Marvel.com Blogs - Blah Blah Blog by Tom Brevoort

web marvel.com

BLOGS HOME|COMIC BLOGS|VIDEO GAME BLOGS|OTHER BLOGS|MARVEL NEWS

Reader Questions 4
2008-04-03 17:58:51

By now you know the drill--here are some more answers to the questions YOU asked!

>My question: What's the current thought within Marvel to the possibilities of expanding into new markets by publishing more comics about non-American heroes? I grew up reading Marvel UK titles such as Motormouth and Killpower, Captain Britain, Knights of Pendragon and I see it as a real shame that kids today don't have the same choice. There's the Panini comics (aimed at younger kids) or the more "typical" American faire.

Posted by ukdavew on 2008-03-28 07:47:46>

I think these are two different questions. In the past, Marvel has been in the forefront of creating characters of different nationalities and different backgrounds and making them important in the Marvel Universe. They haven't all become major players, but a number of them have. However, I don't think this does all that much to expand the market in other countries--while everybody likes to have heroes they can directly relate to, I think that, in general, the publishers in, say, India are more interested in publishing SPIDER-MAN than MARVEL-HERO-FROM-INDIA. Marvel UK was a valiant attempt, but a relatively short-lived one that came about in a marketplace that was very flush, and that died out when that same marketplace began to contract. But we're now doing some cross-publishing with Soleil, so you never know what might grow out of that if things go well.

>What do you believe is needed to turn Dr. Strange into an ongoing monthly book i.e. pencils, plot, packaging, etc. I am not interested about what hasn't worked in the past, or why it hasn't worked, but what WILL work in the future !

Posted by Mon Morn Lunatic on 2008-03-28 10:16:29>

If I knew that, Mon, we'd be doing it already. Doc is a very difficult sell in terms of headlining a series, and he has been as far back as the 1960s--he was one of the earliest characters to lose his own title. But as with all of the Marvel characters, all we really need is the right writer with the right artist and the right pitch--same as with THOR. But I'd be lying if I told you I knew what would absolutely work (other than the creative team of Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale--they could make it successful, most likely.)

>Will you ever start a fantasy editor game again?

Posted by kyle-latino on 2008-03-28 10:41:23>

Not while SECRET INVASION is going on, I don't think, and not unless I can come up with another new wrinkle that'd make it different from what I've done in the past, to keep it interresting.

>1. With succesful comic book based movies (Spider-Man movies, 300) why aren't more people going to a comic book shop and picking up the comics after seeing the movies?

Posted by themexican734 on 2008-03-28 12:54:56>

Some people are, but I think it's the same reason that people don't come out of the theater and buy the novel a movie was based on, or pick up the DVD of the old television series, or whatever. It's a different entertainment experience. And for many people, they're perfectly happy to go to the movies, sit through and enjoy 100 minutes of TRANSFORMERS, and then leave and feel no need to go buy the toys or watch the old cartoons.

>2. The general market for comic book retailers are older collectors and small seven year old children. Why is it hard for comics to break into the market of teenagers?

Posted by themexican734 on 2008-03-28 12:54:56>

I don't think it is necessarily. We have a decent number of teenaged readers. But teenage literacy in general is a difficult nut to crack--if a teenager hasn't developed a love of reading and an affinity with the medium or the characters by the time they hit their teens, then you've pretty much lost them--there are enough other things vying for their attention and their money and time.

>3. Why don't we see more DC/ Marvel crossovers?

Posted by themexican734 on 2008-03-28 12:54:56>

Missed the part about two questions per person, eh? See, this is the literacy problem in action right here. I think we don't see more Marvel/DC Crossovers at this point because we've done enough of them that they've become old hat. We've already seen most of the best pairings, and even quite a few that only a couple of peole really cared about. So given that these books are always a bear to produce, since you need to get people at two companies to agree to everything, and since they're no longer seen as all that unique, that energy is better spent on something else. (Plus, nobody here can figure out all of those multiple Earths--which Superman are we teaming up with?)

>4. Where does Marvel look to find new writers?

Posted by themexican734 on 2008-03-28 12:54:56>

Everywhere writing is published. I think a cold, hard fact that a lot of would-be writers don't like hearing is the fact that they're quite literally in competition with every other writer out in teh world--and that guys who've proven they can write successful novels or successful films or successful television shows are going to have a major leg up over people who haven't succeeded in getting anything published quite yet.

>5.Lastly, with Marvel starting their Digital Comics program, do you think digital comics will eventually replace print comics in the future?

