Grey56

Change can be painful, but in the end it certainly can be a good thing. Marvel has an obligation on many fronts to keep it's doors open - most notably to the fans (customers). In their ongoing efforts to do it - they'll do what is necessary to keep profits where they need them, and hopefully provide a good product to the readers in the process.

All jokes aside, event fatigue is real. That said, the market will bear what's it is willing to - and the moment events stop selling, and there is another proven cash tool....they'll probably continue. That said - I have yet to read any Secret Wars books though they are set to arrive, and when they do it will be the first event I'll have read from Marvel since being disappointed by AvX. My purchase of the books though is still a signal that I'm willing to buy event books.

If I could offer but one request to come as a result of the changes Marvel has teased - it would be to return to original numbering on as many of the books as practical. Providing that sense of history, and longevity is important for many reasons. I'm fine with whatever character changes come along, because in the end they typically come back to their roots - but bringing the numbers back would make an old man happy.

Well said. How we engage each other does matter - especially when we can't see the party we're trying to address.

While it's good to have a spirit of competition - comics truly still are a business. And in an effort to stay in business, companies often have to be creative in finding ways to not just 'fund' but also publicize their products.

What's worth pointing out here is that no one forced any backers into donating - they simply were eager to take part in the campaign. To say that a larger, established corporation using channels typically used by 'local' or 'smaller' companies is 'wrong' or 'inconsiderate' isn't entirely accurate.

Holding everything else constant - Archie cancelling this might be a bad thing for those who were opposed to it. Archie gets to come out looking like the victim taking the high road after scrutiny left a pall over the event.

It's important to give things a hard look because Archie isn't a company trying to use aquifers as a means for industrial waste disposal. They aren't selling you paint laced with lead or insulation that has carcinogens. They were trying a new tool to spread art.

All of this. Brilliantly summarized.

This is very well said, and thank you for posting it.

This is probably a fair summary. It's an honest business tactic. Marvel probably would like to save the viability of a few Ultimate properties and that's sound practice.

And whereas I'm not opposed to this happening (and don't truly have a horse in the race as I've never read anything Ultimate) - I am curious if there will be any easter eggs which make it more for the average reader/collector. Something like the alien suit; something which will contribute in a new original way for more than just the interim.

If that looks like it will be part of the scheme, I may buy. If not, this'll unfortunately make at least a half dozen skipped events.

This. Also, I wonder what Stan Lee thinks of these modern day death issues.

Bottom Line Up Front: This incarnation doesn't mesh with either the intent of Grant and Bisley. It's arguable that it doesn't with what Giffen had in mind. For fans of the model that has been a part of canon for nearly 25 years - this new version will never satisfy.

Secondly, if you are busying yourself with discouraging people for voicing their dislike of a property they spend money on and take time out of their day to comment about - you're doing this hobby a disservice and you should probably check yourself as I sincerely doubt most of these brazen remarks would be offered in an interpersonal setting. If you like this new version of 'Lobo' - so be it.

I expressed these thoughts on @inferiorego 's review and would like to again thank him for taking the time to post his thoughts. Again, for the dicussion here - it is my own opinion (voiced by others, to give them credit) that a property is not made obsolete simply by the passing of years. In case anyone hasn't been watching Harley-Davidson stock, there is still quite a bit of folks out there who identify with the outlaw identity.

If this new property is supposed to be the same as the previous, then why go through the up front production cost of paying creators for a new vision? The answer is that this isn't the same. Unlike Dazzler going back to a Sex Pistols looks instead of her usual Farrah Fawcett - this isn't a uniform change. These are important distinctions.

Lastly, as it's been proposed, DC simply could have made a new character property (a villain to add to a rogues gallery) that represents everything this new incarnation does - perhaps even be another surviving Cznarian (gasp!) who is a brother or such that acts as a good foil to the character popularized over the last few decades.

Bottom Line Up Front: This incarnation doesn't mesh with either the intent of Grant and Bisley. It's arguable that it doesn't with what Giffen had in mind. For fans of the model that has been a part of canon for nearly 25 years - this new version will never satisfy.

Secondly, if you are busying yourself with discouraging people for voicing their dislike of a property they spend money on and take time out of their day to comment about - you're doing this hobby a disservice and you should probably check yourself as I sincerely doubt most of these brazen remarks would be offered in an interpersonal setting. If you like this new version of 'Lobo' - so be it.

I myself have been very vocal about this subject and disagree with @inferiorego though I appreciate his taking the time and effort to likewise express his opinion. It is my own opinion (voiced by others, to give them credit) that a property is not made obsolete simply by the passing of years. In case anyone hasn't been watching Harley-Davidson stock, there is still quite a bit of folks out there who identify with the outlaw identity.

Lastly, as it's been proposed, DC simply could have made a new character property (a villain to add to a rogues gallery) that represents everything this new incarnation does - perhaps even be another surviving Cznarian (gasp!) who is a brother or such that acts as a good foil to the character popularized over the last few decades.

Still hawking a book featuring the demise of a character that everyone buying and not buying the book knows to be untrue. I suppose it's a matter of principle for some and not others. And given that this site is dedicated to reviewing everything to then assist those of sharing this site - it's a fairly good justification.

Still, I do miss the times where third parties were harsh on these types on money-grabs; regardless as to how well written or how many extras there are in the last few pages. At the end of the day, it's still a farce - and not a new one at that.