Page 2 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 ... 13 14 >
Topic Options
#506165 - 01/07/03 04:49 PM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
Matt Hawes Offline
Member

Registered: 07/13/01
Posts: 1965
Loc: Evansville, IN U.S.A.
Quote:
Originally posted by Aaron White:


But that's not the case with Strangers in Paradise or Bone or Akiko.

...



BONE has potential to be mainstream. If Jeff Smith can get the cartoon made, I am sure it can do well. AKIKO might have a little more trouble, but it is possible. SiP, though, is less likely. But you never know.

Still, with the possible exception of BONE, I don't think they'd have the mainstream appeal of BATMAN and the like.

But these are some exceptions to the rule.
_________________________
"Mainstream" Matthew Hawes

COMICS UNLIMITED
654-B E. Diamond Avenue
Evansville, Indiana 47711
(812) 423-6952

www.comicsunlimited.biz

Top
#506166 - 01/07/03 04:53 PM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
Aaron White Offline
Member

Registered: 07/18/99
Posts: 269
Loc: Birmingham, AL
Quote:
Originally posted by Matt Hawes:


How much did that Kevin Costner's ROBIN HOOD film make? Wasn't it a blockbuster the summer of its' release?


Okay, good point. So a character who's achieved cultural saturation can be a big moneymaker with the right big star in the role. But it takes something outside of the Diamond catalogue to bring comics to the attention of people who don't pay attention to comic books. When the NYT Book Review covers something like Jimmy Corrigan it has a boosting effect on sales.

Top
#506167 - 01/07/03 10:49 PM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
Chris Breach Offline
Member

Registered: 05/13/01
Posts: 87
Loc: Sydney, Australia
Quote:
Originally posted by Pat ONeill:
Matt hits the button on exactly what keeps most of what the Journalistas and other alt/indy fans tout as the real "mainstream" from reaching any substantial popularity in this country.


Hawes' not knowing the title of the books he's talking about, but basing his argument on it anyway, is what really earns him Pat's respect.

Quote:
They are, for the most part, depressing and downbeat and actually aimed at the art school crowd (picture a bunch of twenty-somethings all in various versions of black, with spiked, funny-colored hair, heavy metal jewelry and piercings) that the creators themselves are a part of and not even at the general youth population that turns movies into hits.


The Buddy Bradley stories are the chronicle of a young man growing up to discover true love and adult responsibilities, told in an episodic comedy format, by a family man in his 40s. But I've actually read them, so what would I know?

Top
#506168 - 01/07/03 11:17 PM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
darryl comix Offline
Member

Registered: 04/25/02
Posts: 1197
Loc: New York
Buddy Bradley is designed to appeal to the general American mainstream interests of the time (think early-to-mid 1990's).

Within the realm of comics, HATE is alternative, but when when you look at its intention and potential, it attempts to speak to one of America's largest demographics; the same demographic that buys the popular music and goes to the popular movies and watches the popular TV shows.

But the reality is like I already said, HATE is alternative in the comics world.

Top
#506169 - 01/08/03 07:01 AM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
Pat ONeill Offline
Member

Registered: 08/18/99
Posts: 3064
Loc: PA, USA
One other thing that's necessary to be "mainstream" in the American culture that the alt/indy crowd (with the possibly exception of Sim) have never grasped:

Regularity. Coming out on a schedule.

TV shows: Once a week, every week, like clockwork. Magazines: Once a week (or month), every week (or month), like clockwork. Popular film series: Every year or two or three (think James Bond), like clockwork.

Even the most popular novelists--yes, Danielle Steele, Robert B. Parker, John Grisham, etc.--publish pretty regularly, one or two books a year.

Oh--and however you describe Hate, the fact remains the title is a turn-off, the art style is ugly and off-putting to the casual observer, and if you can't get the casual observer to pick it up, it won't matter what the content is.
_________________________
Best, Pat

Top
#506170 - 01/08/03 07:56 AM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
NatGertler Offline
Member

Registered: 07/10/99
Posts: 4618
Quote:
Originally posted by Pat ONeill:
They are, for the most part, depressing and downbeat and actually aimed at the art school crowd (picture a bunch of twenty-somethings all in various versions of black, with spiked, funny-colored hair, heavy metal jewelry and piercings) that the creators themselves are a part of
Pat, can you actually name some of these supposed art-school, twenty-something, black-wearing, spiked-hair, heavy-metal-bejeweled alt comics creators? I know a number of the key alt comics folks, and that certainly doesn't seem to be a blanket description to me. Or are you just feigning expertise in order to attack something you don't understand, as you so often do?
Quote:
One other thing that's necessary to be "mainstream" in the American culture that the alt/indy crowd (with the possibly exception of Sim) have never grasped:

