How to build a better comic Company/Universe.

[The-Spirit]

Something I was wondering about?

If you had the resources Money for great printing and distribution money to hire great artists and writers, how would build a great comic company.
I'm thinking Sim-Comic Company.

I'm more concerned with the creative aspects of it.
When Stan Lee and company started Marvel they had a real great seed started with the continuity and interaction with Marvel books and it had a feeling of a cool Universe there. DC got on board and for awhile they both had intersting Universes, aspects of that still exist but not totally.
If you had these resources and could do it, by learning from the past 40 yrs of triumphs and mistakes how would you build your universe?

I always thought of an approach where they set out to create specific characters and teams and had a timeline say 10 yrs and could have characters grow and evolve thru those eras but have it planned out and my idea with my own characters is to have birthdays and temperaments and psychological information about all the characters so they always will behave a certain way and not go off model.

I also think that big events reveals and crossovers should be planned years in advance and that creators should be on the same page according to the Universe Bible to insure a cohesive universe.

This thread is also to talk about how some companies got it right and got it wrong and how we can learn from that.

[Mwynn]

Valiant had a pretty good plan going on. They had the right balance of books. I can pretty much pinpoint when they lost control. Rai and the Future Force.

A plan similar to their early stuff could work.

[Buckyrig]

Valiant had a pretty good plan going on. They had the right balance of books. I can pretty much pinpoint when they lost control. Rai and the Future Force.

A plan similar to their early stuff could work.

When and how long was Shooter involved? Love him or hate him, he seems to be around when things are being done right.

[Mwynn]

Shooter was gone before Turok 1 came out in 93.

[Craig DeBoard]

But Shooter's Marvel pretty much stuck to continuity (as best as possible).

Fact is, it's damn near impossible for a company that's been around over 40 years with hundreds of titles in that time to get it right every time.

I agree with mwynn. A bible for the company's universe is the first step. After that you have to make sure that editors and writers that are hired respect not only what has come before, but what eachother is doing currently. It's why I have a huge issue with Astonishing X-men. Whedon is doing a decent job of storytelling, but because of wanting to not have the book interact with the rest of the Marvel U, we end up with questionable elements that make no sense (a good example would be the cure for mutantcy...why is it the only folks who gave a shit were the core members of Astonishing? What about X-Factor, or Cable, or SHIELD, or hell NAMOR! he was the first mutant. He would have taken that as a personal attack against him 9and in turn his kingdom).

Writers have to respect eachother and COOPERATE. Not just go "Well I'm doing my thing, and if you guys want to do that thing over there thats cool, I won't screw with it, but I don't want you screwing with my thing either."

They have to co-exist and that means include aspects of eachothers stories in their books (if Spidey and Green Goblin trash a city block in Manhattan, it should be, AT THE VERY LEAST, mentioned in Fantastic Four).

A bible is the first step, but editors and writers who cooperate with eachother and who aren't worried about their own shit is the second. You have to hire folks who care about the entire universe their working in, not just the one title their working on.

[j giar]

I always thought it would be interesting to create a universe where I would do just the opposite of what is done in most comic continuity. Time comes to a crawl and heros never age. One thing I've alwasy liked about some of DC's books is how one hero retires and another assumes the mantel.
Create a universe where time speeds up. You see how a hero starts up. You see what forms or creates the character. The charactermatures and grows into adulthood. Maybe even possibly meet an untimely demise and someone else assumes the title. Let's be honest, I don't care how much of a genius you are. Diving off a building and using a billy club and wire to catch or stop your plummet...theres always a chance something is going to quit working or go wrong. Having other folks assume the mantle would alleviate any continuity issues. If the character became popular..let him retire. Train another protege.
Villains are another aspect that never gets explored. Take the concept of the book Wicked. The storyof the wicked witch from the wizard of OZ is just as interesting as the Dorothy's plight. What happens to an individual to turn them into something so bitter and vile.

