New Joe friday's is up

[roach]

http://www.newsarama.com/JoeFridays/JoeFridays46.html

 

[GNR]

MK #2,DD #87,Hulk #96 are all looking dandy.

 

[roach]

i disagree with his views on Namor though

 

[Electro UK]

This is the HFH line up? Black Cat's getting an ongoing... oh dear

 

[BrianWilly]

Why does it seem like he passes off every concept that doesn't crank his engine -- and yes I mean that in the most lascivious way imaginable -- as some sort of marketting tomfoolery of the times that they were created? I'm not saying that he's wrong, but I'm thinking it says a lot about his attitude.

"Iron Fist was a product of the kung fu craze." "Captain Marvel was a product of the cosmic craze." "Nick Fury was a product of the spy craze." "Namor was a product of the...40s something counter-something craze."

Everything to him has to be of the NOW and the IN and the EDGY, or else it's just a product of its times that has no relevance today. And yet his critical eye seems to glaze over some of the character inventions we've had in the recent past. What shall we say in twenty or even ten years about Arana and X-23 and even Gravity? What shall we say about the Ultimate universe? Those aren't trends? Those aren't products of their times? It's so easy to put on the Hindsight Vision 20/20 so long as they're not making any money today.

The bigger question is, why should it matter? Some of us hear about the mystical city of K’un L’un for an origin for a character and it sounds really interesting. It's wholly irritating how much this man underestimates iconism and history. Instead he keeps talking about revamps and bad origins and different takes and it just leads to sht like JMS's "Strange" revamp. And we all know how well stuff like that turns out.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Why does it seem like he passes off every concept that doesn't crank his engine -- and yes I mean that in the most lascivious way imaginable -- as some sort of marketting tomfoolery of the times that they were created? I'm not saying that he's wrong, but I'm thinking it says a lot about his attitude.

"Iron Fist was a product of the kung fu craze." "Captain Marvel was a product of the cosmic craze." "Nick Fury was a product of the spy craze." "Namor was a product of the...40s something counter-something craze."

Everything to him has to be of the NOW and the IN and the EDGY, or else it's just a product of its times that has no relevance today. And yet his critical eye seems to glaze over some of the character inventions we've had in the recent past. What shall we say in twenty or even ten years about Arana and X-23 and even Gravity? What shall we say about the Ultimate universe? Those aren't trends? Those aren't products of their times? It's so easy to put on the Hindsight Vision 20/20 so long as they're not making any money today.

The bigger question is, why should it matter? Some of us hear about the mystical city of K’un L’un for an origin for a character and it sounds really interesting. It's wholly irritating how much this man underestimates iconism and history. Instead he keeps talking about revamps and bad origins and different takes and it just leads to sht like JMS's "Strange" revamp. And we all know how well stuff like that turns out.

Bravo, Brian.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

This is the HFH line up? Black Cat's getting an ongoing... oh dear

I think it's GREAT!

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

i disagree with his views on Namor though

I thought his views on The Defenders were completely ridiculous.

 

[deathshead2]

I thought his views on The Defenders were completely ridiculous.

Most of Joe Qs views are ridiculous.

 

[THANOSRULES]

His views on Quasar are ridiculous...


Killer Instinct??

what are you talking about..??

He doesnt think Quasar can ever be a success becuase he is 'too nice'??

Joe Q has really lost me.

only good thing he said was about the New Warriors..when he said 70 percent chance of a new series in the next 2 years.

 

[Dread]

Why does it seem like he passes off every concept that doesn't crank his engine -- and yes I mean that in the most lascivious way imaginable -- as some sort of marketting tomfoolery of the times that they were created? I'm not saying that he's wrong, but I'm thinking it says a lot about his attitude.

"Iron Fist was a product of the kung fu craze." "Captain Marvel was a product of the cosmic craze." "Nick Fury was a product of the spy craze." "Namor was a product of the...40s something counter-something craze."

Everything to him has to be of the NOW and the IN and the EDGY, or else it's just a product of its times that has no relevance today. And yet his critical eye seems to glaze over some of the character inventions we've had in the recent past. What shall we say in twenty or even ten years about Arana and X-23 and even Gravity? What shall we say about the Ultimate universe? Those aren't trends? Those aren't products of their times? It's so easy to put on the Hindsight Vision 20/20 so long as they're not making any money today.

