One bait-and-switch tactic that may have backfired
As always, these sales analyses that The Beat blog does are often interesting to look through. Some products at DC may have risen slightly in sales, but there were others that went down. And coming into the latter category, we have Supergirl, which dropped below 50,000 units sold. Obviously, the bait-and-switch tactic combined with publicity stunt - namely, Tony Bedard being touted as big talent when he'd just be an interim writer on three issues - must've backfired, when people realized that there were strings attached, not the least being a tasteless crossover like Amazons Attack too. If that was the case, I certainly can't blame anybody who was discouraged. A dishonest promotion like that only deserves to be met with rejection.
I will not question if Bedard's being sincere by trying to make some better out of even a crossover connected story, but while it is possible to better upon a weak story of yore, the more tasteless, contrived and forced some of these things become, the harder it is to credit even that. For some good examples of sloppy storytelling that found inprovements, we could look to those times in the early 80s when Ms. Marvel was turned into a love slave of the son of Immortus in Avengers issues #198-200, and it was revealed in the Avengers Annual #10 that she'd been under his influence, and when the Wasp, even after how she was smacked by her ex-hubby Yellowjacket, leading to their divorce in 1981, succeeded in coming into her own as a character in the years to follow. The difference from what DC did, however, is that when these stories were first told in the early 80s, while there was editorial influence involved, they were all done within just the Avengers series itself, and did not stem from a crossover in another book that affected more than a few of the characters, and ran the gauntlet of villifying them. Another difference is that Ms. Marvel and Wasp were victims of men who were either exploitive or just went totally off their sanity rocker, whereas in Amazons Attack, they're otherwise the culprits who've been led to disaster by another woman, Granny Goodness.
So clearly, whatever Tony Bedard did in Supergirl's solo book, if it stems from a crossover as monumentally awful as Amazons Attack, it's not like people will be very encouraged to accept something related to a story most wretched. That he was only on board as an interim writer and not as a regular may have further doomed it.
Character/story development only really works when it's done within the protagonist's own personal stories, or a regular series, and not when it stems from an overhyped crossover that's meant to affect everyone involved.
Kelley Puckett, the writer who'd launched the new Batgirl, is supposed to be the next writer assigned to Supergirl, but, if he's not going to be a regular for say, three years, and if no steps are taken to put in some quite useful elements like a secret civilian identity and a supporting cast, then that can further undo this book. Come to think of it, the very fact that DC was dishonest even with how they promoted Bedard could further undermine it too, as some readers may be too put off with what they've been doing till now to keep on with it.
Nice going there, DC. Not willing to be honest and let things gain a natural flow, that's just the way to go, isn't it?
Update: almost forgot: I see that DC has taken once again to spiking sales by running variant covers for a couple of their titles. Can we be clear here about something? It's always possible to find those coverscans online, and nobody needs to go out of their way to spend tons of money on something that's unlikely to gain much value years from now. I guess we'll have to assume that the mindless monetary collectors have struck again, and are buying variants in a futile charade of hoping they'll make it rich someday? I've said at least once before, I'll say it again: Those collectors deserve to be criticized for their foolishness, which only helps to ensure that comics will get worse, and that the industry will be further undermined.
I will not question if Bedard's being sincere by trying to make some better out of even a crossover connected story, but while it is possible to better upon a weak story of yore, the more tasteless, contrived and forced some of these things become, the harder it is to credit even that. For some good examples of sloppy storytelling that found inprovements, we could look to those times in the early 80s when Ms. Marvel was turned into a love slave of the son of Immortus in Avengers issues #198-200, and it was revealed in the Avengers Annual #10 that she'd been under his influence, and when the Wasp, even after how she was smacked by her ex-hubby Yellowjacket, leading to their divorce in 1981, succeeded in coming into her own as a character in the years to follow. The difference from what DC did, however, is that when these stories were first told in the early 80s, while there was editorial influence involved, they were all done within just the Avengers series itself, and did not stem from a crossover in another book that affected more than a few of the characters, and ran the gauntlet of villifying them. Another difference is that Ms. Marvel and Wasp were victims of men who were either exploitive or just went totally off their sanity rocker, whereas in Amazons Attack, they're otherwise the culprits who've been led to disaster by another woman, Granny Goodness.
So clearly, whatever Tony Bedard did in Supergirl's solo book, if it stems from a crossover as monumentally awful as Amazons Attack, it's not like people will be very encouraged to accept something related to a story most wretched. That he was only on board as an interim writer and not as a regular may have further doomed it.
Character/story development only really works when it's done within the protagonist's own personal stories, or a regular series, and not when it stems from an overhyped crossover that's meant to affect everyone involved.
Kelley Puckett, the writer who'd launched the new Batgirl, is supposed to be the next writer assigned to Supergirl, but, if he's not going to be a regular for say, three years, and if no steps are taken to put in some quite useful elements like a secret civilian identity and a supporting cast, then that can further undo this book. Come to think of it, the very fact that DC was dishonest even with how they promoted Bedard could further undermine it too, as some readers may be too put off with what they've been doing till now to keep on with it.
Nice going there, DC. Not willing to be honest and let things gain a natural flow, that's just the way to go, isn't it?
Update: almost forgot: I see that DC has taken once again to spiking sales by running variant covers for a couple of their titles. Can we be clear here about something? It's always possible to find those coverscans online, and nobody needs to go out of their way to spend tons of money on something that's unlikely to gain much value years from now. I guess we'll have to assume that the mindless monetary collectors have struck again, and are buying variants in a futile charade of hoping they'll make it rich someday? I've said at least once before, I'll say it again: Those collectors deserve to be criticized for their foolishness, which only helps to ensure that comics will get worse, and that the industry will be further undermined.
Labels: crossoverloading, dc comics, sales, Supergirl, women of dc