Sorry didn't mean to jump in on the conversation.

[Buckyrig]

Astro City's universe moves in real time. It's about ten years later in the books...or it is supposed to be at least.

But Shooter's Marvel pretty much stuck to continuity (as best as possible).

Yeah, but he has the balls to reign in his talent. That is an editor's job. A lot of people label him a bully (I don't know how he handles people...it may be without tact) but they were not going to kill Jean at the end of Dark Phoenix...Iron Man's alcoholism was going to be stopped by a deus ex machina moment of clarity and a fist fight.

[The Scribe]

When and how long was Shooter involved? Love him or hate him, he seems to be around when things are being done right.

I agree, Marvel needs to bring back Shooter. ;)


Also, I agree with the characters eventually handing their mantle over to another.

[JamieRoberts]

I've always wanted to see real-time (or as close as possible) aging of characters.

The problems with having a 'bible' for continuity is that in some ways you're not letting the writers have free reign to write their best stuff. They're always going to be hampered by obstacles which will only get more difficult as time goes on. Of course, you could argue that writers may produce their best when faced with these obstacles. Depends on the writers, I guess.

Also, a long term plan that everyone has to stick to is a fantastic idea, but only if the plan itself is amazing. If it's a dud, you're going to have to adapt or face financial ruin. That would pretty much bring you straight into conflicting continuity issues from day one, unless you were damn quick.

I quite liked Crossgen's universe model, at least to begin with. I didn't read Ruse or Route 666 or many of the later books, but the initial launch books seemed cohesive without losing their individuality. Ah, I miss Scion.

What would I do? I would start with an anthology title, all stories set in one universe. Or one single story showcasing the universe's different aspects. Then, I would go by reader feedback or (maybe) gut instinct to launch titles based on characters from this book, using the original title as gospel. Changes affect the universe, not necessarily the stories. If a city is destroyed in one book, it's destroyed in all.

[The-Spirit]

But Shooter's Marvel pretty much stuck to continuity (as best as possible).

Fact is, it's damn near impossible for a company that's been around over 40 years with hundreds of titles in that time to get it right every time.I'm actually asking how you could start a New Universe and learn from the mistakes that Marvel and Dc and others made, remaking the big 2 is almost impossible without wiping the slate clean.

I agree a bible for the company's universe is the first step.
I think it's the only option, imagine if Stan Lee had've planned out the first 5 years of Marvel and kept his team informed of plans of what toi do with the company.

After that you have to make sure that editors and writers that are hired respect not only what has come before, but what each other is doing currently. I'd go a step further, if the writer in 4 yrs isn't the originator of the series that was started he or she would have to stay within gudelines of what was planned out for that character somewhat, no marriages or babies or deaths that didn't serve a purpose and if they did they would be permanent and thought out so they didn't destroy the original concept.

You have to hire folks who care about the entire universe their working in, not just the one title their working on.Yes stick to the plan and do your own take in creator owned stuff.

[The-Spirit]

I always thought it would be interesting to create a universe where I would do just the opposite of what is done in most comic continuity. Time comes to a crawl and heros never age. One thing I've alwasy liked about some of DC's books is how one hero retires and another assumes the mantel.
In my own Superhero story which I've been working on forever, my characters age, every year is a year, the story begins in 1955 and ends in 1963. I have biographies of the characters and their psychological make-ups and what they'll encounter thru those years. Although every issue takes a year every month isn't that month some stories could take place one event over 2 or more issues, but at the end of the year the 13th issue is the next year sometime.

Create a universe where time speeds up. You see how a hero starts up. You see what forms or creates the character. The character matures and grows into adulthood. Maybe even possibly meet an untimely demise and someone else assumes the title. I took an idea from DC's 52 where you meet these characters a few months into their story and avoid the "origin" issue. You cna show them fully functional and flashback to show their backstory little by little.

[The-Spirit]

The problems with having a 'bible' for continuity is that in some ways you're not letting the writers have free reign to write their best stuff. They're always going to be hampered by obstacles which will only get more difficult as time goes on. Of course, you could argue that writers may produce their best when faced with these obstacles. Depends on the writers, I guess.

Also, a long term plan that everyone has to stick to is a fantastic idea, but only if the plan itself is amazing. If it's a dud, you're going to have to adapt or face financial ruin. That would pretty much bring you straight into conflicting continuity issues from day one, unless you were damn quick.

I think a bible is absolutely necessary, if you have your characters being written by many different people in the same universe, it has to be cohesive.
I think you should have guidelines and communication.
For instance, if Wolverine is going on a mission in space, tell the other writers when this happens so they can allude to it their story and when so they can juggle the timelines because he's also in the savage land and genosha in other books at the same time, when it's not doen and the reader reads all the books the illusion is gone.
Don't do anything major with the character without thinking it thru, deaths marriages babies or as Marvel did for instance changing Spiderman from Peter Parker to Ben Reilly and then back, they didn't think it through that the switch might not work. Now those stories are confusing to people who would pick up those books and they'll probably be ignored as back issues forever.

I think Marvel killing off a bunch of major characters like they have recently is gonna be bad in the end, if they bring them back it's stupid if they stay dead you have some major characters who are gone that might've been developed in a better way.

I'd say if a character has been around longer than 10 yrs and you want to kill them off you better have all the bases covered or it looks stupid when you bring them back, Don't ever kill off a character you might want to bring back.

[Calloway]

Shooter is like any other EIC..hit or miss...he's had two companies that totally sucked ass that I know of. Broadway and that really lame , everything's watercolored dinky company. The reason he seems so great is because he's barely done anything since marvel and from what I understand is he started screwing marvel up towards it's end, same with valiant. Jumped ship when he saw it sinking.

[Buckyrig]

Shooter is like any other EIC..hit or miss...he's had two companies that totally sucked ass that I know of. Broadway and that really lame , everything's watercolored dinky company. The reason he seems so great is because he's barely done anything since marvel and from what I understand is he started screwing marvel up towards it's end, same with valiant. Jumped ship when he saw it sinking.

But he created Karate Kid...Karate Kid!

Which means he also invented super karate. Come on...that's gold!

[Mwynn]

Shooter is like any other EIC..hit or miss...he's had two companies that totally sucked ass that I know of. Broadway and that really lame , everything's watercolored dinky company. The reason he seems so great is because he's barely done anything since marvel and from what I understand is he started screwing marvel up towards it's end, same with valiant. Jumped ship when he saw it sinking.
Shooter was gone from Valiant before they hit their stride.

[Calloway]

What I remember is he was there right when the first issues were going up like mad. Then left to do broadway as an acclaim deal was being talked about. After he left the comics kinda just sat.

Valiant history (http://www.sequart.com/articles/index.php?article=1294)

edit: apparently I forgot he did get fired. I remember the last few books under him was where I actually started reading. Ninjak.

There was another company he was involved with after broadway that really really sucked..started with a d.

[Mwynn]

In 1993, the first issue of Turok, Dinosaur Hunter shipped 1.75 million copies. This was one of a series of highly successful books that cemented Valiant's place as an industry heavyweight - Bloodshot #1 sold 900,000 copies, X-O Manowar #0 sold 850,000, Rai #9 sold 800,000, Ninjak #1 sold 500,000 etc.

Shooter was gone between 91-92.

[The-Spirit]

So I take it Valiant was the best comics could do in your opinions?

[Calloway]

I think it comes down to personal taste. I loved 70s and early 80s marvel.

[Mwynn]

Well from my days of reading yes. The stories were well balanced, and all the books were pretty good. When a character died they stayed dead.

[Calloway]

Until they came back...

[Mike225]

Shooter went on to found Broadway Comics, which was related to Broadway Video, the production company that made Saturday Night Live; but this line folded after its parent sold the properties to Golden Books. He then announced his intention to form yet another comic book publisher, Daring Comics, but nothing came of it. Since August 2000, he is part-owner and creative consultant for the sci-fi firm Phobos Entertainment.

[Calloway]

defiant and broadway both sucked...defiant was the other one.

[Mike225]

Also from Wiki

Shooter, together with several of his loyalist coworkers, went on to found Defiant Comics. After some initial success with the first title, the new company failed to secure an audience in the increasingly crowded direct sales market and quickly folded thirteen months after its first title appeared, its resources drained in part by a prolonged court battle with Marvel Comics over Defiant's use of a title resembling one used on a failed title from Marvel's British imprint.

[The-Spirit]

I'm of the opinion that a new company could be created with a new universe and contiuity that could stand the test of time and be coherent for generations if thought out properly.

One way is to make the characters age as I and some others have suggested, that way new characters could be introduced and take the place of the old, it's risky but it would add a sense of realism and suspense and characters could die and never come back.
What if Batman were Bruce Waynes great grandson were reading now instead of Wayne?

The other approach I prefer is The Batman the Animated Series type where you give the world a undefined time BTAS was a blend of 30's thru 90's with no references to current events or culture to have a timeless quality, you do lose the impact of things that shape our world, like 911 or the War and could only use them metaphorically with imagined events in that world.

[JamieRoberts]

I'm not a fan, but I'm interested in the way the Dragonball series progress. Characters age and have kids, who age and become adults themselves. Last time I saw an episode, Goku was half-cat or something. But it was a progression, I'm sure. I bet it wasn't a quick fix to boost ratings or whatever.

One thing that bugs me about characters being used in multiple titles is that they show up in various places at once. Even considering that the stories are set in different time periods, it still gets my goat. I'd like to see (I'll use your example, Spirit) Wolverine go into space in his own book, and for this to be planned in advance to as to leave him out of X-Men storylines for the duration. Hell, Marvel are doing it with Hulk right now because it's a major plot for winter (or next year, I don't know) when he returns. Every plot should carry importance. If a plot doesn't have consequences, why tell the story?

So there's more policies I'd implement. Everything matters, and stories are told because they are worth telling, not because the book needs another arc quickly.

[Raven]

I'm of the opinion that a new company could be created with a new universe and contiuity that could stand the test of time and be coherent for generations if thought out properly.


Exactly. I am doing this with the Canadian Legion, unravelling their universe and their world piece by piece, rather than all at once where it seems to grandiose for a new reader to get into. CRISIS only works when you know the characters, make the reader know and care about them, then expand out from that.

[The-Spirit]

The thing is it would be easy to do and mutually beneficial for all involved to have everyone on the same page continuity-wise. I hoped that the Ultimate line would have been something where the creators looked at the beginning history of Marvel kept it intact but threw out only what didn't work and update it, other than that events could work out chronologically on the same terms as the original, you could save characters like Venom and such for later dates but longtime fans would know they were coming up eventually. If not the chronological aspect at least have a sense of continuity throughout the universe.

I do like the idea of starting in the middle of the story and telling the origins in flashback rather than the first story.

[Munch]

I think the best way to build a better universe is by reducing the number of titles you sell. Not every character is really worthy of exploring month in and month out (in my opinion)--and its ridiculous to feature a character(s) in mulitple titles (Spider-Man, Superman, Wolverine,Batman, X-Men). Sure they sell but I think to a casual fan or even serious readers, a bunch of books with a host of tie-ins is daunting.
I think a company should maybe publish around two dozen or so titles and crossovers should be reserved for annuals. It makes reading the annual more rewarding, the crossover more rewarding, and by keeping the characters seperate it really helps create the characters identity alone, while exploring their relationship to their overall world in an annual.
I do enjoy company-wide crossovers, but when you follow House of M, with Civil War, or Identity crisis, with Ifinite Crisis, then 52 and OYL it feels like just another crossover to capitalize on francises.
Obviously all my suggestions are not the ideal business model for a DC or Marvel ran corporation, but would be a good idea for any small press looking to make it big.

[The-Spirit]

I think the best way to build a better universe is by reducing the number of titles you sell. Not every character is really worthy of exploring month in and month out (in my opinion)--and its ridiculous to feature a character(s) in mulitple titles (Spider-Man, Superman, Wolverine,Batman, X-Men). Sure they sell but I think to a casual fan or even serious readers, a bunch of books with a host of tie-ins is daunting.
I wish the big 2 would learn that, one of the main reasons i don't collect alot of Marvels now is that they have these big crossover events all the time that run thru all the books.

I like Astonishing and that's it. It seems like it has it's own storyline and doesn't spill into all the civil war and House of M stuff which is fine by me, I don't have the money to get all that.

[The Scribe]

When and how long was Shooter involved? Love him or hate him, he seems to be around when things are being done right.

You got that right. ;)

Shooter needs to come back to Marvel.

[The Scribe]

I'd listen to the readers more.

Cross-overs that spill into every title are not very popular. I like the original Infinite Crisis (twelve issue maxi-series.) Possibly a special issue if you're going to cross over with another title.

Also, price.

Continuity is big with me, keep everything as tight as possible.

If you're going to up the price you need to have more pages. People were upset with Ultimate Spider-Man because it wasn't sixty-four pages and the price went up.

Hmmm, I'm not sure what else.

[L Jamal]

They are listening to the readers. IC and Civil War and 52 are the top selling books. just because you don't fancy them doesn't mean they are not legitimate top sellers.

Personally, I vote with my wallter. I'm buying far more TPBs and HC than I am singles and I'm much happier as I become a more casual comic reader than a reader/collector.

[HaphazardJoy]

The great goal for companies with a persistant universe is to create characters that can be ongoing for many years. Those that can create a fanbase and sell books over a long period of time. So to kind of skate around the answer, if I was to focus my creative ideas (personally) on a single continuity/universe, I'd rather keep the long lasting characters down to a minimum and instead focus on limited run stories. I'm a big fan of what the more adult anime studios do. They create very well crafted stories in intricate universes but only give them a couple of seasons to play out in. That's part of the inherent problem with continuity with 40, 50, 60 year and beyond characters. You need at least few great stories a year to keep a character going, along with corresponding developments in the characters and world they live in. So how do you give a single character a hundred different stories to pass through, while changing them to reflect what's happened, as well as the changes in standards for comics and story telling in general that are inevitable over a span of time? That's one of the problems I see, with the big two especially. They don't allow the characters to truly change much. Sure, they'll make Supes have different powers for a couple of years or give Spidey poison claws, but the characters are still the same people they were fifty years ago for the most part. How do you change the character without alienating the fanbase? For a large portion of people, you simply can't do that. People are hesitant to allow a character they've connected with to change after years of continuity.

Anyway, enough rambling. If I was given my own company with all of the resouces and clout, I'd focus on original stories that don't share a universe or continuity for the most part. If I did, I'd want to focus on, not one, but a few insular universes with no more than a few titles in each at a time.

[The Scribe]

They are listening to the readers. IC and Civil War and 52 are the top selling books. just because you don't fancy them doesn't mean they are not legitimate top sellers.

Personally, I vote with my wallter. I'm buying far more TPBs and HC than I am singles and I'm much happier as I become a more casual comic reader than a reader/collector.

Who says I don't like cross overs?

I like them. I'm just going by what I've heard cross overs that go through every book so you have to buy them don't seem popular if you have read as many forums as I have. Go look on CBR.

I buy regular titles and trades. ;)

[L Jamal]

Internet users are a very vocal and yet miniscule subset of comic buyers.

[The-Spirit]

You got that right. ;)

Shooter needs to come back to Marvel.
Yeah anybody would be better than Quesadilla.

[The-Spirit]

I'd listen to the readers more.
I think pandering to the fans is what started all the trouble in the first palce. Comics are so inbred with people whoare trying to impress fans instead of trying to build future readership it's horrible.

Stan Lee used to say give the readers what they think they want.

I say stick with the established model of the characters and keep them true to that. Look at what they're doing to Spider-Man.

[The Scribe]

I think pandering to the fans is what started all the trouble in the first palce. Comics are so inbred with people whoare trying to impress fans instead of trying to build future readership it's horrible.

Stan Lee used to say give the readers what they think they want.

I say stick with the established model of the characters and keep them true to that. Look at what they're doing to Spider-Man.

Well, if they were pandering to the fans they wouldn't have ever changed Spider-Man's costume, I actually like Iron Spidey. Among other things.

They should listen more, but not to everything. Because people don't like the same things.

I'd like to see the companies change their formats, so thier comics can be for all ages, like they use to be, instead of trying to give the older readers more of what could be put into a MAX or Vertigo title. I don't like some of the new things they let go on now. The rape and murder in DC, and the way the characters curse now. It doesn't make them look better. If they have to, to make comics for all ages, they can bring back the comics code. I didn't have any problems with that.

[Gonzogoose]

Well, if they were pandering to the fans they wouldn't have ever changed Spider-Man's costume, I actually like Iron Spidey. Among other things.

They should listen more, but not to everything. Because people don't like the same things.



And again, like Jamal said, we internet users are a very small portion of the comic fan community. Believe it or not, there are still tons of fans that don't jump on the internet and actually write real letters to the companies. They listen to the fans, and their best sellers prove that or they wouldn't be best sellers. ;)

[The-Spirit]

I'd like to see the companies change their formats, so thier comics can be for all ages, like they use to be, instead of trying to give the older readers more of what could be put into a MAX or Vertigo title. I don't like some of the new things they let go on now. The rape and murder in DC, and the way the characters curse now. It doesn't make them look better. If they have to, to make comics for all ages, they can bring back the comics code. I didn't have any problems with that.
I agree there, I want some all ages books, my oldest son is almost 6 and he can almost read, I'm poised to hand him the Spider-Man reprints by Lee and Ditko as soon as he can read because I want him to enjoy comics. I hate the fact that there are so few comics that he would be able to understand and that would have stuff I wouldn't want him to read like the rape and murder the way the characters curse now. I have to go back at least 15 years for him to read stuff age appropriate until he gets to be about 14-15.

[The Scribe]

I agree there, I want some all ages books, my oldest son is almost 6 and he can almost read, I'm poised to hand him the Spider-Man reprints by Lee and Ditko as soon as he can read because I want him to enjoy comics. I hate the fact that there are so few comics that he would be able to understand and that would have stuff I wouldn't want him to read like the rape and murder the way the characters curse now. I have to go back at least 15 years for him to read stuff age appropriate until he gets to be about 14-15.

Well, they have all age books, Marvel's Adventures. Then they have MAX and Vertigo. So, why do the regular titles have to be almost like their "adult" titles? They sure aren't for all ages. I'm tired of them trying to create books for a small percent of the readers, instead of all age regular titles like they were mostly pre-1990's. The code may have to make a come back if they can't do this themselves. They will have more new readers if they can be read by people ages 13-35. I know my comics will be all ages no cursing, or sexual situations. Maybe, a bit more violent. But, the news is pretty violent.

[The-Spirit]

They will have more new readers if they can be read by people ages 13-35. I know my comics will be all ages no cursing, or sexual situations. Maybe, a bit more violent. But, the news is pretty violent.
That's the way it used to be and I'd like to see a resurgence of that. I honestly don't know how much further they can go with the "gritty realism". I hated Wonder Woman snapping that guys neck and I hated Sue Dibney being Murdered by the Atom's Ex-wife.

I was hoping the new infinite crisis was going to reset the universe again to a more simpler time, I may still but the corruption seems like it's just under the surface.