Does anyone else find it insulting that the value of our hobby is completely driven by other media? 1 1

[Off Panel]

<rant>

When I started collecting comic books there were a number of factors that could drive up the value of a particular issue, including but not limited to:

• The first appearance of a popular character (e.g., Werewolf by Night 32)
• A character’s origin story (e.g., Captain Marvel 18)
• The first appearance of a hot new writer on a book (e.g., Swamp Thing 20)
• The first appearance of a hot new artist on a book (e.g., Amazing Spider-man 298)
• A classic story (e.g., Amazing Spider-man 121)
• An iconic cover (e.g., Batman 232)

 

These were all great reasons to value a specific issue of a title. More importantly, they were “comic book” reasons. The things that made us covet these books were grounded in our art form’s unique marriage of compelling stories and fantastic artwork.

Today, the factors that give a book its “value” are all external. They are all judged through the lens of the television and motion picture industries.

Looking for new keys? How about:

• She-Hulk 1 (She’s coming to Disney+!!!)
• Avengers 195 (First appearance of Taskmaster. Don’t miss this one, kids! He’s a lock for the Black Widow movie!!)
• Marvel Spotlight 4 (First appearance of the Darkhold book, seen in the background of both the Runaways TV show and WandaVision!! Heavens!!)

 

No one cares about artwork. (There’s no artwork in the movies, except CGI.) No one cares about the comic book story. (They’ll just rewrite it for the television pilot.)

Origins? Only if there’s an origin movie.

Covers? Please.

 

And if the television show flops? Or Taskmaster turns out to be a weird automaton woman? Well, I guess those comic books weren’t as good as we thought they were.

 

I miss the days when key comics stood on their own merits and didn’t need a TV show or movie to tell us what was good. Frankly, I find it insulting that the worth of our art form — comics — is totally determined by a different (should we assume better?) art form — movies —  and that collectors seem to believe that the entertainment industry’s verdict is all that matters.

 

Does this rub anyone else the wrong way?

 

</rant>

[sckao]

Encasing baseball or sports cards in plastic doesn’t usually prevent collectors from reading/viewing both sides. Neither does encasing coins, stamps, or money.

Unfortunately, a comic book or magazine is much more than just its cover.

 

 

 

[zzutak]

On 12/28/2021 at 1:52 PM, Off Panel said:

I miss the days when key comics stood on their own merits and didn’t need a TV show or movie to tell us what was good.

It's nice to know there are a few octogenarians and nonagenarians around here who remember the days prior to 1943, when movie theaters began showing 15-chapter serials featuring such comic book characters as Batman (Columbia 1943), Captain America (Republic 1944), and Superman (Columbia 1948).  

Edited December 28, 2021 by zzutak
Typo Fixed

[01TheDude]

People like what they like for whatever reasons they use to get there. Perhaps the larger impact of the types of things you are referring to is how much readily available the information is to the entire public. So yeah-- in a media focused culture-- it will impact things more so than established knowledge or rational thought processes.

I would not find it all that upsetting. personally as it tends to help raise the value of all our collections (for however long it continues). It might make some silly things out priced from reality but give it time and short of it becoming camp-- it will come back down.

[Off Panel]

On 12/28/2021 at 4:59 PM, Bumbo said:

Taskmaster was popular way before the MCU 

I agree with this. (I’ve always liked Taskmaster.)

BUT… when people thought Taskmaster MIGHT BE IN A MOVIE the price of Avengers 196 suddenly shot up from around $1,000 to around $3,000! Then when people decided that movie Taskmaster was lame, the book sank like a stone to around $900.

I kind of think my point still stands.

[Ryan.]

None of your thesis applies to large swathes of the Golden Age, which has seen tremendous growth the last two years. 

[Off Panel]

On 12/28/2021 at 5:02 PM, Bumbo said:

Totally? Incorrect.

I may occasionally be guilty of hyperbole. 

Could you get behind the statement that the number one factor for influencing comic book values today is movies/television?

[Off Panel]

On 12/28/2021 at 5:22 PM, Ryan. said:

None of your thesis applies to large swathes of the Golden Age, which has seen tremendous growth the last two years. 

You make an excellent point.

I love that about Golden Age books.