The bigger question is, why should it matter? Some of us hear about the mystical city of K’un L’un for an origin for a character and it sounds really interesting. It's wholly irritating how much this man underestimates iconism and history. Instead he keeps talking about revamps and bad origins and different takes and it just leads to sht like JMS's "Strange" revamp. And we all know how well stuff like that turns out.

Total agreement here. Joe Q seems very content with being able to use hindsight to see a lot of characters of old, who haven't been selling well lately, mostly because of Marvel's utter failure to sell them properly (for chrissakes, DBZ and NARUTO are hotter than ever, and Marvel can't sell a series about a MARTIAL ARTIST WHOSE POWERS INVOLVE CHI!? Am I missing something here?) yet naturally he can't see how a lot of his own creations since he took over could be said the same. Plus, you KNOW that if any one of these properties that he mentioned has a movie franchise, sold in the Top 25, and so on, he'd be totally pimping out the next issue.

But, Joe Q's strategies are working. Marvel's selling well, beating out DC even with DC on its A-Game. And so long as they do, we'll have more of the same.

Frankly, many characters don't need anymore "mucking" with their origins. Marvel loves retcons, but they're spineless. Do something to a character in the HERE AND NOW. Actually commit a few years to amping something, and do it proper. Retcons, Joe Q, are definately, "a product of the early 21st century where writers wanted all the punch of shock value, but lacked the patience to do it right because the company at the time only cared about the bottom line". Or can I save that for 2015?

 

[deemar325]

^ Brilliant as usual.

I hate you.

*joking*

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

But, Joe Q's strategies are working. Marvel's selling well, beating out DC even with DC on its A-Game.

And it boggles the mind. As an observer, and in my personal opinion, if i put the past two and a half years of product from each company side by side, DC, quite frankly, blows Marvel out of the galaxy in terms of creativity and "crowd pleasing". Marvel seems to be merely reacting to everything DC has done, instead of setting the standards.

Meanwhile; Spider-Man (im one myself) and X-men fans are some of the most un-happy fans in the industry, yet books from both franchises continually sell in the upper tier numbers.

It makes no sense.

 

[Dread]

And it boggles the mind. As an observer, and in my personal opinion, if i put the past two and a half years of product from each company side by side, DC, quite frankly, blows Marvel out of the galaxy in terms of creativity and "crowd pleasing". Marvel seems to be merely reacting to everything DC has done, instead of setting the standards.

Meanwhile; Spider-Man (im one myself) and X-men fans are some of the most un-happy fans in the industry, yet books from both franchises continually sell in the upper tier numbers.

It makes no sense.

It does when you remember that X-Men, at this point, is a fool-proof franchise. No matter how good, bad, or mediocre the core titles are, they sell well. Now, can Marvel successfully launch a NEW X-title and have it last more than 2 years? Aside for NEW X-MEN (which is a carry-over from NEW MUTANTS), no. All of their 2004 X-books crashed and burned. Note, that in 2001, nearly any X-book, even BROTHERHOOD, was a Top 10 seller.

Now, Spider-Man isn't quite as fool-proof, as the CLONE SAGA showed. JMS brought with him some fan-following from RISING STARS and BABYLON 5, much as Whedon brought over the Buffy/Angel crowd on ASM. ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN's success likely had some carry-over effect, same as the films. I guess shocks just sell well. Although it is worth noting that USM routinely outsold the "core" Spidey titles until about the past year or so.

You also have to recall that the "silent majority" of comic book fans supposedly do not post often at message boards. And these are the ones who are buying a lot of these books. I mean, if you go by what books are "hot" in this forum, RUNAWAYS, MTU, THE THING, SHE-HULK, and so on should be selling like gangbusters. In reality, only TWO of those titles are selling in the Top 100.

I don't read a lot of DC books, but I am reading INFINITE CRISIS and even without having a lot of investment in the characters, it is a great story, really an awesome superhero opera with all the action, tragedy and otherworldness within, along with a potent metaphor. Marvel's shied away from outright "superhero operas" for a while now. They're more about relating to what is happening in reality, which is nothing new (look how much milage they got out of WW2 or the Cold War Era), but it does limit them in some ways. DC stories tend to be more timeless, but Marvel stories are usually more relevent in the PRESENT than looking back. Sales involve striking when the iron is hot, and maybe Marvel just does that better, at least within the past few years. Are they simply reacting to trends? Of course. Both companies do that rather shamelessly, and will never cop to it.

