|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2021 4:26:49 GMT -5
I'd say repackaging 60 year old comics that only old farts like us are into for the umpteenth time is the very definition of Marvel "doing the same old thing over and over and expecting a different outcome". Better that they should start with material from the last decade that actually has a chance of resonating with the majority of modern teenage readers, if that's the audience they're targeting. I'd agree if price point, format and where it is going to be sold were irrelevant to the conversation, but those three things are the point in this conversation and that is what is being done differently. I think those three things will determine initial sales more than the content, thought the content will play much more to the long-term viability of the line. But the more recent material is more expensive to reprint in terms of royalties owed, and I think they are trying to trade on the Stan Lee name which is as well known to younger audiences as the characters from the movies. DO I think it will work? Probably not. But for Marvel to even to make a move to create a format and strategy geared towards the booktrade is a HUGE change for them, whos strategy under both Alonso and Cebulsky has been to double down on the direct market and do everything possible to maximize market-share there and totally ignore the potential of the book trade for potential sales. For them to even be looking at the book trade and creating product specifically geared towards it (even if the content is the sale old same old) is a seismic shift for Marvel. The execution certainly looks half-assed, but their taking their heads out of their asses long enough to recognize there is a growth market in the YA book trade out there and make a reach for it is most definitely a change. -M
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Jan 30, 2021 5:53:24 GMT -5
Well, *I*, for one, don't have any problems at all with the digest, or rather smaller, format. As a kid I used to love the Archie and then DC digests, I'm still fond of the format to this day. So I loved the digests Marvel published a few years ago, which were the same size as the Archie check-out line digests (because Archie packaged and distributed them), and I love the Panini digests (5 x 8) and quite recently, I purchased the recent Shuri collection which is in the 6 x 9 format being discussed here. Personally, though, I'm not particularly interested in getting any of the announced titles, because I'm either not as interested in the material or I already have it elsewhere - e.g., in the case of Spider-man, I have the first 20 issues in the paperback reprints from the late '70s, the rest of the Ditko issues and beginning of the Romita run in the second Essentials volume, and most of the rest (there's a few holes here and there) up to the end of Len Wein's run on ASM in the aforementioned Panini books. I kind of wish they would skip around a bit and, say, republish the Killraven and second Inhumans Masterworks volumes in this less expensive format. I'm quite aware that that'll probably never happen, though, as I share some of the skepticism expressed by others here, i.e., I'm doubtful that this line's sales figures will justify its continuation.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 30, 2021 8:04:54 GMT -5
They have been skipping around with the epics... which I don't love. If I can get the comics in a $1 bin, I don't really need a collection. I agree more modern material would have been better first... the Ultimate Line would work, or just going back a bit on the current series (Like Champions or Ms. Marvel).
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Jan 30, 2021 9:08:48 GMT -5
I'd say repackaging 60 year old comics that only old farts like us are into for the umpteenth time is the very definition of Marvel "doing the same old thing over and over and expecting a different outcome". Better that they should start with material from the last decade that actually has a chance of resonating with the majority of modern teenage readers, if that's the audience they're targeting. This may be attempt to make these stories available at a format and price point for younger readers thinking, "Well, I've heard a lot about these books, but never actually read any."
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Jan 30, 2021 9:30:13 GMT -5
More like ALL the creators are dead so ALL the profit goes straight into Disney/Marvel's pockets. No creators rights to deal with like more modern comics would have.
|
|
|
Post by SJNeal on Jan 30, 2021 13:47:07 GMT -5
Nothing about that cover says "masterwork" to me. And $15 is still a bit steep for the format and page count, but what do I know, I keep shelling out cash for everything they put in front of me so it must be working...
|
|
|
Post by The Cheat on Jan 30, 2021 14:22:21 GMT -5
As mentioned, these aren't for us, they're an attempt to emulate the Manga model. I think the content may be more appealing than people are giving credit for. Is the 60s writing/dialog really any more jarring to kids today than it was to me as a kid in the 90s who fell in love with the stories regardless? Whether it works or not, it's good to see them trying new things.
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Jan 30, 2021 15:04:35 GMT -5
As mentioned, these aren't for us, they're an attempt to emulate the Manga model. Even then, Manga is still vastly cheaper. But yeah, it is a good way to get into school book fairs, though I can't recall comics being a part of them when I was younger. The most I ever noticed was Garfield's Pet Force
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2021 15:20:11 GMT -5
As mentioned, these aren't for us, they're an attempt to emulate the Manga model. Even then, Manga is still vastly cheaper. But yeah, it is a good way to get into school book fairs, though I can't recall comics being a part of them when I was younger. The most I ever noticed was Garfield's Pet Force Marvel has had some success through Scholastic with trades for Kamala Khan, Moon Girl, Miles Morales, etc. so they have a foothold there that these books can be brought into. Whether it succeeds or not will have to be determined, but the market is there and they certainly can try to expand their footprint there. -M
|
|
|
Post by jason on Jan 30, 2021 17:21:55 GMT -5
It boggles my mind that these classic collections have modern artists for the covers. I also find it a tad disrespectful. So please explain the marketing strategy behind this. You grab a new reader with a fancy modern style only to provide hundreds of pages of classic, retro, Kirby or Ditko art? Nonsensical. Are Masterworks impulse buys at bookstores? For me, I have zero interest in a collection of classic material with a cover by anyone besides the original artist. Clearly these sell better, or they wouldn't market it like this, but WHY they do fascinates me and irritates me in equal measure. It's a common thing in print media to reissue "older" looking books with newer looking covers. That said, it would be better if they used some of the older art on the cover, I've seen plenty of Marvel merchandise that uses 60s/70s art on it.
