11 O'Clock Comics Episode 7

[tomkaters]

I don't know about you guys but I can't wait to get a sketch from Brevoort!


I think Editors have always had alot of control and pull in stories...hell Julie Schwartz used to help plot all the stories! We just know more "behind the curtain" stuff.

You guys should change your name to "Much Ado About Nothing!"

[Wood]

You haven't, and are a smart enough reader/consumer to not do that.
But mark my words, the day is coming when the big two start making a much bigger deal about the editorial teams. David mentioned that editors are the ones who take blame when things don't go well. I've been noticing things like Breevort throwing Dan Slot under the bus for missing deadlines, and that's just not cool. I also think Breevort is the guilty party in pushing Secret Invasion into an "Event" when I think it would have been a fantastic self contained story within the two Avengers series.

It's a thin line between too much editorial control and not enough. Image suffered from unbridled creators in the 90s, and right now I feel like editorial is too heavy handed in the "creative" direction that Marvel is taking.

Just my 2 cents.

Fair enough. But in your earlier post you said that Marvel and DC were already marketing editors as stars and parts of the creative team. Now you're saying that it's on the horizon. I guess, for me, as long as they tell good stories I could care less who plays a role. If they start putting out bad comics, then we'll all find people to blame; we always do.

We fundamentally disagree on two things as it relates to this:

1) That events all suck right now
2) That it's because editors have a heavy hand in comics today

As to point 1...Secret Invasion is way too early for me to say how I feel about it; but I've genuinely enjoyed what I've read so far. I also LOVED Final Crisis #1. I have enjoyed both Annihilation events. Loved Planet Hulk. Enjoyed Civil War (but didn't love it). Thought Messiah Complex was entertaining. About the only "event" from Marvel I haven't liked was World War Hulk [thought it was a mess]. On the DC side, the recent track record is spottier for sure. Final Crisis is 1 issue in and has promise, but Countdown was an unholy mess [and they know it]. 52 was awesome in both its execution and its concept. Doing a quick tally, I would say that events have, for the most part, been generally good to great depending.

As to point 2...I think editors are the ones easiest blamed. When we love a book, series, event it's time to heap praise on the creative team. When the event sucks, all of the sudden it's because of those evil corporate suits and their editorial ne'er do wells. I say that's a) crap and b) too easy. Do you really think Mike Carlin failed on Countdown, or was it an ill conceived idea from the start that was subsequently poorly executed by Paul Dini. I would say blamed falls to both parts, right? And if Carlin gets blamed for Countdown, why are we heaping praise on the Johns/Morrison/Rucka/Waid/Giffin quintet for 52 instead of Michael Siglain and Steve Wacker?

It just makes no sense to me that every time something is a success, it's because the editors stay out of the process while every time it's a failure, it's because of their hand in the mix? No way. Marvel and DC are institutions. If an editor has as big a hand in what's going on that they can be blamed for screwing it up, you can be damned sure they are as heavy handed in the creative process on the successes, too.

At the end of the day though I ask again, where is all this Editorial Push you refer to? I'm still not seeing it. When I read Previews I don't see the blurb say...

From the man who brought you 52 and Spider Man Brand New Day...now Editor Steve Wacker is bringing you Dreaklok!

or...

If you liked what Michael Siglain did on 52, be sure to check out JSA, Nightwing and Superman!

I'm just not seeing it.

[Wood]

I don't know about you guys but I can't wait to get a sketch from Brevoort!


I think Editors have always had a lot of control and pull in stories...hell Julie Schwartz used to help plot all the stories! We just know more "behind the curtain" stuff.

You guys should change your name to "Much Ado About Nothing!"

That's the other thing Tom, I'm glad you mentioned it.

If you read Back Issue or Alter Ego, the stories usually involve a creator being told he's off a book and then being immediately reassigned to a new book. Editors changed all the time, as did writers and pencilers. There was no rhyme or reason and it's clear that most creators (save for the top dogs) really had no say and were rarely given an explanation for why they were taken off a book or re-assigned. Many just assumed it was sales related, but they didn't have a way to run something up the flag pole.

Today, thanks to the power of the internet, the process is transparent. And that's not always a good thing. Bendis has a MONSTER following in no small part b/c of the Jinxworld boards. So when Bendis says something on his boards about a book, it becomes GOSPEL. The JMS/Spider-Man thing...we would've NEVER had a view into that in the past. It would've been a decision that happened, we would've had no idea it was coming, we would've read the book and either hated it or loved it. A month or two later JMS would've been off the book and we may or may not have noticed. We would have had NO IDEA that JMS didn't want to use a "magic retcon." We also would've never heard from Joe Q in a public retort.

And it works the other way. Creators, editors and readers are all intertwined now in ways they never were before. They read what we say, they appear on our podcasts, they pimp their wares at con panels. Feedback is IMMEDIATE. The veil is gone. We're teased about books months before they hit the stands. We're presented with creative teams and then immediately react to whether it's going to be a good series and creative team BEFORE WE'VE READ AN ISSUE.

I just don't see how the wrench in the process is genuinely increased involvement from editorial. Marvel's renaissance has been attributed in no small part to the now infamous retreats. Sure the editors are involved, but when we are regaled with tales of those retreats we don't hear "Tom Breevort really had a great idea and we're running with it." No, we hear something like, "Jeph Loeb and Mark Millar and Bendis were arguing about something and then Slott threw out some other idea and then BAM! we all realized that THAT should be our next big summer event."

Again I'll say it...I'm just not seeing it.

[DGoodhart]

There are A LOT of Dixon fans out there. His work on the Bat Family created a strong following of fans. I'm one of them.