 

[vog]

And it boggles the mind. As an observer, and in my personal opinion, if i put the past two and a half years of product from each company side by side, DC, quite frankly, blows Marvel out of the galaxy in terms of creativity and "crowd pleasing". Marvel seems to be merely reacting to everything DC has done, instead of setting the standards.

Meanwhile; Spider-Man (im one myself) and X-men fans are some of the most un-happy fans in the industry, yet books from both franchises continually sell in the upper tier numbers.

It makes no sense.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying CaptainStacy. I guess you can sorta compare it to the 90's. The 90's is generally looked upon as one of, if not the worst, decades of all comics, yet it was also one of the highest selling decades to boot (at least for the first half of the decade).

Just as an example, March's numbers just came out today and Uncanny X-Men 470 and 471 were ranked 9th and 11th respectively for the month, yet I rarely ever hear good things coming from fans about the book. I know there are some people who enjoy the book, but typically, people talk about how bad it's been for "x" number of years. I can't fathom why a book that has been critized so badly for so long can pull in such good numbers over such a consisent time period. Uncanny X-Men has been around (if not at the top) the top 10 for well over a decade now, yet is continually slammed by fans and it's numbers have barely waivered. I guess that's why the quality of the book has remained relatively the same....as far as Marvel is concerned, it's still a "great" book.

 

[vog]

It does when you remember that X-Men, at this point, is a fool-proof franchise. No matter how good, bad, or mediocre the core titles are, they sell well. Now, can Marvel successfully launch a NEW X-title and have it last more than 2 years? Aside for NEW X-MEN (which is a carry-over from NEW MUTANTS), no. All of their 2004 X-books crashed and burned. Note, that in 2001, nearly any X-book, even BROTHERHOOD, was a Top 10 seller.

You also have to recall that the "silent majority" of comic book fans supposedly do not post often at message boards. And these are the ones who are buying a lot of these books. I mean, if you go by what books are "hot" in this forum, RUNAWAYS, MTU, THE THING, SHE-HULK, and so on should be selling like gangbusters. In reality, only TWO of those titles are selling in the Top 100.

I often wonder how many of the silent majority are actually enjoying all the books they are buying, or if they are simply buying some of them out of a commitment to the book and/or character. I know there are plenty of "zombies" at my comic shop who simply buy X-books out of commitment. As long as the book is somewhat mediocre, it's enough for them to buy it just because it has an "X" in the title.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

It does when you remember that X-Men, at this point, is a fool-proof franchise. No matter how good, bad, or mediocre the core titles are, they sell well. Now, can Marvel successfully launch a NEW X-title and have it last more than 2 years? Aside for NEW X-MEN (which is a carry-over from NEW MUTANTS), no. All of their 2004 X-books crashed and burned. Note, that in 2001, nearly any X-book, even BROTHERHOOD, was a Top 10 seller.

Now, Spider-Man isn't quite as fool-proof, as the CLONE SAGA showed. JMS brought with him some fan-following from RISING STARS and BABYLON 5, much as Whedon brought over the Buffy/Angel crowd on ASM. ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN's success likely had some carry-over effect, same as the films. I guess shocks just sell well. Although it is worth noting that USM routinely outsold the "core" Spidey titles until about the past year or so.

You also have to recall that the "silent majority" of comic book fans supposedly do not post often at message boards. And these are the ones who are buying a lot of these books. I mean, if you go by what books are "hot" in this forum, RUNAWAYS, MTU, THE THING, SHE-HULK, and so on should be selling like gangbusters. In reality, only TWO of those titles are selling in the Top 100.

I don't read a lot of DC books, but I am reading INFINITE CRISIS and even without having a lot of investment in the characters, it is a great story, really an awesome superhero opera with all the action, tragedy and otherworldness within, along with a potent metaphor. Marvel's shied away from outright "superhero operas" for a while now. They're more about relating to what is happening in reality, which is nothing new (look how much milage they got out of WW2 or the Cold War Era), but it does limit them in some ways. DC stories tend to be more timeless, but Marvel stories are usually more relevent in the PRESENT than looking back. Sales involve striking when the iron is hot, and maybe Marvel just does that better, at least within the past few years. Are they simply reacting to trends? Of course. Both companies do that rather shamelessly, and will never cop to it.

I agree that shock and relevance may be a factor, but honestly, i think a lot of it has to do with nostalgia.

