Whilst I too get tired of the neverending string of crossovers, The Infinity Trinity is the best name for a crossover in the history of all things. You just know it's going to be all Adam Warlock, Pip the Troll and Thanos tearing shit up on some intergalactic road trip. Plus, it rhymes! Rhyming titles are the future.

Maybe DC could bring back one of the characters from 52 and release the Isis Crisis.
JYD | Email | 06.19.07 - 3:10 am | #

Here's a flipside to that argument. Grant Morrison's JLA run had a series of strong stories, leading up to a cataclysmic finale which brought back elements from earlier in the run as well as the usual Morrisonian reinvention of classic DC concepts. Throughout that run there were several Crossover Events, from Byrne's Godwave rubbish or whatever it was to Morrison's own One Million. There were also key changes to lead characters, such as Wonder Woman's "death", Superman's Blue period and the Flash changing identity or something. These elements were woven into storylines seamlessly, sometimes invigorating them, but never giving the impression they would knock the title's momentum off balance.

Now I'm not suggesting this is the only way to write comics. But maybe what we're all saying when we complain about crossover overload is we're not reading well enough written stories. We're talking about the two most prominent Comics Companies in the Western World, both of whom have been in business for over fifty years. It stands to reason if you join a National Circulation Newspaper as a Sports writer as well as style and ability to deliver you're required to have an in depth knowledge of your sport. The same would go for a long running TV show. So maybe the bare minimum required to write any DC or Marvel title is a comprehensive knowledge of ALL the characters involved in the respective universe, as well as being a sharp, funny exciting writer that can deliver on time. And maybe the bare minimum for an editorial team is to have an even more comprehensive knowledge to ensure writers remain faithful to the character concepts, rather than bend them to their own needs.

And maybe then we'd all be saying what a blast these crossovers are.
Andy G | Email | 06.19.07 - 4:39 am | #

Ya beat me to it, JYD!

When is Infinity Trinity #1 (DF variant exclusive prismatic gatefold cover) coming out? Soon? Is it coming out soon?
GQ | 06.19.07 - 5:36 am | #

The question that's burning my brain now is this: Who the hell is buying all these crossovers that folks are so burnt out on? How can something be a top seller on the one hand and so greatly disliked on the other?

I know that Mike's little survey was about as unscientific and unstatistically sound as one can get, but for the desire to back off from the crossover events is pretty universal among those who responded.

I can't believe they are just an isolated subset of readers. Surely if this many of them surface in response to a question tossed off in a blog, then there are many others out there who feel the same way.

So why does this crap keep selling like it does? I just don't understand super-hero comics any more...
Eddie Mitchell | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 5:45 am | #

"But maybe what we're all saying when we complain about crossover overload is we're not reading well enough written stories. "

Well of course not. Stories created by giant committees are going to be mediocre at best.
Ziggarut | Email | 06.19.07 - 6:55 am | #

I believe that the idea that crossovers sell well is a damnable lie. Perhaps they sell proportionately better than a random noncrossover book, but those numbers only look good because the bar is so low nowadays.
Jeff Rients | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 7:38 am | #

"Well of course not. Stories created by giant committees are going to be mediocre at best"

These aren't "giant" commitees, surely. Most top notch television drama produced in the US in the last few decades has been written by commitee, or with head writers delegating.

I think it's a mistake to dismiss the crossover in principle.
Andy G | Email | 06.19.07 - 7:38 am | #

Umm.. I like big crossovers. Civil War was so much fun! And I like hardly any DC comics these days, but for Infinite Crisis I didn't mind reading a lot of them. I mean, sure, I didn't like any of the writing involved in the IC-related comics, but still it was fun to see this huge masterpiece of editing, with the whole epic scale and careful structure. What I didn't like at all was the ending, where they just pushed the big reset button and it was like nothing had changed at all. They should at least have had the guts to kill off the villain, though even if they had I think all the other status quo changes would have felt tacked-on.

But Civil War had none of those problems. Mark Millar's plots are goofy fun, Straczynski (one of my favorite writers) wrote some of the main tie-ins, Bendis is always great, etc. And the stuff with bad writing -Front Line, Runaways/Young Avengers- was skippable. So not only did it have a nice scope to it (though it could have been bigger), but on an issue-by-issue basis it was a really good read. And the changes it made couldn't have been better- The Initiative being such a cool idea (and followed up on in Avengers: The Initiative which instantly became one of my favorite books) that changes the way superheroes do things, Spider-Man unmasking leading to some really cool stories, the Avengers splitting into two (leading to the great Mighty Avengers), the Iron Man series getting much more interesting, etc. And the biggest changes didn't feel tacked-on at all- they're all coming from the premise of the story. (To be fair, there were a few tacked-on changes, such as the new Thunderbolts and (of course) The Return. But these are smaller things.) They even had the guts to kill off the antagonist in the end!

