) who drop him on the speeding missile.

Joka is able to quickly disable the missile... and cut to an interlude back home in the underwater city. Two councilors discuss what will have to be done to get rid of Aquaman so that Atlantis can join the community of nations as an equal.

NATO's not happy the missile's gone down, but hey, maybe if we give Joka an hour he can come up with something.

Sure enough, he can. His first attempt is to use his beast master powers to summon a random collection of creatures, but they can't help as the water around the ship is radioactive. The second plan is more successful.

With the help of The Celtic Legion, Joka is deposited aboard the ship. He sabotages the engines which in turn draws out the terrorists. A few minutes of hand to hand action later and the ship is in Joka's control.

NATO's second missile is called off, but Joka's royally pissed. He's off to give NATO a piece of his mind, and a piece of his fist. Boo-yah!

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-14 16:44:55
You wrote: " This doesn't mean that older creators should never be given work--only that there isn't an obligation on the part of anybody at any company to give them work, as we will see."

Just wanted to add: I can't imagine that any of these creators would *want* to be given work solely as an honorary thing -- I'm sure each of them, if asked wants to be given work as a recognition of their *present* ability and their potential.

Also, thanks for the refreshingly frank, and informative blog. I really enjoy reading it.

Posted by darkwave on 2006-07-14 20:04:09
A Blog Entry Dedicated to Lil' ole Me?
haha...Much appreciated! Tom, I'm glad that you weren't offended. Sometimes you have to confront a situation head on and ask the tough questions and throw out the formed opinions. I've always been the type to speak up, so you'll never see me kissing up and trying to make cyber brownie points with you when I feel you're wrong. (you probably have enough of the brownie point gang running around, so you don't need me for that!) I'd like to comment, if I may, on your comments. Being challenged isn't so bad, and again, I appreciate and respect the direct approach here that you gave.

"Sorry, no. No one is owed work. This doesn't mean that older creators should never be given work--only that there isn't an obligation on the part of anybody at any company to give them work, as we will see." -TB

We'll have to agree to disagree here. I feel that this "debt" is being paid to Chris Claremont, and I say that as somebody who thinks Claremont's still got it. He deserves it for what his contribution has meant to Marvel as a company. I certainly don't believe that the same debts should be owed to Roger Stern or David Michelinie, two writers I like better than Chris, but I do believe all should have an equal opportunity at least, and I don't see that, and when it comes down to it, Roger and Dave should get a job before any of the 2nd and 3rd tier writers that are "cutting their teeth" at the major league level.

"Stan has a contract with Marvel that pays him a minimum of a million dollars a year. That is what Stan is owed. But Stan is not owed writing work. And Stan's right now doing more writing work for Marvel than he has in a decade or more, but that's based on the desire to give the work to him, and on the result we expect to get, nothing more." - TB

Hey hey! Glad to hear that about Stan. I hope that one million dollar a year salary isn't forced by any recent lawsuits, though. Stan is indeed the man!

"Sorry, no. John Byrne is not owed work. Certainly he's entitled to respect for the great runs he worked on in the past--X-MEN, FANTASTIC FOUR, AVENGERS, etc. And whenever John's work is reprinted in trade paperbacks, he gets a check. But John is not owed any work beyond that--any work he gets, either here or at another company, he gets because he's earned it, because somebody thinks that he's the best person for the job. Also, John has been very clear and vocal in saying that he doesn't want to work for the current Marvel. There are no "personal reasons" preventing John from working at Marvel, at least on this end--if John wanted a chance to be back at Marvel, all he'd really have to do is pick up the phone and talk to somebody over here. I'd take his call." - TB


Again, we'll have to agree to disagree on this issue, because I feel that somebody like Byrne HAS earned enough with his pencil that it should be a given that he can "handle the job" better than most artists working, especially with deadline missing artists who hamper just about every series on the shelf being such a problem.

Anyway, I don't know the specifics of Marvel vrs. John Byrne, but there is nothing preventing you or anybody from calling him, either, and paying that respect that he earned, even in your words, could be applied there.

It's not only Byrne, though. There are many writers and artists who aren't sought after, while others are actively pursued. It definitely isn't a case of the creator knocking on the door, just in "some" cases, and that sends a bad message.


