Why is Mark Waid doing this now?
Either Waid actually believes what he says in the following interview (via The Roar of Comics), or, he sees the audience as easier to blame than the publishers who may not give his book the same promotion they're giving to World War 3:
And as I said above, I think DC's been giving far more attention to their needless WW3 than to truly promoting books like Waid and Perez's new anthology series. Regardless, he did a serious disservice to comics by saying that nobody wants a fun story these days. That's not how you draw in newcomers either. That sounds more as though he were toeing the company line than reflecting what the audience asked for. And might I just add that, if the Star Wars prequels weren't as fun as they were, it's possible that they'd never have done as well as they did in the past few years when George Lucas put them together.
As for the grittiness I assume Waid must think is better, ever notice how people who make arguments like these don't seem to suggest writing stories that give something to think about, like human interest stories where they deal with all possible pressing issues of the time or day? If he or others of his standing can't suggest anything beyond just darkness, what's the point in writing downbeat stories?
MW: Oh, I'll say it. I hope that proclamation doesn't doom us, though.Something tells me that Waid could use a bit of fun himself, by spending time outdoors and at an amusement park, because this is really stupid of him to say that. Bent Corner has a reasonable argument that DC's use of variant covers for the first issue were what led to big sales for the debut. Personally, I find variants worthless, and even when I still bought pamphlet issues regularly, I didn't go out of my way to spend my hard earned money for the same story twice. And yet, this shows just how the new Brave and the Bold may actually be a failure, because quite a few people may have bought it more for the value to be had in the variant covers.
The moment all the reviews started coming in they all said, "It's fun." "It's fun." "It's fun." I started to sweat, because "fun" is a death word in comics these days.
RT: If you kill off Hawkeye, people are going to hate it, but at least they are going to buy twenty of it.
MW: That's just it.
"Fun, fun, fun" being our rap makes me worried. Sales were strong on the first issue, but the second issue drop-off was a little steeper than we'd predicted. And I honestly think that was because every reviewer said it was "fun."
"Fun" automatically kills off a lot of your sales. Don't get me wrong; the book's still a success in the current market, and no one at DC has expressed anything but enthusiasm. We certainly seem to have a hit on our hands, George and I. I just hope that the "fun" label doesn't hit us too hard. If so, it's just another sign that current readers don't want "fun" comics.
And as I said above, I think DC's been giving far more attention to their needless WW3 than to truly promoting books like Waid and Perez's new anthology series. Regardless, he did a serious disservice to comics by saying that nobody wants a fun story these days. That's not how you draw in newcomers either. That sounds more as though he were toeing the company line than reflecting what the audience asked for. And might I just add that, if the Star Wars prequels weren't as fun as they were, it's possible that they'd never have done as well as they did in the past few years when George Lucas put them together.
As for the grittiness I assume Waid must think is better, ever notice how people who make arguments like these don't seem to suggest writing stories that give something to think about, like human interest stories where they deal with all possible pressing issues of the time or day? If he or others of his standing can't suggest anything beyond just darkness, what's the point in writing downbeat stories?
Labels: dc comics
