CHUD.com Community › Forums › ARTS & LITERATURE › Comics & Anime › Millar's Theory, i.e., Prophecy of Doom!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Millar's Theory, i.e., Prophecy of Doom!

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
BOOMS AND BUSTS: MARK MILLAR EXPLAINS HIS THEORY

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Mark Millar

Being stupid, I tried to crash into the US comics scene at the worst possible time. It was the mid-nineties and the number of comic stores had halved one year and halved again the next as everyone—and I mean everyone—seemed to be losing their jobs. Those actual, grown-up proper writers and artists who’d been in full employment for the last decade were crashing and burning and a huge number of people were very quickly chasing the very small number of jobs that were around. But I remained optimistic. Why? Because I’d found this little interview with Denny O’Neil some years earlier…

The interview had been conducted in a period roughly comparable to where we are now in 2006. That is, sustained growth in the market over a number of years and a rosy outlook for the foreseeable future. Denny said something that really struck me in that interview and that was how great is was for the biz to be on such a high after the low, low lows of the seventies when Marvel were sometimes reduced to sixteen pages of story, filling the rest of a book with ads just to keep the wolves from the door. After the horrible collapse of the 70s and the big wave of firings and smaller companies going under, it was great to be sitting there, he said, in a spanking new WB-paid office and looking at a market with healthy, sustainable sales.

Sound familiar?

It certainly cheered me up and made me realize that, like any other market, the comics industry goes through booms and busts and what we were experiencing in the 90s was just a downturn soon to be followed (I prayed) by an upturn. I looked into the figures a little more, examining the market for the previous two generations and noticed that the peaks and troughs formed what was essentially a sine-graph going back to the dawn of the Golden Age in 1935. We had a peak in the 40s, a trough in the 50s, a peak in the 60s, a trough in the 70s and so on until we hit the worst trough of all in the mid-90s when the market suffered the nastiest collapse in our publishing history. The pattern seemed to be record highs (in terms of revenue and creator salaries) immediately followed by record lows where Chicken Littles everywhere predicted the death of the medium as a whole. And so, as the FINAL DEMANDS piled up on my desk and absolutely no work was to be found for long periods of time in the ‘90s, my friends and I consoled ourselves with the notion that we’d only have to tighten our belts for, er, a few years and things would be just peachy again when the pick-up of 2005 and beyond got into full swing.

Like I’ve said many times, comics tend to move in twenty years cycles. Twenty years after Crisis and Secret War we have Infinite Crisis and Civil War at the top of the charts. Where were are right now, in market terms, is very close to 1986, right down to the numbers where the initial printings on Dark Knight and Watchmen are almost identical to our big books now and the frenzied re-order activity eerily accurate too. Like 1986, we also have a phenomenal number of talented people in the biz and I would say, especially among the writers, that we have MORE right now than we had back then. I don’t think anyone’s reached the giddy creative heights of a Dark Knight or a Watchmen recently, but some have come close and it’s clear to see why the market (especially the big two) have made such significant gains in terms of growth year-on-year since the turn of the millennium. It’s an exciting time to be in this business. Marvel and DC seem more enthused about their books than they have been in a long time and the independent scene is at least as thrilled by the influx of comic-book movies as their lycra-clad cousins. A self-contained three issue mini-series is now enough to get you a movie deal and, even if you aren’t writing the screenplay yourself, you can expect anything from 500,000 dollars to even a million for single picture rights, the same again for sequels and prequels and that’s not even counting DVDs, TV rights and merchandise. As I’ve maintained in interviews throughout all this time, the best is yet to come and the boom that ran from 1986-2003 is going to be nothing compared to the boom we’re experiencing now just two decades later. The Image guys became overnight millionaires in 1992, but imagine what could be accomplished now in the multimedia age as new characters are exploited in all these different formats. The boom of the ‘60s could never have anticipated the millionaire creators of the ‘80s. Is it possible that a comic-creator generates the next Harry Potter as a series of creator-owned books? Could we be looking at the first comics billionaire a few years down the line?

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=82502
post #2 of 14
Well, the main crux of his argument is that things happen in twenty-year cycles. While Millar points out some examples of how things now relate to things circa 1986, at the core of it there's no definitive substance to this theory.

Millar seems, in some ways, to be measuring success in comics by how much multimedia presence they can gather, and how much money folks can make off of it. Which from a purely business standpoint is reasonable, but from a creative one...well...can I say Youngblood? If this supposed twenty-year cycle means that the mainstream 90's are coming back, and story takes a backseat to marketing gimmicks (the signs are already here), I take that more as a terrible prophecy of dread than anything else.

I also don't happen to believe that Marvel/DC comics nowadays are, by and large, as good as they were in 1986, but that's a personal opinion that holds no weight here. Could be I'm just an old fart.
post #3 of 14
The great thing about Mark is that you can't tell when he's sincerely convinced of something (i.e., the Caviezel/Superman fiasco) and when he's just stirring things up (the Orson Welles Batman project)-- he has that same wild-eyed enthusiasm either way. I love the guy.

I think he's positing one entirely plausible scenario, but not one that's significantly more likely than plenty of others.
post #4 of 14
The problem with his argument has already been torn apart at more places than I care to remember.

He is pulling on a lot of "if" scenarios to make this larger masterplan work. The problem with the larger masterplan is that it's based on a lot of generic scenarios.

It's like saying that you can predict the future, if you say it's going to rain in the next year. You didn't say the precise location, so if it rains somewhere...you're right.

