Marvel's Falling Sales 6 6

[zosocane]

5 minutes ago, ComicConnoisseur said:

I find it disastrous as well.

All those Marvel movies that did billions at box office didn't really bring in a great majority of new readers in the long run.

So not only are those sales figures shocking,but a wasted opportunity on Marvel's part to covert new Marvel movie fans into Marvel comic fans.

Marvel the hottest movie company in the world still couldn't convert these new found fans into Marvel Comic readers.

Somehow they dropped the ball.

Heads should be rolling at the highest levels of Marvel Publishing RIGHT NOW.  It should be a complete purge.  Totally unacceptable, when viewed with the wildly popular success -- not just in the U.S. but globally -- of Marvel movie properties.

[mysterio]

11 minutes ago, ComicConnoisseur said:

I find it disastrous as well.

All those Marvel movies that did billions at box office didn't really bring in a great majority of new readers in the long run.

So not only are those sales figures shocking,but a wasted opportunity on Marvel's part to covert new Marvel movie fans into Marvel comic fans.

Marvel the hottest movie company in the world still couldn't convert these new found fans into Marvel Comic readers.

Somehow they dropped the ball.

One wonders if they went back to publishing comics with cover prices back in the $1 range and made them available in grocery stores and gas stations again whether they would have captured some of those fans of the movies as readers. Distribution through shops only will only reach new fans if said new fans actually go where the books are. This doesn't happen nearly as often as it used to. 

Edited April 4, 2017 by mysterio

[zosocane]

From the Marvel website:

"Marvel Entertainment, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company, is one of the world's most prominent character-based entertainment companies, built on a proven library of over 8,000 characters featured in a variety of media over seventy years.  Marvel utilizes its character franchises in entertainment, licensing and publishing. "

Forget what Stan Lee, Roy Thomas, and Jim Shooter think about this publishing disaster -- what does the brass at Disney think of this???  Again, heads have got to roll.  Marvel is a subsidiary of a major public company.

[Doktor]

55 minutes ago, Senormac said:

Sounds like a pretty foolish business model.  Who expects to succeed catering to the smaller population?  I mean, what is the gay pop of this country?  2 - 5%

Without getting into politics, it's essentially the same approach that 1 of the 2 major US parties has tailored their campaigning in the past few years: cater to every minority demographic & try to  take advantage of the changing demographics while ignoring the majority, thinking that when you add up a 1% population group here & a 3% population group there & a 15% population group there & everything else, it'll total up to a majority. It hasn't worked out very well thus far there either because the math just doesn't work yet. Maybe it will in a decade or 3, but not yet.

[Doktor]

1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

In a similar fashion, any thoughts on the casting diversity in the Marvel movies (both in-house and licensed properties)?  I see that, in the upcoming Spidey film, Flash Thompson is played by a Guatemalan actor.  Ned Leeds is now Filipino.  And Betty Brant is African-American.  Now, on the one hand, I appreciate that, if the Marvel Universe were created today, instead of the '60s, there would be more diversity among the characters created in those early days, and that the film franchises, with a much shorter history and frequent reboots, are an easy place to make those updates.  That said, it does feel like the pendulum is shifting so much the other way that I have to wonder if it's impinging on creative freedom.  More and more, the world I see on TV and in films gets farther away from what I witness in the real world (not talking about super powers and the like, but demographics and such).  Much of the time it's unobtrusive, but, sometimes it's quite noticeable and rings false.  

When it comes to the upcoming Spidey film, at least it is plausible that Peter Parker would have a very multicultural set of friends, especially living in a melting pot like New York.  I do have an issue with casting decisions that are totally incongruous and smack of tokenism, though - like making the Norse god Heimdall of African descent in the Thor films.  Or, I just saw the commercial for the upcoming King Arthur film during the NCAA final broadcast last night, where Djimon Hounsou will be playing one of the Knights of the Round Table.  I mean, seriously?  Has it really gotten to the point where you can't even make a movie set in the 500s A.D. without changing the race of one of King Arthur's knights?  I don't know about you guys, but that just really feels forced and inauthentic to me. 

Being a minority myself, I'm all for more diversity in film, TV and comics.  But, I think it should be done thoughtfully instead of the often ham-handed way that it's being done nowadays.

Well, with the King Arthur film, I'm just looking at that as payback for sticking Matt Damon in early Imperial China and Tom Cruise in Imperial Japan movies.

[Patriot6]

11 minutes ago, Doktor said:

Tom Cruise in Imperial Japan movies.

The Last Samurai was very plausible haha.

[drotto]

The other issue is looking at how Marvel is promoting stories and books now. They would never publicize that they were bringing out a new white character male or female. But, give a character a few checks in the diversity column and they attempt to push the character big time.  This promotion has no bearing on if the character is actually popular, has good stories, or has been a proven seller.  It is simply Marvel just announced a new, amazing, groundbreaking, (fill in the blanks) character, that will appeal to a new audience.  They set them up in a few issues of an established book with a known property, then three months later give them a solo series. Totally ignoring a massive list of established characters that may have a legitimate chance of supporting a solo book, then are left scratching their heads when the book is cancelled in less than one year. Finally, the character that was announced with such fanfare becomes an obscure footnote, never to be used again.