Posted by themexican734 on 2008-03-28 12:54:56>

Not any time in the near future, but in the long run, absolutely. This is just a fact of life, and you can really see it if you study the younger generation. While old farts like me may not like reading comics on a computer, my kids are completely comfortable with getting their entertainment downloaded onto a screen. And that's only going to become a more pronounced feeling as the technology improves--forty or fifty years from now, there may be precious little print-media content that is actually delivered tangibly on paper. It's all going to be digital.

More later.

Tom B

You missed out my question about new concepts... :(

Posted by Fetsur on 2008-04-03 18:10:06

Thanks !
Tom,

Thanks for answering my Q re: Doc Strange. I am curious about your comment re: Loeb & Sale. Is your comment a random suggestion or a 'hint' about what's in the future?

PS: I'm an old fart too, and prefer my comics on paper !

Monday Morning Lunatic !

Posted by Mon Morn Lunatic on 2008-04-03 19:52:29

>4. Where does Marvel look to find new writers?

Posted by themexican734 on 2008-03-28 12:54:56>

Everywhere writing is published. I think a cold, hard fact that a lot of would-be writers don't like hearing is the fact that they're quite literally in competition with every other writer out in teh world--and that guys who've proven they can write successful novels or successful films or successful television shows are going to have a major leg up over people who haven't succeeded in getting anything published quite yet.

yes it hurts...
even not for breakdowns ?

Posted by notapotatoe on 2008-04-04 04:19:58

I mean, if you find a pitch interesting, why not hire the provider, if it's duing to a lack of experience, why not just take a little more time, until he (the provider ) can manage what you would call a script if he's not a complete pro;there's probably a lot of secret projects or minis who merged this way.Aren't we into the House of Ideas ?

Posted by notapotatoe on 2008-04-04 04:25:12

Uh tom
if you answer 5 questions from 1 guy you are only able to go trough 5 guys...:(

Posted by underworldeve on 2008-04-04 08:01:08

spider-man
Umm i was looking around marvel.com and i saw spider-man revaeling his identity wats this about

Posted by BulldogfanMitch on 2008-04-04 09:43:56

Hey!
I couldn't help but notice that you skipped past my questions. No one actually validly vetoed any of mine. The only comment before your Closed one was:

"I veto PseudoSherlock getting to veto a million vetoes, especially ones that veto me. Haha"

Which isn't vetoeing my questions, just being jovially snarky. However, AFTER your Closed comment was:

"Veto all Psuedo Sherlock's questions just because he vetoed a sh**tload of everyone else's."

Not only was that after you said the topic was closed, but it was by a guy who didn't ask any questions of his own, and probably didn't even read WHY I vetoed so many questions.

I'm feeling a bit robbed here. I will grant that one of my questions was partially answered by themexican's question/answer. But, really, why even bother with rules if they aren't observed?

Posted by PseudoSherlock on 2008-04-04 10:32:01

Oh
And Mr. Moorish spelled my name wrong, so please feel free to veto all of "Psuedo Sherlock's" questions.

Posted by PseudoSherlock on 2008-04-04 10:34:11

Pseudo-- I also vetoed your questions.

Posted by CylverSaber on 2008-04-06 11:13:24

Oh, and yours too Fetsur.

Posted by CylverSaber on 2008-04-06 11:17:45

HALO
Where can I post that Marvel sucks for completely ruining the Halo Uprising mini-series? Halo 3 came out in SEPTEMBER 2007, 6 months later the 4 book series is only halfway finished. This is garbage. Maybe if Bungie and Microsoft had picked a different publisher this would have been finished LAST YEAR!

Posted by SPARTAN013 on 2008-04-06 11:58:23

"I think that, in general, the publishers in, say, India are more interested in publishing SPIDER-MAN than MARVEL-HERO-FROM-INDIA."

Hmmm, and yet Marvel still went ahead with SPIDER-MAN: INDIA! Yikes that was a bad idea.

Hey Pseudo! Sorry you feel robbed. I did read your veto reasons, I just thought they sucked. Actually, thinking about it, I'm not sorry. :-)

Posted by Moorish on 2008-04-07 04:51:28

Cylver:
I don't see it. The only responses you made past my post were:

"I veto the questions of everyone who vetoed the Marvel Boy questions."

Which I didn't do, as it had been done to death. I vetoed your question which you specifically stated was "putting aside Marvel Boy questions for a sec", making it so that vetoeing people who vetoed you has absolutely nothing to do with Marvel Boy. Mine had the line: "If it isn't caught by the Marvel Boy vetoes:" which does not imply I'm vetoeing all the Marvel Boy questions, only yours because it was aside from Marvel Boy (on the surface) and I was worried it wouldn't have gotten caught and Tom might have had to answer something that wouldn't have done anyone any good.