Back to the subject of Millar's Prophecy of Doom, I feel that he's reading the industry and the market entirely wrong. The market is going to move sideways before it goes bust.

A lot of people are taking Joe Quesada's future predictions of Marvel moving with away from print based distribution and towards electronic means as a vote of no-confidence in the system. Quesada is just doing what everyone else has already come to realize. Traditional markets and venues don't exist anymore.

I'm not sure if Oni is involved, but several smaller American indie publishers are pushing towards an ITunes style download system. While it's not as advanced as what Apple can offer, it's still a step in a new direction.

Then, there are the forward movements in the Manga field and with Tokyopop in America. While, they've run into trouble with adequate payments to creators...it's a lot easier for them to create and distribute materials for the larger market.

The bottom line is if Millar or his Corporate Masters at Marvel want to change the game and prevent a bust, they have the chance.

It's just going to involved fielding out retailers, changing how they come across and making themselves more available to the consumer.

When I first started reading comics, I read the licensed books that Marvel put out. Byrne on "The Further Adventures of Indiana Jones", Duffy and Simonson on "Star Wars" and Larry Hama on "G.I. Joe". Why did I read those first? Because, I was new to the stuff and I liked what I knew.

But, how did I even know those books were out there? Simple. Commercials ran daily with "G.I. Joe" cartoons that advertised that these books were out. You knew what they looked like and they were cool. You didn't have to drop three bucks on them and they could be found at a convience store or general gas station.

They were widely available and Marvel/DC/Star Comics/What-Have-You let potential customers know they exist.

If the industry goes to shit, it's only for one reason. They became so much of a niche market, that no one gave a fuck anymore.
post #5 of 14
Electronic distribution is going to become a necessity if comics are to survive. As print quality continues to become more of a priority, the printing costs go up, the comics prices rise, and comics become even more of a niche market, preaching to the converted. Selling online "eComics" would allow the prices to drop, and convert a new generation.

And then there's the movies. Avi Arad's contention that the future of the Marvel stable of characters was in the movies seems to have been right on the nose. I can easily see a future in which the primary medium for Spider-Man and X-Men is the movies, with the comics being secondary, even tertiary, to their success. It can certainly be argued that more people saw the Spider-Man movies than ever picked up the comic books. The potential audience is too big to ignore, and I doubt that most of those people were driven to start buying comics as a result of the films' success.
post #6 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg David
Electronic distribution is going to become a necessity if comics are to survive. As print quality continues to become more of a priority, the printing costs go up, the comics prices rise, and comics become even more of a niche market, preaching to the converted. Selling online "eComics" would allow the prices to drop, and convert a new generation.

And then there's the movies. Avi Arad's contention that the future of the Marvel stable of characters was in the movies seems to have been right on the nose. I can easily see a future in which the primary medium for Spider-Man and X-Men is the movies, with the comics being secondary, even tertiary, to their success. It can certainly be argued that more people saw the Spider-Man movies than ever picked up the comic books. The potential audience is too big to ignore, and I doubt that most of those people were driven to start buying comics as a result of the films' success.

Actually, I know of a lot of younger people who started to pick up the books based on the strength of "Spider-Man" and "X-Men". They're all reading Ultimate stuff only, but they seem to like it.
post #7 of 14
That pretty much describes every comic book reading friend I have.
post #8 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ServantOfDagon
That pretty much describes every comic book reading friend I have.
And, do none of them have any interest in reading the DC books? Several of them said that it's too hard to follow, but I got that person interested in reading "Justice".
post #9 of 14
Some of them will read Batman, but I did notice Vertigo's a much easier sell than regular DC.
post #10 of 14
Oh yeah, I forgot about Vertigo. Fables and Y: The Last Man goes over like gangbusters.
post #11 of 14
Don't forget Watchmen, or just mention some of the edgier elements of Preacher and they'll be on it pretty fast.

Thanks to the shitty movie, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen does take some convincing of its greatness.
post #12 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anderson
And, do none of them have any interest in reading the DC books? Several of them said that it's too hard to follow, but I got that person interested in reading "Justice".

I've always found that assertion that DC is hard to follow kind of hard to swallow. I've never thought that DC's continuity was ever any harder to get into that Marvel's (or even Ultimate Marvel's, now that that Universe is developing it's own continuity). Does one REALLY have to know the circumstances of Superman's wedding to get into Superman comics these days? Not really.

That said, Infinite Crisis is a bitch to get into if you're not a fan.
post #13 of 14
Well, see...that's the problem.

I honestly love the hell out of DC's use of the legacy characters and the folks who've stepped in to be the seventh version of the Crimson Avenger. I love that shit, because I like to see older characters still being built upon.

But, to the new fans...they don't care. They'll care if they stick with the company for a bit and learn about what has come before. But, for somebody who has just seen "Superman Returns" and wants to pick a Superman book.

They're going to be lost by the fifth page.
post #14 of 14
One of the reasons that Marvel is easier to get into is that so many of their characters are recognizable. On the instant recognition front, DC has Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. After that, the general public really doesn't have a clue. Marvel, on the other hand, after Spider-Man, X-Men and Hulk, still has a number of characters that people know at least a little bit about. If you throw Captain America, Iron Man and Thor into your story, people will have some cursory awareness of them. You can't get that from Martian Manhunter, Mister Miracle and Guy Gardner.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Comics & Anime
CHUD.com Community › Forums › ARTS & LITERATURE › Comics & Anime › Millar's Theory, i.e., Prophecy of Doom!