"You mention Pete Rose--would you put Pete Rose ont he starting line-up of the Cincinatti Reds today? Doesn't mean you don't respect his performance in the past, but what counts right this second is how well anybody can play today, and how they stack up against all of the other players in the league." -TB

Not old and fat Pete Rose, hell no, but the Pete Rose that won a gold glove at 5 different positions, who won World Series rings, who leads major league baseball with 4256 hits, most definitely. Even if he was only 80% of that, he'd still be better than most. This is not a case where Byrne, Simonson, or whoever can't compete, it's a case of them never getting the opportunity to compete. That's the flaw in your analogy.

"I think all of these creators are respected for their past accomplishments. But that respect isn't the same thing as guaranteeing them any particular gig they might want.

And your list is somewhat slanted: Todd McFarlane has his own company and hasn't drawn comics for ten years. Goerge Perez is under exclusive contract to DC right now, and couldn't do Marvel work if he wanted to, as is Walt Simonson. Alan Moore says he's retired from comics altogether. We covered John Byrne above. So really your list comes down to Jim Starlin and Frank Miller--and if that's their personal choice, then good for them. There's nothing preventing either of these guys from expressing a desire to do a Marvel project. but there's also nothing that demands they do a Marvel project. There's nothing wrong with not working for Marvel if somebody so chooses." -TB

Fair enough, but how is your list any less slanted? Perez and Simonson BOTH have had opportunities to sign with Marvel, but weren't interested. McFarlane will be drawing some upcoming DC stuff, yet he denied Quesada as Joe chased him around, even offering him money out of his own pocket. Why didn't "he" have to earn anything? If that isn't a clear cut case of a creator being treated as if he was owed...lol

"Okay, two things on this:

1) I think we give plenty of chances to established veterans. We've got guys like Stan Lee, Sal Buscema, Tom DeFalco, Steve Englehart, Marshall Rogers, Chris Claremont, Fabian Nicieza and Roy Thomas working for us right now (not to mention Roger Stern, who's working with Kurt Busiek on the long-in-development MARVELS: EYE OF THE CAMERA). But part of that is the desire to work for Marvel. David Michelinie and Bob Layton, for example, pitched me an IRON MAN: THE END project a few years ago. But we weren't able to come to a meeting-of-the-minds on the story, so the project never happened, and they took some of the ideas they'd had for it and used them in their FUTURE COMICS line. And that's fine--it doesn't prevent them from pitching something else up here again. But it also doesn't mean that I'm going to put out a book that I don't think has merit solely because it's pitched by a classic creator.

2) I have five words for you: Peter David Back On Hulk. For years and years and years, HULK fans insisted that if Peter were only given the chance to go back on HULK, sales would skyrocket. And eventually, it happened--and the numbers remained more-or-less the same. Same sort of thing is true of Layton and Michelinie's last IRON MAN limited series--no avalanche of sales or readers. Or, across town, same thing with the Englehart & Rogers BATMAN series. That's not to say that any of these creators are bad, or doing poor work--in each instance, somebody felt that they were the right person for the job (in the case of Peter back on HULK, me). But it does show pretty conclusively that this idea of a classic creator back on their classic character equals tremendous sales is fiction. John Byrne on X-MEN THE HIDDEN YEARS, same thing."- TB

1) I'm glad to hear about the few but proud vets that have work at Marvel, regardless of how minor their contributions to anything important are. They're not even getting 3rd tier book assignments, and that's just wrong.

2) A few comments about the Peter David on Hulk outcome. First, it was not heavily promoted, and nowhere near as promoted or tied into other high profile projects as Planet Hulk, yet PAD's Hulk initially sold BETTER than Planet Hulk. How do you explain that? Also, Peter David's return wasn't teamed with an artist who sells. Sometimes the writer needs help, especially when PAD's old Hulk run had artists such as McFarlane, Keown, Frank, Kubert, and Deodato during his 90's fame. Lee Weeks and what's the other pencillers name are hardly in the same league as those names. Also, the first arc was sickeningly decompressed, and that's what caused me to drop it after a few issues. Peter David is better when he writes in Peter David's style, not in the Bendis style that I see forced on books today.

It still sold better with PAD than the heavily hyped Greg Pak Planet Hulk, right? Imagine how it would have sold if he got the artists that Mark Millar gets! Artists really mean a lot in regards to sales.

