|
|
Post by Dr. Poison on Oct 21, 2014 16:39:59 GMT -5
From DC Comics Ask Creators For ‘Daring, Blue Sky Thinking’ Pitches After The Band Aid – Think Batgirl, Gotham Academy And Harley Quinn Posted on October 21, 2014 by Rich Johnston Yesterday, I ran the story that DC Comics were asking creators to bring their story lines to an end before what we have dubbed the Band-Aid event in April 2015. This was similar to instructions given to comic book creators before the New 52 reboot back in 2011. Will there be another reboot in May or June? No. Instead, creators are being asked to submit pitches that are ‘daring’ and to employ ‘ blue sky thinking’. Impressed by the commercial success of Harley Quinn and Batgirl, and critical sucess of Gotham Academy, the beancounters have been persuaded that a little more individual thinking might reap benefits. Indeed, those books may have been part of an early attempt to mix things up and see what happened. And creators, used to having to present certain kinds of stories to the bosses under certain criteria, expecting to see the edges knocked off, are being asked to let loose in a similar manner. This is, of course the way it always should be. But an attempt to replicate success by siply copying successes has let to an attrition of interest in the books, and a de facto house style across much of the New 52. Harley Quinn changed that, by unexpectedly staying in the top ten, month in month out, and outselling the Xbooks. The new Batgirl, pushed through by Bateditor Mark Doyle, has done the same. This is an attempt to do something different by, well, encouraging people to do something different. Some will crash and burn. Some will soar. But at least people will try. This is probably the best news I’ve heard coming out of DC for some time. Folk are giddy. Expect new books and newly reinvented books in 2015. And, hopefully, not just everyone in yellow Doc Martens boots… |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Oct 21, 2014 17:49:48 GMT -5
If DC had put more thought into the panning the New 52 than I do in planning my dinner, we could have had a lot more of this three years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2014 20:08:32 GMT -5
This is definitely good news.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Oct 21, 2014 21:08:40 GMT -5
That sounds pretty exciting to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Oct 21, 2014 21:12:57 GMT -5
All this just seems like a painfully obvious attempt by Marvel and DC to cash in on the popularity of Image comics and other independent publishers by offering quirky books with "indie" sensibilities. It reminds me a lot of the early 90s when major record labels realized this "alternative" music thing was popular with the kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Oct 22, 2014 11:01:41 GMT -5
I see nothing wrong with that, in fact its no different than any of the other trends comics have followed since their inception. I mean, why do you think Marvel and DC have at various times put out multiple Romance, Western, Sci-fi and fantasy books? It wasn't because they were giving in to the demands of their writers and artists, it was because they were following popular trends.
|
|
|
|
Post by Earth 2 Flash on Oct 22, 2014 11:30:36 GMT -5
I think this is great news. I look forward to finding out what they come up with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Oct 22, 2014 23:21:31 GMT -5
I see nothing wrong with that, in fact its no different than any of the other trends comics have followed since their inception. I mean, why do you think Marvel and DC have at various times put out multiple Romance, Western, Sci-fi and fantasy books? It wasn't because they were giving in to the demands of their writers and artists, it was because they were following popular trends. Strictly speaking, I don't find anything "wrong" with it either, since I am enjoying several of the books that have been put out as a result of this. I just think it's amusing that what DC and Marvel consider to be a fresh approach to superhero comics is something that creator-owned titles have already been doing for a while. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Oct 23, 2014 10:51:07 GMT -5
Eh, it just seems to be the way of things. Like I said, I'm sure fantasy comics seemed like a bold new direction in the late 60's and yet, once again, independent publishers had already been putting them out. It's all very cyclical.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 12:30:26 GMT -5
I see nothing wrong with that, in fact its no different than any of the other trends comics have followed since their inception. I mean, why do you think Marvel and DC have at various times put out multiple Romance, Western, Sci-fi and fantasy books? It wasn't because they were giving in to the demands of their writers and artists, it was because they were following popular trends. Strictly speaking, I don't find anything "wrong" with it either, since I am enjoying several of the books that have been put out as a result of this. I just think it's amusing that what DC and Marvel consider to be a fresh approach to superhero comics is something that creator-owned titles have already been doing for a while. Well it is a fresh new approach to corporate super-hero comics and yes creator-owned comics have been doing it for a while. I've said it before and I will say it again, never expect those at the top of the current status quo to be the innovators, they have no incentive to be. But when something that emerges form the grass roots proves to be successful and profitable, catching consumer fancy, those at the top will become adopters and drive that fresh approach into the ground until the grass-rrots innovate something else. It is the nature of the beast. When you are at the top of the status quo, you don't jeopardize your postiion by trying to change things. You react when change is afoot to maintain your position though. If Marvel and Atlas monster mags had been outselling DC super-hero output, we would never had had the birth of the Marvel Universe... -M |
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Oct 23, 2014 13:04:22 GMT -5
Strictly speaking, I don't find anything "wrong" with it either, since I am enjoying several of the books that have been put out as a result of this. I just think it's amusing that what DC and Marvel consider to be a fresh approach to superhero comics is something that creator-owned titles have already been doing for a while. Well it is a fresh new approach to corporate super-hero comics and yes creator-owned comics have been doing it for a while. I've said it before and I will say it again, never expect those at the top of the current status quo to be the innovators, they have no incentive to be. But when something that emerges form the grass roots proves to be successful and profitable, catching consumer fancy, those at the top will become adopters and drive that fresh approach into the ground until the grass-rrots innovate something else. It is the nature of the beast. When you are at the top of the status quo, you don't jeopardize your postiion by trying to change things. You react when change is afoot to maintain your position though. If Marvel and Atlas monster mags had been outselling DC super-hero output, we would never had had the birth of the Marvel Universe... -M I agree with you in many respects. But wouldn't it be fair to say that there was a time when Marvel and DC were more open to innovative concepts? Silver Age Marvel in particular strikes me as a period when they were willing to be more risky and try out more interesting or original ideas. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2014 15:01:08 GMT -5
Well it is a fresh new approach to corporate super-hero comics and yes creator-owned comics have been doing it for a while. I've said it before and I will say it again, never expect those at the top of the current status quo to be the innovators, they have no incentive to be. But when something that emerges form the grass roots proves to be successful and profitable, catching consumer fancy, those at the top will become adopters and drive that fresh approach into the ground until the grass-rrots innovate something else. It is the nature of the beast. When you are at the top of the status quo, you don't jeopardize your postiion by trying to change things. You react when change is afoot to maintain your position though. If Marvel and Atlas monster mags had been outselling DC super-hero output, we would never had had the birth of the Marvel Universe... -M I agree with you in many respects. But wouldn't it be fair to say that there was a time when Marvel and DC were more open to innovative concepts? Silver Age Marvel in particular strikes me as a period when they were willing to be more risky and try out more interesting or original ideas. Marvel was still the underdog/grassroots company at that point though, DC was the one who was the top dog benefiting from the status quo, and Marvel was still carving out a place for itself and throwing everything at the wall to see what stuck, it wasn't until Marvel was well established in the late 70s and into the Shooter era that it became a bit more moribund, ther ewas still some innovation but it was in fringe stuff that wasn't succeeding like Daredevil with Miller. When DC was clearly not large and in charge, i.e. going into the 80s, they got more innovative and we got the DC Renaissance of the 80s but a lot of that was floowing a trail set by the indies of the late 70s/early 80s as well, recruiting established talent form indy and UK books. Once the direct market established its stranglehold and the big 2 were firmly in charge of that market, innovation became the territory of those outside looking in. -M |
|