I'll use myself as an example; I love many different characters from both DC and Marvel, but Spider-Man has always been my favorite. I wasn't even old enough to read yet when i became a fan (just oogled all the colorful pictures, and watched the original toon, first run)...my interest is the other characters i've had "love affairs" with; Batman, Captain America, Conan, Hulk, Green Lantern, Daredevil, JLA, etc., has come and gone over the decades, but Spidey has pretty much remained a constant. (with a brief break-up during the Clone Saga, but technically, the books were no longer featuring the Peter Parker version anyway)...

So yeah, that's a pretty long time. And i think i tend to associate the character with many different aspects of my life, both good and bad, and it kind of becomes hard to let go.

I think it's like that with LOTS of Spider-Man and X-Men fans.

 

[Dread]

Definately. And Marvel will exploit it to the end. Why not? It's working for them.

Spider-Man was my first comic character too, but I dropped reading his core titles around the CLONE SAGA and, alas, have never been given a good reason to hop on since. A real shame.

 

[Nasty-B]

At least he was right about the Champions. That roster never made any sense to me.

 

[Harlekin]

NRAMA: QUASAR
Best suited for ongoing solo, limited series, or cast member:

JQ: As a cast member.

Why it worked/didn’t work in the past:

JQ: Well, Quasar ran for about for about 5 years but it was never a huge seller. I would argue that there were always problems with this character. A cool look obviously derived from Captain Marvel, but I never felt there was much to hold onto with the character.

Arguably, his origin adheres to the Marvel formula in manner so calculated that it’s transparent. He’s a Peter Parker archetype with cosmic powers and the lack of a killer instinct is what made him compatible with his cosmic band doohickeys. I don’t know something about a hero without a killer instinct. Having a killer instinct doesn’t mean you act upon it, it just means that you want to win at all costs.

Captain America has a killer instinct, great athletes have a killer instinct, Wendell couldn’t cut it with S.H.I.E.L.D. so they make him a guy who stands by guarding a door? Sorry, I was never ever able to buy into the whole Quasar thing.

What it would need to work today?

JQ: Find someone new to be Quasar and start from scratch.

Odds of seeing a new starring project in the next 2 years:

JQ: 10%

See, these kinds of things just piss me off.

The man obviously never actually read the Quasar title, and although Wendell does kind of suffer from the Parker-syndrome, he's an amazing character that just needs a bit more of a push. If they replace him or whatever, ugh, screw you Joe.

 

[roach]

Hmmmm so Iron Fist was created from the Kung-fu crazy and is irrelevant...yet look at Daughter of the Dragon and the cast of H4H

 

[roach]

so according to Marvel......
Namor cant work..........DC's Aquaman
Quasar cant work.........Green Lantern
Magic cant work.......Shadowpact
cosmic doesnt work........Rann/Thanagarian War; Green Lantern Corp.

 

[iloveclones]

The first half of that interview was like pulling teeth, and even though I don't share those feelings, I can see why people are put of by JQ at times. I mean, c'mon, if you don't want to answer questions, and you can't be cute about it like Stan the Man, just move on.

The second half, though, was extremely interesting, where he goes through a list of unused concepts/characters and talks about why they do/don't work. Definately worth reading through.

Comments about two of my favorite costumes ever:

JQ: Some people think Iron Fist’s costume is goofy as hell, I have to admit, if I saw someone walking around at a convention dressed like that I would think that it was dumb too. However, on paper, on the comic’s page, I really dig the costume, something about the lines of it that work for me. Maybe I could live without the yellow slippers, but the whole big collar thing, dragon chest tattoo, and tied mask is cool as all heck. Now, aside from all of that, I think currently he works best as a cast member in a title.

JQ: I loved the look of the old Captain Marvel and bought his title when I was a kid simply because I was buying everything that had a Marvel slug on it. He still to this day has one of the coolest costumes in comics. Heck even the green and white costume rocks! With the right pitch, I could se him having his own limited series at least. With a great pitch, perhaps an ongoing someday.

I think I see me a little old school Aurora and Northstar action, and I like it!

 

[32CAGE]

He is the only one other than perhaps Azzarello himself, who loved Azzarello's version of Luke Cage in the Cage mini.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Azzarello's a big name in comics these days. Of course he's gonna say he loved his version of anything. You never know what'll burn bridges with a creator you could potentially coax over to working for you in the future.