I can't believe Wizard named him Man of the Year
I don't. People got concerned during all the INFINITE CRISIS jocking, but WIZARD is clearly pro-Marvel if you got them to admit a bias between the big two. At least that was the impression I got from reading their magazines for a good 5-8 years.
Plus, to be fair (I guess), Joe Q has seen many successes on his watch, from Ultimate to boosted sales since the crash of 1994 and the bankrupcy that ended the 90's, from movies to DTV's and merchandising and so on. There still are many good relaunches, comics, and stories written under his watch, and he seems to embrace the future...to a fault, and in ways that are staggeringly short sighted and backward ("I'll revert the status quo to the 70's...by using 21st century cynicism and angst, with topical Bushophobia!"). And his Marvel has collectively kicked the arse of DC in sales and mass media dominance after being at a disadvantage during the 90's.
That said, onto the bitter, fanboy criticisms!
- Joe Q insists that he and Millar haven't changed the ending of CW even if many fans on the 'net have predicted it. He brings up the right point that so many books RELY on that ending, which clearly depicts that the pro Reg side wins the war, if not the battle. For now. However, last week he all but threw Whedon into the fire if there is an outcry ("It was his idea! HIS! SEE IF YOUR BUFFY WORSHIP CAN FORGIVE THAT!" basically). But I sort of think I can buy his answer on that point.
- If I was Joe Q, I would wonder if fans have so many "conspiracy" theories because we're by nature paranoid, or because Marvel has offered half-truths and contradictory answers to problems before? Claiming "dead is dead" and then ignoring it, vowing never to see 22+ pages of ads in story in 2005 vs. "Just Part of the Biz cycle" come '06, belittling the Parker marriage at every turn and interview and then seeming "surprised" that fans believe he has something nefarious in mind, and then promising to crack down on delays for certain titles, vs. then giving a collective shrug in practice (almost a year since ULTIMATE HULK VS. WOLVERINE, ULTIMATES 2 expected to end in fall 2006 and now dragging into First Quarter 2007, pretending DAREDEVIL: TARGET never happened, continuing to chase Bryan Singer for Ultimates despite the fact that we have been waiting TWO YEARS AND COUNTING, etc). There is plenty to blame on fans I suppose, no community is perfect. But Joe's Marvel is one that overwhelming blames all problems on their audience, and that's unfair. The concept of an EIC of a company pretending any and all problems are due to the customer overreaction, misunderstanding or ignorance is short sighted at best. The best companies look within and offer solutions, not excuses, for problems. And besides, Joe Q's constantly bragged about giving misleading interviews to "sell" something. So, no, conspiracy theories haven't been without some merit.
On the "Footnote-gate" issue:
Joe Q said:
1.) If almost everything you need to know is in the recap page, why are people upset about footnotes? You're getting the information that a footnote would contain, they're just not in a footnote caption.
Usually this is incorrect. The recap page only tends to recap the previous issue, usually within a sentence or two, and sometimes the underlying surrounding story in vague terms. If the inside story references something specific from a past story (i.e. years ago), or in another title, or in another title years ago, the recap page offers NADA.
Joe Q said:
2.) As you stated above, if the recap page doesn't cover it, and we really feel we need a footnote, we add the asterisk and the reader can find the footnote information in the letter's page. Again, why are folks so upset that there isn't a footnote caption, there is, it's just in the back of the book as opposed to within the story. Are they saying that they need it right on the page in order to get the info? Hmmm.
A brilliant idea. The problem is that not every writer does this. Some writers, specifically Heinberg and others, have done this. Other issues, like CASUALTIES OF WAR, risk omitting a sacred ad to have an entire page devoted to this. BUT THIS IS NOT AN ACROSS-THE-BOARD thing! I have never seen you mention this as a mandate initiative, but something you leave to the whim of the writer, and if they feel they're "above" that sort of thing, or that their audience is "above" it, then the audience is F'd.
However, I can't make it a mandate. You can. Yet you fail to. Maybe you're too nice a guy to lower the hammer, whether in terms of a letters page recap or deadlines, and in that case you are an ineffective manager.