"Sorry, no. What ultimately determines who gets to work long term and who doesn't is the readership--and by that, I mean the readership as a whole. Every creator has dedicated fans, and every book has classic runs in its hisotry, but it's ultimately self-defeating to try to replicate the classic runs of yesteryear thinking that you'll somehow replicate the sales success of yesteryear. Time moves on, tastes change, the medium evolves. What was popular on television or in music or in movies two decades ago isn't what's popular now, and comics are no different in this regard."- TB

I definitely challenge that statement! Walt Simonson on Thor would outsell anything you've put on that book, and Dave and Bob with Patrick Zircher on pencils would outsell the current Iron-Man sales. And why are you so sure that classic creators have nothing new they can do? They've never been given a chance, so I'm just wondering what you base that assumption on? If Byrne was the current Hulk penciller instead of the rotating guys they have now, you don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to put it together that it would translate into MORE sales. Same goes with Fantastic Four and Byrne.

Thanks again for addressing this, Tom. I hope nothing I've said has come off wrong, I'm just a comic lover. (Make Mine Marvel!) There is a better collection of artists working for Marvel than anytime in history, and for ANY comic company. It does, however, come off many times like Marvel is a "good old boys' club", mostly concerning it's writers, and THOSE creators are "owed" for that, while classic creators aren't really considered or given any chances because of the "old school" label attached to them. That "they're drinking buddies" logic does appear to be very relevant from an outside POV.



Posted by Larry C on 2006-07-14 20:26:40
Another baseball analogy
I agree with your post. No one in any business is owed anything if they can't perform. It is cool to see certain creators come back for things, but sometimes certain projects of theirs are bad. They ran out of ideas. Haven't caught up with the times. Or simply feel forced to write the same stuff because that is what fans expect.

Now what I am curious to know is what determines which creator gets work? All indicators seem to be it's what will sell. But again is that more important that performance?

As good a ballplayer as Pete Rose was, you wouldn't put him on a team anymore because he couldn't produce. Now, without a doubt, the fans would come to see him given his stature. He may even hit a homerun here or there, but he would not be consistent enough to keep on the team. Now what is more important here? The fact that the fans are coming to the stadium and paying to see him play or the fact that he can't consistently perform?

What if it was a new younger player? Someone who the fans loved. Maybe a Derek Jeter or Albert Pujols. They sell games out. But all of a sudden they start to only connect with the ball once every 3 weeks and have a bunch of fielding errors. Should the coaches keep them on board out of popularity? Or should they get the more consistent, reliable player in their place?

This takes us back to the blog discussion of deadlines. You have those ballplayers(creators) who have the fan appreciation. However they aren't consistent with making contact with the ball and making their deadlines. Are you, as the coach, going to keep them around just because they sell out the stadium currently? Or are you going to replace them with the more consistent(and maybe not as popular) player who will benefit the team in the long run?

And that may have gotten a bit confusing given the mixture of the analogy into it. But the point is, veteran creators aren't owed work because they can't perform up to expectations. Should popular creators be getting the work then even if they don't perform to expectations? Or is the only expectation, the bottom line?

Posted by thatsmystapler on 2006-07-14 20:31:40
Objective versus normative
I agree with you Tom. Sometimes it is hard to explain to people how the cow ate the cabbage but that is life. There is the way it is and the way it ought to be. It is hard not to see the old giants of the 70s and 80s not get much time on but that's the way it is. You aren't going to feed your family on good intentions.

One of the saddest things of these times is that the industry has shrunk down. If things were booming lile they were in the 70s the Clairmonts, the Byrnes, and the Lees would all be gainfully employed. Compettion is such that a bad few months will run the comic off the shelf.

If you want to see more of the old titans make a comeback the best way is to go out and spread the fanship around. Get people reading comics and there will be a return to the old days.

Posted by Wild Ape on 2006-07-14 21:54:37
Get me a Tom Brevoort type!
As much as I'd like to see all the old writers and artists get work, I unfortunately suspect that the old saw about the five stages of an actor's career is applicable here:

1. Who's Marv Wolfman?
2. Get me Marv Wolfman!
3. Get me a Marv Wolfman type!
4. Get me a young Marv Wolfman!
5. Who's Marv Wolfman?


Posted by Lonesome Pinky on 2006-07-15 02:20:18
Joka? What the hell?
Am I the only one noticing those weird JOKA posts? I'm very confused as to what they have to do with this particular installment of Tom's blog... What's going on here?! :P

Posted by Jen Grunwald on 2006-07-15 18:44:33
JOKA
Jen Grunwald

Posted by joka_23 on 2006-07-15 23:21:16
JOKA, one warning
You're more than welcome to post your opinions here, but this spamming thing of copying pieces of other messages from around the net and posting them here whether they're relevant or not has got to stop. If you persist in doing this, then you're going to force me to ban you from the site.