So am I, absolutely loved his early Nightwing and Birds of Prey work... so I wasn't one of "who gives a fuck crowd"...

[Chris]

So am I, absolutely loved his early Nightwing and Birds of Prey work... so I wasn't one of "who gives a fuck crowd"...

I didn't know just how big of a following he had till John Siuntres told me he's one of the biggest drawing guests on Word Balloon.

[DGoodhart]

Listening to the Episode now... Is that KY Comic Guy with the first phone call?  Christ, that was funnier than hell...

[VinceB]

You guys should change your name to "Much Ado About Nothing!"

WWC can't come fast enough. You are gonna get such a PINCH. 

Leave Chris alone.

[Mike Sims]

Listening to the Episode now... Is that KY Comic Guy with the first phone call?  Christ, that was funnier than hell...

 

I kinda got so wrapped up into making it, I forgot to say who was calling.   

[Wood]

I kinda got so wrapped up into making it, I forgot to say who was calling.   

FREAKING REDONKULOUSLY FUNNY

[tomkaters]

WWC can't come fast enough. You are gonna get such a PINCH. 

Leave Chris alone.

I kid coz I love.

[Derek Coward]

Iron sharpens Iron!

Who is buying (or telling people to buy) comics because of a given editor? I honestly can't think of a time I've bought a book because of the editor, nor can I think of a time I've had someone recommend a book to me because of it.

I became a Stephen Wacker fan from his work on 52.  He was the main reason why I bought the first few issues of Spider-Man Brand New Day.  If I know that he will be the editor on a book, then I will check it out.  On the flip side, if Mike Marts is on a book, I know that I will avoid it.

Of course I may be a special case, but I like to think of myself as the average comic book fan.

[New Mutant]

I kinda got so wrapped up into making it, I forgot to say who was calling.   

I heard you identify yourself somewhere in there.  What I didn't understand was why the fellas weren't pissing themselves during the actual episode, but now I realize.  We heard you; they didn't.  Only the editor knows for sure!  (See what I did there?)

It was brilliant indeed, KY!  Kudos and double-kudos!

Did I hear Wood say he has a secretary?

Well exCUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSE  ME!

[tomkaters]

I heard you identify yourself somewhere in there.  What I didn't understand was why the fellas weren't pissing themselves during the actual episode, but now I realize.  We heard you; they didn't.  Only the editor knows for sure!  (See what I did there?)

It was brilliant indeed, KY!  Kudos and double-kudos!

Did I hear Wood say he has a secretary?

Well exCUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSE  ME!

No kidding....Secretaries, imported beers, talking about Top Shelf.

I am surprised the yacht club let them record the show there!

[darrell]

Ill take Morrisson over Moore any day but both writers are overrated. There are times where you try to be to damn smart and that can take all the entertainment out of the story. Its a shame about Chuck dixon and dc.

[darrell]

Its not always good but i think big names are the ones that get the control now. Some of the inconsistencies with Count down and Final Crisis was due to Morrisson being allowed to write his story without making too many changes before Countdown was done. Millar took the FF from Mcduffie and even though its crap Millar will still get to do whatever he wants on the title. The samething with Bendis. A good editor should have had a more forceful hand in House of M and it could have been a good story but like usual he can pretty much do whatever he wants.

[Wood]

No kidding....Secretaries, imported beers, talking about Top Shelf.

I am surprised the yacht club let them record the show there!

Hey Vince called himself pretentious and then both Chris and I assumed he meant us; we are what we are.

[DGoodhart]

Morrison or Moore?  Morrison all the way...

[tomkaters]

Its not always good but i think big names are the ones that get the control now. Some of the inconsistencies with Count down and Final Crisis was due to Morrisson being allowed to write his story without making too many changes before Countdown was done. Millar took the FF from Mcduffie and even though its crap Millar will still get to do whatever he wants on the title. The samething with Bendis. A good editor should have had a more forceful hand in House of M and it could have been a good story but like usual he can pretty much do whatever he wants.

Thank God Morrison didn't have to change his story to match Countdown!

[Chris]

Morrison or Moore?  Morrison all the way...

I don't think I can agree with that. I enjoy Moore's work more than Morrison's when I'm thinking of their high points.
They're both brilliant.

[Papercut]

Morrison or Moore?  Morrison all the way...

Morrison v Moore. 

Tough, tough decision…especially when I started thinking about the stories/books that each created of the last 20-30 years.

Then I figured out that looking at these two writers, just like Vince alluded to that the difference between a Mark Waid and a Grant Morrison is one of both substance and style, each fulfills a different role for me.

Morrison is a racehorse of a writer that always seems to be charging in month after month, leading with his head and leaving a trail of phenomenal work behind him. The trips are frequent and dizzying at times, but well worth the ride.

Moore has become special event writer in that it'll be a year or two between projects and then he'll storm in and take a 2x4 of brilliance upside your head and then quietly saunter away again like nothing happened.



And to take this a step farther, it's like Morrison's output and consistency could be compared to film directors like Hitchcock and Scorsese (and maybe Spielberg) where not every project's a blockbuster, but not every one has to be...and at the very least, they're entertaining.

And to keep the comparison going, Moore's output would then be like Terry Gilliam's or Stanley Kubrick's or the Coen Bros's where there may have been years between projects but when the next one is ready, each has a blend of the director's unique vision and elements of their signature narrative traits that you come to expect.


Sooooo, with that being said, I'd probably be leaning towards……Morrison?  Probably based solely on the work being done today. But like Chris mentioned, it's harder when comparing the entire body of work....but I'll stick with Morrison.


At least for today.