Joe Q said:
3.) If a particular back issue or trade is important in order to understand a particular current story arc, again, we would flag the mention of that past event as it occurs during the course of a story with an asterisk within the caption or balloon it appears in. We would then include all the pertinent information in the letters page.
Also, keep in mind that we don't write our stories that way anymore. We try to make them as inclusive and none confusing as possible, I think that's where the letter's page comes in handy. I never understood why comic books and comic continuity had to be a puzzle only solvable by the most hardcore Fanman?
Baloney. The across-the-board crossover that references items from decades ago and dredges up F-Listers who barely have had 5 appearences at times SPECIFICALLY is made for the "most hardcore Fanman". A casual or new fan is not going to appreciate the Cap/Iron Man history. They are not going to give a **** about Goliath being murdered. They are not going to be impressed that the Shroud and Capt. Angst have been included. They are not going to even know who half the characters at Stamford are. This event, like MOST crossover events, exists to draw money from the fans who are entrenched and care the most, especially caring enough to buy every god damned tie-in. The new or casual fan gets maybe 1-4 titles on average, they can't be expected to buy 42 chapters and counting. The hardcore is. I don't mind you trying to swindle your audience, but give us a little credit. Creating puzzles for the hardcore fanman is the name of the game. Especially when you previously had to deny changing endings BECAUSE fanmen are puzzling at it.
And secondly, again, this idea for having footnotes in the letters page IS great, so make it mandatory, not at the whim of writers. After all, the satisfaction of the reader is supposed to trump a writer's ego (to some degree). Isn't it?
The fact of the matter is, unless a footnote or recap page is there, new and old fans can be confused. What is so hard to grasp? Make the recap page an editorial edict, and be done with it. It's a good idea. RUN WITH IT. I've feared for a while that Joe Q's too "nice" to really hammer home points with the employees sometimes, and that makes Marvel look inept, and always puts him on defense.
Joe Q said:
4.) And finally, this has been in effect for nearly six yearsz! Six years without footnotes and nobody has complained nor noticed really until I said something last week [laughs].
That just shows you are out of touch. I've noticed people on SHH mentioning it for the past 1-2 years, and I am sure others could offer better numbers. It has been an issue long before you brought it up. In FACT, the way that it has exploded into a "mini debate" upon you uttering it is PROOF that the stew had been boiling a bit. Much like how stunned Republicans after the 2006 elections failed to realize that the pot of malcontent from the war had been brewing ever since 2004, when it DIVIDED the nation in the race for the White House (true, Bush got the highest popular votes in 30 years, but Kerry got the second most). When you're #1 for so long, you lose touch if you are not careful. Marvel's so used to beating DC that is where I believe they are sometimes. The only difference is maybe 5 years ago they did it without breaking a sweat and now they sometimes have to roll up a sleeve.
Joe Q said:
JQ: I would say that I agree with them, ads do take you out of the flow of a story, there's no question about that. It does the same for me when I watch a TV show as well, but they are part of the cost of doing business and unavoidable. That's why I love watching shows on DVD, the equivalent of the trade paperback, or on my TiVo, unfortunately, there isn't a TiVo for comics (yet). But that said, since we do have this unavoidable interruption, does that mean that it's okay to compound that with even more interruptions? If that's the case, then no one should really ever argue during those months when we have excessive ads.
A fair point. But am I the only one who sees this answer and thinks, "Joe is basically saying that fans who buy trades are more important, and the 100k + readers who sometimes read top books, if they feel that 24 ads in a book in November is too much, can bite it"? Because for the last few years we have been hearing writers excuse pacing mistakes as "it reads better in trade", totally dismissing the experience of the majority of readers who read monthly. Lord knows trades are a better deal in terms of price, no ads, and an entire story in one sitting. Eventually, nostalgia and impatience will not be enough for fans to be suckers on monthlies anymore, and if I were EIC I'd word my points carefully to not dare this outcome.
Joe Q said:
With respect to thought balloons, that just seems to be more of a stylistic approach with today's creators. The truth of the matter is that the thought balloons are still there, they just have a different shape. They're now rectangular caption boxes but they basically accomplish the same thing.