Tom B

Posted by Tom Brevoort on 2006-07-15 23:43:00
Perhaps I'm Wrong
Yet I would think the older, legendary pros already get the respect they deserve because their name alone on a proposal will probably get it consideration. I mean if it comes down to reading a proposal from John Smith or a Roger Stern or John Byrne or the like. Then it seems likely that the one from the established professional will get the first look.

Of course if the editor doesn't feel like it is up to snuff or even just doesn't fit into what they are trying to do at that time. Then that proposal gets declined, because while their name gets them a foot in the door, it doesn't mean they get the job on their name alone.

I don't think I've heard too often of editors from either company chasing the talent as Larry describes though. Most of the stories I've read and heard from editors seem to be the talent pursuing them to get them to listen to their proposal. (including one editor who told me he had like 7 lunches in one day at SD once)

Posted by JamesSchee on 2006-07-16 11:46:58
Differing tastes
"David Michelinie and Bob Layton paired with somebody like John Byrne on pencils would far outsell anybody that's been put on that book."

I buy around 30 Marvel books a month and I would drop a book with that creative team in an instance.

Posted by IanZL on 2006-07-17 14:04:51
Bad Analogy
This blog thread is still percolating within my brain, so I decided to revisit it. On the whole, I'm inclined to agree with Tom B. However, I don't like the athlete analogy. Barring arthritis, there's no physical reason why an artist or writer can't continue his or her craft into an advanced age. This is distinctly different situation than that of the athlete, who can only remain competitive while in peak physical condition. The commodities of the comic book marketplace are ideas (words and pictures). As long as one's ideas are viable, there's no reason why an aged artist or writer can't continue to work. In other media, we don't throw out the senior members of the artistic community. We still have respect for (and consume the products of), for example, old playwrights or old painters. We don't put them out to pasture, and I don't think that we should treat this medium's creators differently. An athlete has a finite potential career, but an artist should have a longer shelf life. Thus, I am glad to hear Tom B say that Marvel is not against working with old pros, assuming that they have an valid, competitive concept. There is no mandatory retirement age!

Cheers!

(P.S., Jen, the rest of us saw the spam posts, but since us ordinary citizens of the Marvel U don't have the power to stop them, we chose to ignore them.)

Posted by Lonesome Pinky on 2006-07-17 19:04:52
Exactly right
In many fields, roundabout 50 is regarded as being a human being's creative peak. Age doesn't necessarily have the same effect in all endeavours as it does in athletics. Older writers have more life experience to draw on, which is why teenagers only rarely write classic novels, although some do through awesome talent. Nevertheless, I have to agree that no one is owed work. If someone can't cut it anymore, show them the door. Who knows, sometimes an enforced change can re-ignite a person's spark.

Posted by Pallando on 2006-07-18 22:03:57
old vs young artists
When I started buying Marvel comics in 1976, the roster of artists was a complete mixture of 'old-timers' and 'young guns':

George Perez, 22 (FF, Avengers)
Ross Andru, 51 (Spider-Man)
Gene Colan, 50 (Dr Strange, HTD, TOD)
Dave Cockrum, 33 (X-Men)
Jack Kirby, 58 (Cap, Eternals)
John Buscema, 49 (Conan, Thor)
Jim Starlin, 27 (Warlock)
Sal Buscema, 40 (Hulk, Defenders, Marvel Team-Up)
George Tuska, 60 (Iron Man)

Average age of the above: 43

It wasn't long before a steady stream of new artists (Giffen, Byrne, Romita Jr, Miller, Golden) shifted the balance in favour of the young (where it has firmly remained ever since), but I still think that mid-70's mix of youth and experience was something special.


Posted by Rob Anderton on 2006-07-21 18:15:41
Had To Comment Again
I find it very hard to believe that Bendis gave the best proposal for a second Avengers book, judging the lackluster quality of Disassembled and New Avengers, and that bit of new just gives much weight to my argument that it's a good ole' boys club at Marvel these days, and certain creators are "owed" for all the wrong reasons, while others aren't even considered.

Can you explain how on Earth Bendis was given a SECOND Avengers book that doesn't totally contradict your original post, Tom? I'm not picking on you here, but let's call a spade a spade when it is.

Posted by Larry C on 2006-07-21 19:13:10
the progres of things...
hey tom,
at 2007-03-22 you wrote:
"Roger Stern, who's working with Kurt Busiek on the long-in-development MARVELS: EYE OF THE CAMERA"

and what about it?
haven't heard of it ever since.
and what about the art Jay Anacleto had that related to it?
haven't seen it as well...

Posted by ofer b. on 2007-07-18 10:03:40