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Jan 30, 2021 18:14:21 GMT -5
I've seen plenty of Marvel merchandise that uses 60s/70s art on it. I've seen too many Captain America "Madbomb" products for my liking :X
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 30, 2021 18:19:06 GMT -5
I was just looking at the cover pic again... so it's collecting the 1st ten issues, but showing 9 of the 10 covers on the back? That's kinda weird, no? Maybe the last one should be the front cover?
I'd actually rather have new art on the cover, just to see something new, as long as it's not a big style clash.
But again, these are not for me, or any of us. I have those issues in essentials. If I ever want them again in color, I'd buy the epics most likely.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 30, 2021 20:24:37 GMT -5
As mentioned, these aren't for us, they're an attempt to emulate the Manga model. Even then, Manga is still vastly cheaper. But yeah, it is a good way to get into school book fairs, though I can't recall comics being a part of them when I was younger. The most I ever noticed was Garfield's Pet Force They absolutely are at school book fairs. Bone was a huge seller at book fairs.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jan 30, 2021 22:12:59 GMT -5
The colous is often the killer for me in these reprints, and I don't imagine that'll change here. However, if this was the only possible way to read them, I'd read them this way.
|
|
|
Post by donaldg on Jan 31, 2021 2:45:04 GMT -5
Looks like the 300th volume of Marvel Masterworks may be the last in its original format. Marvel is relaunching the line as 6 x 9 (digest sized) softcovers selling for either $14.99 or $15.99 (reports vary) and aimed at the book market (though there will be direct market variants with covers featuring classic art by Kirby. Ditko etc.). They will be starting over with Spidey, FF and X-Men the first to launch with volumes collecting the first 10 issues of each. Here's a look at the trade dress for the Spidey volume... Here's the solicit text for the three volumes... While I can't say I am a fan of the 6 x 9 size format, it is good to see Marvel take steps to provide affordable editions of these at a price point that works towards impulse buys and focusing on getting them in markets outside the direct market. Now whether they can keep them available and in print in that format or this is just another of their change things up so customers will rebuy the same stuff over and over moves remains to be seen. Not quite sure if there will be more volumes of Masterworks in the original format of stuff not already collected, but the tone of the articles I have seen seems to imply that 300th archival edition will be the last of the run. Not sure if that has been officially confirmed though. I divested myself of most of my Marvel collected editions (with a few exceptions like the Foreside books and a few select collections of favorite material) since I have Marvel Unlimited and needed shelf space, so I am not sure I will be picking any of these up, as I said I am not a fan of the smaller format, but I will likely take a look at them if I see them in the wild before fully making up my mind. -M No, Volume 300 is not the end of the hardcover Masterwork line. Volume 310/Avengers Vol. 21 has been announced for August 2021. This new line no more replaces the hardcover line than the earlier attempts at softcover Masterworks did. This line is geared toward young readers and school bookfairs, hence the reduced trim size and price point in comparison with the previous softcover Masterworks and current epic collection. The price point and format are similar to Scholastic's collections of Jeff Smith's "Bone" ($12.99 retail) and Mike Maihack's "Cleopatra in Space" ($14.99 retail), but with vintage Marvel material. The intended audience is not aging 40 to 60-something fanboys, nor hip, cynical teens looking for the kewlest, most radical, extreme comics, but younger and theoretically more accepting than their older siblings. As a parent, and as someone who has taught "Myth and Storytelling" classes to gifted pre-teens and teens, if you catch them young enough, it the stories and characters are engaging enough, you don't need all the flashy gimmicks. Children who read already read stories set in many time periods. They already encounter retrofuturism in entertainment. They can cope, and we sell them short by assuming they can't. As for prioritizing older material over more modern material. Marvel has attempted modernized retellings their early stories in the late twentieth (see "Professor X and the X-Men") and the first iterations of the Marvel Age line's "Fantastic Four" and "Spider-Man" in the early twenty-first. The Marvel Age material was also reprinted in smaller sized digests and Jeff Parker's " X-Men: First Class" was reprinted in something approaching the trim size of the GN-TP format of these "Junior Masterworks." Unfotunately, to my eyes, the 21st century artwork and computerized coloring does not reproduce as well as the "simpler" art and color palettes of 1960's - early 1990's art at smaller size, becoming instead too of a muddy-looking mess. In a way, the "dated" artwork and coloring might on some titles might come across as more appealing to younger eyes under certain circumstances. Also, older and "goofier" and more self-contained storytelling approaches may also play better with younger readers than the constant 21st century parade of crossover events and higher than high stakes events and the wholesale slaughter of characters that has become all too commonplace because comics are serious business and not [just] for kids, anymore. As with anything either of the Big Two have done to try to expand the readership in the face of an increasingly aging and dying customer base, it's a gamble, and it may fail. The plug could be pulled on these "Junior Masterworks" at any time, just as it was pulled on the softcover Masterworks about a decade back. While this publishing initiative is not meant for us, and my own children are now much too grown for this ( and already have on-call access to my own voluminous comics library), I welcome the attempt.
|
|