Doublespeak. If Thought Balloons are equal to Text Boxes, then why are Text Boxes the "stylistic choice"? Why does this seem more of an across-the-board mandate than your recap letters pages? Obviously Text Boxes have to have something special about them, in that case admit it and don't pretend they're equal. It makes you look bad.
And I will add that the fact that both Marvel and DC have gone back to the 90's model of perpetual crossover shows a sense that trying to reach out to elusive "new readers" has failed, so they're trying to please and drain money from the diehards.
- The fact you have to keep answering questions about when CW #7 is out is simply because the audience has grown pessimistic and sees delays as the norm, not the exception. Does Joe Q have some innovative answer for this? Leaders innovate. Companies that save that for when the competitor does something get left behind. To hell if they plague DC too. Learn from it and evolve. That is your job.
Joe Q said:
JQ: In all seriousness, this is the constant battle that we have to fight between promoting our books and keeping storylines as secretive as possible. Also, with so many different and growing avenues by which to solicit our product mistakes are bound to occur, especially as all these different avenues have different solicitation cycles.
It doesn't make me happy, but it's the cost of doing business on a larger scale.
It took you at least 2 years to even BEGIN to try to save spoilers from solicts. And some people may see where Iron Man gets his current attitude from. Some problems are the cost of doing business. But companies are constantly finding ways to cut costs of business. To be fair, Marvel's made strides in keeping spoilers secret in the last year or so, they just need to keep at it, be vigorous, and keep tighter reigns on things.
Joe Q said:
And for 2.): Four words for you: Captain America, Hawkeye, Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch. Hell, even if you add Goliath and the Wasp into the mix, I’d still bet on our new line-up in a fight, and nobody had any problem with “Cap’s Kooky Quartet” being the Avengers, and being dubbed “Earth’s Mightiest Heroes.” This to me is just a case of what fans are comfortable with versus any new status quo. “Earth’s Mightiest Heroes” is a tagline and over the glorious history of the team, there have been some mighty heroes and there have been some not so mighty heroes. In the end, what's important is the chemistry of the characters and how the writer and artist handle and convey that chemistry.
One counterpoint from me; Joe Q is an EIC who constantly justifies some fan criticisms as either a "cost of business" or "moving forward into the future". That is why half the heroes are supporting a semi fascist law. That is why storylines are more than 2 issues on average. That is why thought balloons are text boxes. That is why comics are often late due to "embracing" more evolved styles of pencilling, inking, and digital colors.
So if Marvel is so busy moving forward...why is Stan Lee's roster from AVENGERS #16, circa 1964 or 1965, always drudged up to defend any criticism, worthy or not, that people have with Bendis' new roster? I thought Marvel was above having to dig up evidence from 40 years ago. They're all modern now.
Personally, I don't care too much about the NA roster, just feel that a rehash of Ronin is stupid and egotistical on Bendis' part, and seeing MIGHTY AVENGERS get to do the sort of sun-drenched heroics that the NA never did for 2 years is a bitter pill to choke down. It makes it look like it took Bendis 2 years to decide to make an Avengers team that caters more to what the Avengers were KNOWN FOR, and that CW was just a timely convience, vs. believing that it is a natural progression.
- I think it's nice that Bendis wants to amp up The Hood, although I am disturbed at how casually he brushes aside the elements from the mini and BEYOND that suggested he wanted to make a life outside of crime. I am expecting the "demonic posession" angle to be used as an insto-excuse, like Wanda and reality warping. To play Devil's Advocate, though, there are very few good villians who aren't T-Bolts, overdone, or dead these days, so I can understand perhaps Bendis willing to steamroll a bit to desperately find a guy to replace Kingpin (since he and everyone else have abandoned Count Nefaria, who's been around longer than even Fisk has).
I do agree that this FRIDAYS's was mediocre, but it did give us some points to ponder. I feel if Joe would get more assertive and visionary as an EIC, and hired some kind of coach to work on his ability to doublespeak and oversell, he could come out much better in some of these things. He also needs to acknowledge that fans are not stupid simply because they are devoted.
t: 
