@frozen said:
But that's NOT the way to go - anything can be made 'curious' - if Superman was made gay, would that pander to 'curiosity'? Or if Batman was made black? Creating controversy will only last so long, it'll create an initial ''buzz'' or attract attention but eventually that buzz Marvel are aiming for will fade. That does not give Marvel the right to throw away a great run, and a great character and replace it with an unnecessary change. The operative word here: unnecessary. Marvel instead could focus on other female characters, or attempt to make them more known, but instead they've opted for a cheap cop out - fans don't deserve to have that happen to them. Marvel are simply trying to be diverse for the sake of being diverse.
A Muslim teenage girl superhero can only be handled so carefully - if that is to truly appeal to Muslim teenagers, then they should capture the culture/society they live in, of a post-9/11 world, there are other Muslim superheroes in DC who have nothing notable about them and no attempt at capturing the culture whatsoever.
It does, in a way - since the MCU's popularity, more posters here have been predominantly Marvel fans, the MCU brought more awareness to the character, and Marvel, up until this fiasco, were doing a good job at maintaining good stories, and making him more accessible with Marvel NOW!
But if we take too much of an OPTIMISTIC view, then we simply become suckers to both DC and Marvel.
Specifically not everything can be made curiosity inducing, your example is a significant change in sexual orientation by one of the if not the biggest superheroes of all time and really now its Superman so he is the biggest and sexual orientation is a big huge topic, and if DC decided to make Superman gay it would garner a lot of curiosity from people who don't read Superman comics. Thats a different issue as far as the issue of deciding whether its worth it or not. So risk reward. The reward with changing Superman that way wouldn't be worth the risk for DC. The rewards for Marvel in introducing a new female Thor are to them, worth the risk,
Indeed, using controversy to sell is a risky tactic and can be a way to undermine a products long term sustainability and harm a solid and loyal fan base to a product but its common in comics which already has a cycle of reader drop off and readership gain. Regardless of whatever happens readers tend to drop off books only to be replaced and most comics sales trend towards declining save for when events boost them or number ones roll around or occasionally creative changes granting the fame/status of the creative team. That and each controversy has its own risk and reward ratio. Marvel already knows that after the initial buzz sales and attention will fade but thats still a potential extra 5 to 20 thousand dollar boost per issue sale that starts to fade from that point on, just as the book is already fading and has been fading even though you and me think that its a great run with a great character.
That they are throwing something away I can only take as your opinion, unless you want to assert the objective reasoning behind the claim. As an opinion its fair but not one I share, as I haven't read the stories yet. Similar the application of what is necessary and unnecessary? On what foundation do you assert this is unnecessary and as importantly what in comics do you view as necessary so we can make a comparison? Marvel does focus on many other female characters. Elektra, She Hulk, Ms Marvel, Captain Marvel, Scarlet Witch, Storm, they focus on them as they see fit as a business dealing with the creation of stories involving fictional characters but its priority is not randomly making some female characters more known to be rah rah girl power. Rather its looking at a characters potential and how their gender, background, supporting characters can be assets combined with a creative teams assets to make money and produce great stories and generate sales. The idea of a new female as Thor with the publicity it will generate and how that will affect sales for that title is a different approach than say giving Sif a new solo book. Personally I'd prefer a Sif solo but a Sif solo wouldn't generate the publicity that this new Thor book would, which goes back to my point about what is the motivation behind this new book and who its supposedly pandering towards. Unfortunately for me, a Sif solo book doesn't seem worth the risk or investment on Marvels part.
Fans don't all have the same opinion, preference or idea about what they deserve or don't deserve. Your argument lacks any exclusivity. Its like if I said this is the book every single human who has ever lived has been waiting for and deserves. I mean its a bit empty, I get that you feel that way, but you and I can't speak for every fan.
Your basis for such claims? Every study and business related article, professional consensus on how comic book movies affects comic book sales points to CBM have little to no effect on comic sales. You are right that it does make more people aware of such characters and that in itself can be very valuable and that there is benefit and smoothing the lines between the comic reality and comic book reality but most of that is for fans of both mediums stories rather than a serious hook for fishing in new readers. Which doesn't matter too much as I explained Thor is still around and going to be around and if anything closer to his MCU incarnation with his grizzled look and probably rougher moral edges.
Who needs a optimistic view when you can have a realists view and understanding of the comic book industry and why and how it aces creative decisions? =p Do the things I assert above sound like sucker to Marvel or DC?
I also understand if you have a critical and skeptical view of all this, I would even encourage it, but there is a difference between a skeptical and critical view on something and a unfavorable gut reaction to something and anticipation of a let down or disappointment because of a unnecessary change to what would be considered a good thing. There are lots of creative decisions I don't like and can view as being reasonable from Marvels or a creators POV, alternatively can be times I think they are making a poor business decision or excessively risky decision but am glad for it because of my own preferences.
Log in to comment