View Full Version : Avengers tri-monthly?
tomhayday
10-20-2009, 10:58 PM
Since Bendis announced recently that there would be a major shake up to the avengers books post siege, I've been hoping it is the return off the 'Avengers' book and the cutting of the rest.
This seemed more and more likely as Bendis kept stressing that Marvel is doing this becuase they 'want to, not because they need to'.
As nice as that sounds, Marvel is a business and cutting books with good sales is stupid, for any publisher big or small.
Then I read an interview with Quesada on Newsarama:
'A fan wondered if Marvel would ever consider applying "The Amazing Spider-Man's" thrice-monthly publishing schedule to other books. "The only other ones it might work with are X-Men and the Avengers," he said, "just because there are so many characters involved and so many stories to be told."
If they made 'Avengers' 3 times monthly that would keep sales up and focus the titles.
I for one hope it happens.
Thoughts?
I think in the future, we'll probably see the Avengers take on the Amazing Spider-Man approach.
As for X-Men, I just don't know if this would happen. There's so many books that it would almost have to be weekly to cover all of the characters. Of course, they could do a thrice monthly title with the main characters and keep the ancillary books, but with that, they'd probably be cutting into their bottom line. Why get people to buy one book, when they'll buy four?
sullivan85
10-21-2009, 01:49 PM
I'd rather keep X-Men and Avengers the way they are. I don't see it making a difference either way. We're still going to get a ton of books for either characters.
johnferrigno
10-22-2009, 01:21 AM
I just wish there was a single Avengers book that actually FELT like an Avengers book. New Avengers just doesn't feel like an Avengers book to me. If your team has Spider-Man, Wolverine, Dr. Strange, Luke Cage and Echo, you aren't the Avengers, you're the freakin' Marvel Knights. What's the matter, did Editorial tell Bendis he couldn't have Moon Knight? Did Cloak and Dagger not pick up the phone? how about the Punisher?
Dark Avengers? That's just Thunderbolts, if Thunderbolts sucked. (Since I haven't read Thunderbolts in like 5 years, it may suck now. IDK.)
Mighty Avengers is closest, but even that just seems.....off somehow. it's almost like a West Coast Avengers type vibe, or something like a new Champions team or something.
I just miss the Avengers. they shouldn't be sitting around a room somewhere talking about the news. They shouldn't be fighting street thugs. The Hood? Please! the REAl Avengers would have kicked his ass on the first page before getting to the REAL villain of the story. Nowadays, the Avengers just get the crap beat out of them, and then Hawkeye spends five pages bitching about what the Dark Avengers are wearing.
The Avengers team now is like Justice League Detroit meets Project Runway. So sad.
foggyspal
10-22-2009, 04:05 PM
I hope it doesn't go to 3 times per month. So many books I like require you to get multiple books to truly understand the story. Superman requires 4 books per month, Spidey has 3 books per month (plus the other 6 Spidey stories coming in the near future- just because I love Spidey), Blackest Night has 3 books. At $3-$4 per title, it makes some books inaccessible for me, so I would prefer no more 3 times per month books.
tomhayday
10-22-2009, 07:36 PM
I hope it doesn't go to 3 times per month. So many books I like require you to get multiple books to truly understand the story. Superman requires 4 books per month, Spidey has 3 books per month (plus the other 6 Spidey stories coming in the near future- just because I love Spidey), Blackest Night has 3 books. At $3-$4 per title, it makes some books inaccessible for me, so I would prefer no more 3 times per month books.
I kind of agree but I already think you have to read at least 3 avengers books to really know whats going on anyway at the moment. If anything, i think making 1 tri-monthly title would remove monthly books for me.
I can understand that there are going to be people who only get New Avengers for what ever reason be it financial or taste, but I don't know how you can possibly be keeping up with the 'avengers' if your only getting a book that has barely any avengers in it.
tomhayday
10-22-2009, 07:38 PM
I can understand that there are going to be people who only get New Avengers for what ever reason be it financial or taste, but I don't know how you can possibly be keeping up with the 'avengers' if your only getting a book that has barely any avengers in it.
Or people who get 1 of any of the the other avengers books. I just always think of New Avengers as the main book for whatever reason.
Marvel definitely has a wealth of riches when it comes to the Avengers and X-Men. There's just so much that you can do with them.
From a business stand point, I don't see them doing just one Avengers/X-Men title, even its tri-monthly, because they make more money releasing the books separately.
Also, in reading about Guggenheim's departure from Spidey, it seems like doing books like the Webheads requires a lot of work and time from writers and creators, and it may be hard to find another group of creators that could keep up the quality and the pace of a tri-monthly book.
tomhayday
10-22-2009, 11:46 PM
Marvel definitely has a wealth of riches when it comes to the Avengers and X-Men. There's just so much that you can do with them.
From a business stand point, I don't see them doing just one Avengers/X-Men title, even its tri-monthly, because they make more money releasing the books separately.
Also, in reading about Guggenheim's departure from Spidey, it seems like doing books like the Webheads requires a lot of work and time from writers and creators, and it may be hard to find another group of creators that could keep up the quality and the pace of a tri-monthly book.
Well maybe but i personally think that amazing spider-man has been better than New avengers for months and it comes out 3 times more often.
I think the advantage of the tri-monthly format as a reader is that you don't notice the issues that aren't that great. It's because you didn't have to wait a month for it.
If in one month spidey is 2 good and 1 bad i'm going to be happier than if new avengers has 3 in 3 months and one of the months is bad.
Well maybe but i personally think that amazing spider-man has been better than New avengers for months and it comes out 3 times more often.
I think the advantage of the tri-monthly format as a reader is that you don't notice the issues that aren't that great. It's because you didn't have to wait a month for it.
If in one month spidey is 2 good and 1 bad i'm going to be happier than if new avengers has 3 in 3 months and one of the months is bad.
That's a strong point. It just takes a lot of manpower to get that book out tri-monthly, and I just don't know if Marvel could do more than one title. I think they may try it, but we'll just have to see. I don't think that making the Avengers books tri-monthly will inherently make them better.
tomhayday
01-15-2010, 10:05 PM
this is looking more likely
http://uk.comics.ign.com/articles/106/1061476p1.html
johnferrigno
01-16-2010, 01:51 PM
The Avengers no longer exist in my world. Thank you Bendis, for killing my interest in my favorite super hero team!
legendwoodsman
01-18-2010, 12:50 AM
I'm fond of the New Avengers. I like the dynamic of having Spider-man (a long-standing hero in the Marvel U.). Luke Cage is given a great character treatment and pitting him against Avengers' foes makes sense to me. Bucky Cap and Clint Ronin make an interesting pair of co-captains (Clint is hot-headed and Bucky is level-headed). I would love to see this continue when they re-launch Avengers (at issue 900?)