[eastbayrudy]

Yes I find it extremely annoying that a show/movie makes books increase in popularity. I dont understand why a character being cast has anything to do with whether a book/character is desired or not. I enjoy comic characters based on the comic books I read, not tv shows or movies. To me seeing them on the big screen is just a bonus. 

[Readcomix]

To OP’s question, no the new drivers do not bother me. But the lost/diminished drivers you cite do (content-driven drivers besides first appearances). Only because I can’t help but believe that if no one consumes the content then it’s a bad thing long-term. That said, if enough people find said content though TPB reprints and digital format, collecting of originals may well hold up much longer than all the usual doomsayers predict. 

Of course, fictional characters can always be given new life. But the long-term trajectory of, for example, a character such as Tarzan suggests popularity can and does peak. Keep it about enjoyment rather than investment to mitigate the stress, but of course that’s hard to do when stuff you bought cheap years ago is worth a small fortune, as is the case for many collectors.

[sckao]

Another way to look at it is how the medium has evolved. Stories used to be short and there were multiple stories per comic book. Novels used to be serialized in newspapers and then later collected into a single form.

Earlier Superman and Batman film appearances were also short and serialized. They eventually lengthened to fill movies. The original Marvel and DC movies were basically standalone efforts marked by being released years apart. 

Now you have basically a 23-part linked movie plot which basically started with Iron Man 1 and ended with Avengers Endgame. You had Marvel Netflix serialized shows and a  DC universe filled with shows that are ostensibly plotted tighter than their movies. You have Disney+ shows which are essentially super long serialized movies (or two-part movies).

The slabbed comics themselves now only have value for being a collectible produced in limited quantities existing in various grades. Its creative content is everywhere… on the net in digital comics , in graphic novels, in cartoons, in movies, and yes, still in physical copies you can buy and read. The artwork is incredibly important as it is the basis for the entire “look” of the movie universe. (Bryan Hitch and Ultimates, Iron Man and Adi Granov)

So saying it’s all because of the tv and movie industry is not recognizing that these are the times we live in and that people are consuming entertainment in many, many ways. But even the rumor or appearance of a new comic series is enough to cause a spike… since that could mean it is setting up a future movie. (Which then becomes a chicken or the egg situation.)

Collecting that key appearance is one of the ways people can show their fandom.

[Toz]

Doesn't bother me.Just glad I got to see the live action Marvel movies.My 12 year old self would have probably peed his pants if he (I) had seen them.

[vaillant]

Quote

Does this rub anyone else the wrong way?

I have always *loathed* with all my heart the whole concept of Marvel movies in itself. Go figure now.
The only good element is that this keeps the comics market alive, but in the long term?

[shadroch]

When I look at the money I made selling books last year, I smile and thank the universe for being very good to me. 

[letsgrumble]

Another way of looking at it is that film and television are now being driven by another medium.

Both audiences are cross-fertilizing to generate more interest and money into characters seen on screen and in print.

I don't find it insulting, but as a collector I wish I had bought all those key first appearances when they were affordable. 

[MattTheDuck]

I find it somewhat flattering that characters I've loved for 45 years are now loved by millions.  I don't need external ratification of my life choices, but if I did this would be a big one.

[Sigur Ros]

Maybe you're looking in the wrong place for value.

Buy a book you want to read.  Read it.  If there is value in the story, buy the next issue.

 

 

[musicmeta]

I guess one way to look at it is where were "The Eternals",  "She-Hulk",  "Spider-woman",  "Ms Marvel"..etc. before the TV/Movie hype?

[Lord Gemini]

Myself, I'm thrilled that many characters have become more popular among the masses due to the movies. That this translates to more value regarding certain comics is no surprise to me and I'm not the least bit offended by it. Whatever helps keep the medium afloat is just fine with me.

[universal soldier]

On 12/28/2021 at 7:38 PM, Shawn Everidge said:

Myself, I'm thrilled that many characters have become more popular among the masses due to the movies. That this translates to more value regarding certain comics is no surprise to me and I'm not the least bit offended by it. Whatever helps keep the medium afloat is just fine with me.

Agreed, the long term good of the hobby is what is most important. If a byproduct of that is a significant increase in the value of my collection. Gravy...