You also said:

"No provision in the rules for that :p"

and

"Sometimes what someone doesn't say is what's interesting. And I am personally very interested in Marvel's stance on deceptive marketing (which, contrary to PseudoSherlock's assertion, not all companies engage in)."

So while you took a further naive jab at me, you never actually vetoed my questions. I'm not even being picky on wording as I never said anything like "I veto all Marvel Boy questions," because I would never do that, I would have individually explained why each question wasn't worthwhile.

So, again, robbed.

Posted by PseudoSherlock on 2008-04-07 10:24:26

hey...CALL THE POLICE

Posted by notapotatoe on 2008-04-07 10:30:48

However,
I can see where you got confused, Cylver. Clearly, your question was an attempt to ask a Marvel Boy question but with the literal pretense of "putting aside the issue," when you really wanted to drag out the issue and try to make someone accountable for an...internet blog?

So that when you vetoed everyone who vetoed Marvel Boy questions you were including me because your question was actually a Marvel Boy question. However, you didn't title it as such, and so I was deeply concerned that it might get answered with the boring, pat PR answer it deserved and I wanted to make sure the "I veto all Marvel Boy questions" schtick wouldn't pass yours by.

Nevertheless, it can't count as one to be caught in your veto as you made sure to label your question seperately from the others that you then later spitefully revenged.

Posted by PseudoSherlock on 2008-04-07 10:38:45

Heh. Obviously Tom understood the intent of my veto. But I'll try to make it clearer for you next time.

Seriously though, if you keep acting like a know-it-all, you gotta expect you'll become a veto target.

Posted by CylverSaber on 2008-04-07 11:18:32

You Know What
A few minutes ago I sat down and thought of all the things I could have been doing with my time today instead of arguing about how petulant your response really was.

I came up with a lot and things, many of them a lot more productive, and so I'll keep that in mind for the future.

Enjoy your talking.

Posted by PseudoSherlock on 2008-04-07 11:22:53

And posting the above was at the very top of that list.

Posted by CylverSaber on 2008-04-07 11:32:51

Matt, if you're going to make your vetoes personal then you're going to end up starting a veto war where someone will pre-veto all of your questions or nominations in future threads. The point of this exercise was to put together a short list of the very best questions to ask Tom - an exercise which largely failed because of stupid tactics like that. (Frankly I was mainly afraid to veto anything because there were lots of good questions and I didn't want to upset anyone; the Marvel-b0y situation however was generating a lot of similar questions that were designed specifically to potentially put Tom into a rather uncomfortable position and I vetoed them because I felt they were an abuse of the privelege that Tom had given us. If Tom wanted to address the Marvel-b0y thing then he'd have done it by now.) Instead of just picking yourself up from the disappointment of losing a question and coming up with another one to ask, you decided to attack the people who took that question away from you.

Posted by Fetsur on 2008-04-07 15:35:15

It works both ways though. It's one thing to veto a question here and there for specific reasons, but you guys vetoed an ENTIRE TOPIC that clearly a lot of people wanted to know about, because you decided it wasn't worth Tom's time. That's pretty arrogant. If you want people to be selective and fair with their vetos, you have to do the same. I personally would rather have my questions vetoed than allow that kind of stuff to go on.

Posted by CylverSaber on 2008-04-07 18:44:48

Hahahaha
"A few minutes ago I sat down and thought of all the things I could have been doing with my time today instead of arguing about how petulant your response really was"

Oh, the irony!

Posted by Moorish on 2008-04-08 04:46:10

I think that given something had to be vetoed in order to slim the questions down, the Marvel-b0y stuff was a sensible target to be ditched. And like I say it's not like those users couldn't have asked other questions. What you did on the other hand was just selfish. For someone who's been employed by Marvel in the past, I would have thought you'd know better.

Posted by Fetsur on 2008-04-08 06:26:29

Hey, Marvel-b0y was employed by Marvel!

(theoretically)

Posted by CylverSaber on 2008-04-08 07:09:18

At least he or she was sensible enough to do whatever he or she did anonymously.

(personally, my theory is that Marvel-b0y was actually Noh-Varr, become sentient having been brought into the world by Grant Morrison, just as he intends to do with the DC universe)

Posted by Fetsur on 2008-04-08 09:56:59

Array

Enter a response to this blog post: