Marvel and DC have been in the comic scene for decades, they have made huge impacts on comic readers everywhere. Not only with their ability to draw in the reader, but to make characters that stick with them forever throughout their lifetime. That being said, what does that do to the other comic book publishers such as; Image Comics/Vertigo Comics/Wildstorm Comics/Dark Horse Comics/Boom! Comics etc. Most of these comic publishing companies don't make superhero comics, they make other genres of comics books. I know some comic book buddies that don't even know half of that list exists.
Knowing that, what do you think this does for them? The love for superheroes will never cease, but with the approaching years to come do you think that readers are going to switch to other genres and give up on the cliche superhero plots? There are some really good comics out there in the wavelengths, Paper Girls being one of them.
Do you think readers are going to make the adjustment and start giving these comic publishing companies the credit they deserve?
Or keep on going with superheroes?
If you agree, do you think these publishing companies will get movie rights and start making even more comic films that don't have to deal with superheroes?
And even so, do you think they would make any money if they did start to make other genres of comic films?
Is there some particular reason that 2016 will be the "migration" year? Personally, I see DC and Marvel as the gateway publishers. I started with Batman graphic novels, then getting into the Batman monthly issues,and branching out into Wonder Woman New 52 (Azzarello and Chang) and Green Lantern before I picked up Saga, an Image published comic. I can't say I would have gotten Saga without first getting into DC, but man am I glad I did. It is important also to keep in mind that Marvel and DC use publisher owned characters, compared to Image and Vertigo which are creator-owned books and characters. The ownership allows for some more risks and deviations from what the big wigs would see as popular; it allows for more "art" (not that DC and Marvel can't have literary books, just that it isn't as often or easy with their characters). – nsnow9 years ago
All things being equal, comic books attract a certain audience; and different genres of comics have a specialized audience that is a subset of the whole of the comic book audience, with relatively little crossover. Barring a profound cultural shift, I think the status quo shall remain relatively intact for the foreseeable future. – JDJankowski9 years ago
There are many heroes that adhere to a strict "no-killing" rule and there are several heroes that absolutely don't. For instance, Batman and The Midnighter. Analyse which approach makes more sense from an idealistic standpoint as well as a pragmatic standpoint.
This is a fascinating concept, but terrifyingly broad. Maybe you could pick two specific heroes to contrast? Batman versus pretty much anyone else? I have Trigun on the brain because I just finished it, but a contrast between Trigun and Wolfwood would be interesting, especially because they are both mitigated versions of other's more extreme philosophies (Ren and Knives, to some extent). Also, the show definitely seemed to priviledge Vash's perspective, but, as the viewer, I'm still not sold that he's right, even in his fictional universe. – thekellyfornian9 years ago
I think adding the "Yes-Kill" rule to a character adds the ability to really flesh out a character. Most characters who kill are not unaffected. Usually they deal with moral issues and regret. A character with a "No Kill" rule, would not have these issues and therefore it'd be harder to flesh out the character and make them feel real to readers. Not to say it doesn't work, it just evokes a much different type of connection. – Tatijana9 years ago
I think it's interesting some of the greatest characters for DC do not kill and the best character, in my opinion, for Marvel, The Punisher, does. A lot. I find that interesting because typically one associates DC comics with a grittier feel and Marvel with a brighter tone. Maybe an examination of each universe and the prevailing philosophies of the leading heroes? – Bo9 years ago
I think examining the moral question--examining those situations when it is justifiable to kill for the sake of the common good--would be of great importance here. For instance, despite his no-kill stance, would it be better for Batman, in some instances, to kill in order to prevent more harm (e.g., should he kill the Joker)? – Luthien9 years ago
It's all about personal philosophy...Are you asking about what would make a character who doesn't kill kill someone? To protect those they love...
Or they will always find another way.
-Rurouni Kenshin
-Aang ,Last Airbender It is a very heroic and philosophical ideal, but can be perceived as a weakness. – Candice Evenson9 years ago
The comparison between Avengers Assemble and Avenger's films.
Avengers Assemble is a cartoon television show aired on Disney XD. It started in 2013 and was created by Stan Lee himself. Look at the comparison between the two and how the personalities are either constructed better in the cartoon series, or they lack abilities that you see in the films.
You can also get down and dirty to a depth-by-depth analysis of each character and how they are similar or different between the two the show and the film. You can also think about how Avengers Assemble can show a lot more analysis of personality traits because it is a TV show, that has at least 26 episodes. There is two seasons currently and it is available on Netflix.
Was the 2013 series REALLY created by Stan Lee? I know he's the big guy for Marvel, but wasn't the show along with the other ones now from Joe Quesada and Jeff Loeb? Stan Lee as I understand would just be the producer. – Ryan Walsh9 years ago
the avengers as a whole. not the entire show; the show was produced by a bunch of people. I was just naming Stan, for reference as to past avengers personalities if they didn't just want to focus on the films and the avengers assemble and wanted to contrast the comics as well, but I meant to say "the avengers was created by Stan Lee himself" then again it probably would still sound like I was saying it was created by Stan Lee; didn't catch that until now! thank you! – scole9 years ago
Analyze the connections that can be made between many of Marvel's films and topics present in High School Social Studies.
It would need to be distinguished which graphic novels and marvel films best cater towards specific social issues. – Ryan Errington9 years ago
i actually took a class like this in college about teaching graphic novels in the classroom and we worked on which ones would be best in the classroom, this could be really interesting – scoleman9 years ago
Might be helpful to narrow it down to a specific series of novels or a select few marvel stories/movies. At the moment it seems like a pretty broad range to work with, which could make the analysis a little jolted with so many options. – DaisySquires9 years ago
Batman has been such a big staple in comics and has remained that way for decades, why is there such a resonance with audiences? Also, the audience for comics has largely changed, as well as what people expect from their comics. What has Batman done to remain captivating for people and fresh after so long?
I think half of the appeal of Batman is the fact that he's ordinary. He has no powers, he's not from another planet- he's a man trying to do the right thing. – SomeOtherAmazon9 years ago
I agree, most of his appeal is that he's an ordinary guy. He's wealthy and a business man so you have an "American Dream" aspect there but he uses his money for good. Batman has also evolved a lot through the many adaptations and I think part of the appeal is that audiences are excited to see what spin a new director will put on him. – Kathryn9 years ago
I personally love how dark the Batman universe is. Batman goes through some pretty heavy stuff, and DC isn't afraid to press their luck with how dark things can get. I think this makes it relatable in a way, because we don't always face our problems in life with a BOOM! POW! WHOP! superhero attitude. Bruce Wayne faces his problems as a regular home being, which makes it easier for us to identify with him. He also has faults, which we see regularly. He's just like the rest of us (except for the billions of dollars). – Christina9 years ago
A major draw for me was that Bruce Wayne also went through plenty of childhood trauma, how though others saw him as wealthy and a rich spoilt brat, he had very few people to truly call his own, an issue to circumvent which he immersed himself in science and became the legend we all know him to be. – Dr. Vishnu Unnithan4 years ago
With Ms. Marvel and Batgirl of Burnside as just two examples, how are Marvel and D.C. writing young women as heroes? What sort of plot devices do they use to make them relatable? In what areas do they succeed or fail? Furthermore, analyze whether or not these characters have been successful in reaching a wider demographic for the comic industry.
Comic fans love their heroes, and their tested and true stories that have been rewritten and reimagined for well over half a century. Recently, however, there's been talk of creating new heroes, new teams, and new identities that better represent our modern ideologies and culture. What really makes a new hero worth publishing? What sort of criteria should be followed to give a character the longevity of the greats? What aspects of our society can we fuse into new heroes to further the ongoing mythology of the superhuman? Analyze whether it is about diversity, history, relatability, or something else entirely.
I like this topic and think it would make a great subject to analyze. I think as our society has evolved new heroes, teams, identities, etc. have been created that are emblematic of modern ideologies and cultural trends. The question of what makes a hero "modern" and what characteristics define this new type of character would make a great topic for exploration and discussion. – Morgan R. Muller9 years ago
At what point should comic publishers like DC and Marvel cancel a series that isn't as financially viable as was hoped? A few weeks ago, DC announced a few young comics were being cancelled early, including Green Lanter: Lost Army and Omega Men (which has been allowed to run for the original 12 issues), which was met with fairly universal backlash. Many people agree that cancelling issues after seeing sales figures for only a few issues and before even all of the issues that will be included in the trade paper back is unfair to the consumer and to a point the artist. But these publishers are companies with financial obligations, meaning that if a comic series is doing poorly, they should dump it and replace it with something that will be commercially successful.
Marvel's also got it's really drawn out reboot thing going on NOW! started in October 2012 and started, dropped, and changed up a bunch of titles off and on until they finally bit the reboot bullet in May with Secret Wars. This is another element in the early cancellation of titles that could be contrasted with the financial aspect. – Max9 years ago