 

Not to say that Marvel should not be trying out, new and different things, but they have to go back to how it used to be done. A more slow organic fashion, no fanfare, no ads, no national news. Introduce new people, write them into interesting stories, and the good ones, with a potential audience will rise to the top.

[kav]

Marvel: stop trying to sell the sizzle.  get some actual steaks.

[FN-2199]

1 hour ago, zosocane said:

Heads should be rolling at the highest levels of Marvel Publishing RIGHT NOW.  It should be a complete purge.  Totally unacceptable, when viewed with the wildly popular success -- not just in the U.S. but globally -- of Marvel movie properties.

Disney is too busy axing bloated contracts at ESPN and reeling in bidding of sports licensing not making them money. If my math was correct at the time, ESPN was costing Disney as much as Marvel and Star Wars combined when Disney purchased those properties.

[1950's war comics]

Stan Lee had already been in the comic business for many years, and when given the editorial opportunity, he decided he wanted to take characters and stories in a new direction and make comics that he himself would enjoy reading.

Todays Marvel top brass decided they should take comics in a different direction and make politically correct stories that people should feel obligated to read.

 

 

[MetalPSI]

What they need is a little originality by people who can write competently. Problem these days with that is everyone can become a novelist or at the very least, blog themselves to fame. Why bother with comics when you can self promote through other mediums. Comics is for drawers, right? 

[fastballspecial]

3 hours ago, zosocane said:

Heads should be rolling at the highest levels of Marvel Publishing RIGHT NOW.  It should be a complete purge.  Totally unacceptable, when viewed with the wildly popular success -- not just in the U.S. but globally -- of Marvel movie properties.

I am surprised they haven't yet.

[Ken Aldred]

5 hours ago, Silver Surfer said:

Waiting for transgenderman to join the Avengers and then have an argument with Stark over what bathroom to use.

I always thought it was a pity that the name 'The In-Betweener' had been given to a cosmic-level character rather than being available for a more grounded, transgender super-hero.

Edited April 4, 2017 by Ken Aldred

[1950's war comics]

With great powers comes great social responsibility ....Transgender-man !!

[Ken Aldred]

10 minutes ago, 1950's war comics said:

With great powers comes great social responsibility ....Transgender-man !!

And then it would be parodied cynically at some stage as...

'With great powers comes great, politically-correct social responsibility... '

Edited April 4, 2017 by Ken Aldred

[kav]

53 minutes ago, MetalPSI™ said:

What they need is a little originality by people who can write competently. Problem these days with that is everyone can become a novelist or at the very least, blog themselves to fame. Why bother with comics when you can self promote through other mediums. Comics is for drawers, right? 

As usual I have no idea what you just said.

[lizards2]

1 hour ago, kav said:

1 hour ago, MetalPSI™ said:

What they need is a little originality by people who can write competently. Problem these days with that is everyone can become a novelist or at the very least, blog themselves to fame. Why bother with comics when you can self promote through other mediums. Comics is for drawers, right? 

As usual I have no idea what you just said.

That's funny - you made me re-read.  At first, I took drawers literally, and almost posted that I put a copy of X-Men down the backside of my drawers daily to soak up the X-creMent.  Or, comics were something you left in the drawers to keep them dark.  I see now he meant "artist".

[jcjames]

6 hours ago, ComicConnoisseur said:

I find it disastrous as well.

All those Marvel movies that did billions at box office didn't really bring in a great majority of new readers in the long run.

So not only are those sales figures shocking,but a wasted opportunity on Marvel's part to covert new Marvel movie fans into Marvel comic fans.

Marvel the hottest movie company in the world still couldn't convert these new found fans into Marvel Comic readers.

Somehow they dropped the ball.

As someone pointed out elsewhere - what in the world would a new-reader do when he/she walks out of a theater and into a LCS looking for "Iron Man", "Hulk", "Thor", "Captain America", "Wolverine" that they've been seeing in the movies the past few years?

You won't find any of them in an LCS... at least not in any form resembling the MCU portrayals. "WHICH spider-man is the movie going to be like?" new readers might ask in vain as they try to navigate the web of multiple spiderverses and spider-people.

Marvel destroyed the very same legacy characters that the MCU movies might have inspired audiences to be become new long-time Marvel comic readers.  (AND displaced so many long-time/life-time followers of the same characters at the same time).

But, again as others have pointed out, it really comes down to stories and characters. Create characters that are interesting and not just transparently-gimmicky "diverse" rip-offs of legacy characters and create stories that are interesting without being unnecessarily divisive and insulting for the sake of political agendizing.

 

[1950's war comics]

!!!!!!! DON'T BUY MODERNS !!!!!!!

[kav]

1 hour ago, lizards2 said:

That's funny - you made me re-read.  At first, I took drawers literally, and almost posted that I put a copy of X-Men down the backside of my drawers daily to soak up the X-creMent.  Or, comics were something you left in the drawers to keep them dark.  I see now he meant "artist".

 

I was able to decipher the drawers comment (barely) but am still baffled by "Problem these days with that is everyone can become a novelist or at the very least, blog themselves to fame. Why bother with comics when you can self promote through other mediums. "  Is he saying everyone can become a novelist?  Because I believe that is incorrect.  Is he saying it's better to self promote rather than be published by Marvel?  Because, also incorrect.  I really have no idea what he is trying to say and I never really understand to be honest.