Regularity. Coming out on a schedule.
Gee, I can think of a fair number of indy comics that are more regularly on schedule than top-selling mainstream books. But somehow, your saying something is "necessary" does not make it so. Star Wars did not stop being mainstream because of its long absence. The lack of regularly-scheduled Harper Lee work does not mean that To Kill A Mockingbird is not mainstream, and the same goes for Gone With The Wind. The fact that Harry Potter volume 5 did not come out a year after volume 4 does not mean that it shan't be mainstream.

But hey, if you want to invent ridiculous reasons to belittle alternative comics, there you go!

Top
#506171 - 01/08/03 08:04 AM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
Charles Reece Offline
Member

Registered: 08/18/99
Posts: 10013
Loc: us of fuckin' a
I think Pat meant that you have to have an assembly line churning out some form of art under your imprimatur and proper name trademark to be mainstream, Nat.

As usual, Pat conflates mainstream appeal with mass art mechanization and distribution. There's nothing in the story of Maggie from LOVE & ROCKETS which couldn't be appreciated by an average reader, but how it's made and distributed does affect wider appreciation (consider that GHOST WORLD the movie had a larger viewership than any superhero comic being published*). One thing that probably does have a detrimental effect on sales is that a running narrative is interrupted by 3 month spaces. But if that's how long it takes, that's how long it takes.

*and no need to mention that any successful action spectacle, including those with superheroes, has an even larger audience. I'm not claiming that GHOST WORLD's the most potentially mainstream film out there (it'd likely be shit if it were), only that it's content has mainstream appeal (if you're talking about "mainstream" in terms of "mass art" and not some crass bean-counting LCD sort of aesthetics).
_________________________
The Gospel, wherein much Truth is written.

Top
#506172 - 01/08/03 09:00 AM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
gene phillips Offline
Member

Registered: 09/30/99
Posts: 5910
Loc: Houston, TX
Quote:
Originally posted by Matt Hawes:


Not so. If true, Buddy's sales at booksellers like Barnes & Nobles, where I am lead to believe he sells quite well, would tip the scales in his favor, right?

Buddy's stories in HATE appeal to a more limited segment of the general audience. The title "HATE" alone would cause many people to pass on the comic, as it is a negative title. Many people don't go for that, as a rule.

It's not a "Who's better than who" issue. It is one of sales and recognition. A Fellini movie, while successful in its' own right and critically acclaimed is not considered mainstream America, but TERMINATOR 2 is.


Matt,
I don't understand your point. I understood ChrisW to say that if Buddy Bradley sold more copies in a venue like chain bookstores, that IN THAT VENUE it would be a "mainstream" book, even though it would not be "mainstream" within the comic-shop venue.

Then you state that you've heard that BB does do well in the chain bookstores. So, purely going on ChrisW's pellucid definition, doesn't that make it "mainstream" IN THAT VENUE?

Top
#506173 - 01/08/03 09:01 AM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
darryl comix Offline
Member

Registered: 04/25/02
Posts: 1197
Loc: New York
You think the art of HATE is ugly and the average person wouldn't like it?

Spongebob Squarepants
Invader Zim
Ren and Stimpy
King of the Hill
Beavis and Butthead
Futurama
The Simpsons
Ed Edd and Eddie
Rugrats
Popeye
Looney Tunes/Merry Melodies
Dilbert
Cathy (yes, THAT Cathy)
etc, etc.

you can't seriously tell me that Peter Bagge's art doesn't have mainstream appeal. If anything, its MORE appealing than most comic art because its understandable, expressive, clear, and cartoony/cute.

Top
#506174 - 01/08/03 09:09 AM Re: Why are Superheroes more "Mainstream?"
darryl comix Offline
Member

Registered: 04/25/02
Posts: 1197
Loc: New York
The point of that list, of course is that there is a full spectrum of cartooning styles that are popular to mainstream America. Hate falls closer to one extreme on the spectrum, but it remains visually accessible enough.

And to say the art is "ugly" is ridiculous; that's an opinion. I'm sure people who really dug the art in Ren & Stimpy and Spongebob would disagree somewhat.

Top
Page 2 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 ... 13 14 >