So what is there to complain about? Just the amount of money involved? They did make the main mini-series pretty self-contained, if you didn't want any of that other good stuff. And even the series that tied in didn't abandon their own stories for the most part- they integrated the war into their ongoing stories. I mean, She-Hulk kept dealing with the love spells and legal stuff, and X-Factor kept dealing with the aftermath of House of M, and Captain America kept dealing with the Red Skull's schemes and the regular group of characters, and New Avengers kept serving as Bendis's sandbox to play in, and Thunderbolts kept telling the story of Baron Zemo and the whatshisname and so on. So if you just kept reading the same books you would have read anyway, you wouldn't lose anything at all. Sure, you'd feel like you were missing out on lots of other stories, but that's only because you were! What, are people resentful that there's too much fun stuff going on at once? How would your enjoyment of a particular series be lessened? I'll grant you Amazing Spider-Man- Civil War did push it in a radically different direction during its duration. But I can't think of any other examples.

I'm hearing all these complaints about how there are "too many" crossovers, but I don't get that. It's not like the crossover is a particular kind of story, it's just a format. As long as the stories stay fresh, the crossovers will stay fresh. A criticism I could agree with, however, is that some stories that should not be crossovers are being made into crossovers. The obvious example is House of M, which was not a story big enough to call for tie-ins. A single eight-part miniseries (along the lines of Secret War or Silent War) would have been the more appropriate format. Spider-Man: The Other is a more extreme example, where a story with hints of greatness became nearly unreadable due to the involvement of a bad writer and a bad artist. But that was a different sort of crossover than HoM, CW or WWH- in The Other the different writers' work can't be separated from each other. But the bigger Marvel crossovers are a completely different issue- if you only read the main miniseries for House of M or Civil War or World War Hulk, you do get a pretty self-contained story. (Not completely, but enough.) So there's no problem.


All this is just to affirm that yes, I do love crossovers. The big, epic kind with dozens of writers involved. The ones that promise that "EVERYTHING WILL BE CHANGED!". They're just so much fun. I didn't particularly care for the New Avengers twist, but once I heard it was leading into a big epic crossover (most likely written by Bendis) I was on board. The X-Men crossover I'm a bit more cautious about, since it's the Other-type crossover where the fact that I don't like Brubaker's or Carey's X-Men work could mess up the whole thing. But still- could be fun. And the magic and space crossovers- well, I'm not interested in those stories, so why on earth should it bother me?

Long live the crossover!




...

This is the part where you all come after me with pitchforks, isn't it?
Mory Buckman | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 7:48 am | #

People say that want self-contained, fun comics; yet looking at the sales charts, those are always the comics languishing at the bottom.

Those wanting to put their money where their (metaphorical) mouths are will buy the 3rd digest of Marvel Adventures The Avengers this week; it has two of the best super-hero comics of the year collected within: the MODOC story and the "Ego the Loving Planet" story.
Dave Carter | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 8:11 am | #

Yeah, what Mike said. The amount of crossovers is sucking the coolness out of them. If Red Tornado and Ultraa fight Crazy Quilt twice a month, it starts to be less special.

Like, I remember being ecstactic about Judge Dredd/Batman the first time they crossed over. But by the third one I dont think I was even interested in picking it up. Same with the Amalgam stuff, the DC/Marvel classic All Access and, obviously, the things going on now. FInal Crisis ins't any more exciting to me than the next issue of Aquaman at this point.
caleb | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 8:14 am | #

I can't offer any sweeping summation of Marvel/DC, at least not at this hour of the morning, but I can tell you why I'm not a fan of these crossovers.

At this point I'm very much a casual fan of comics. I come into the comic store once every 2-3 weeks. I pick up about 2-5 serial comics on any given month, and I follow three manga titles.

I like to walk out of the store with comics that contain stories I can mull over. I want stuff worth spending time with. The comics I like tend to have a singular style that real pulls me in while I'm reading it. I like knowing while I'm reading a book that there's nothing like this on the stands. Some examples are Criminal by Ed Brubaker and Sean Phillips, The Spirit by Darwyn Cooke and Casanova by Matt Fraction and Gabriel Ba.

I feel the crossovers appeal to fans who are right there in the store every Wednesday, knows all the characters already and can go through a lot of books in a short period of time (how many Civil War books were there? Hundreds?). I don't have the means, patience or interest for any of that. I would feel like a reader continually trying to catch a cheap high.

The other aspect of crossovers I don't like is how, well, corporate it all feels. So many books start with X amount of plot points decided by a group. Those plot points are given to another writer who is told to fill in the spaces in between. Then the artist who starts the book leaves in two issues becuase he/she couldn't make deadlines so now the book cycles through a bunch of wannabes just to make that deadline. Or maybe they keep the original artist and the book only comes out five times a year. There's no stamp of personality on so many mainstream books.

I guess for some fans all that matters is the character. As long as Hal Jordan shows up a certain amount of times a month it could be Hacky McHackenstein writing his adventures. But I follow creators, not characters. I look for more than cheap thrills found on the surface. That's just where my brain goes, and from there I sort out what comics I dig and what I don't.

I don't know, if more superhero comics were like Iron First by Brubaker, Fraction and David Aja I'd buy more superhero books. Is it so much to ask for more chi bullets?
Ian Brill | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 9:21 am | #

"So, you want a realistic, down-to-earth show... that's completely off the wall and swarming with magic robots?"
Jon | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 9:53 am | #

The question that's burning my brain now is this: Who the hell is buying all these crossovers that folks are so burnt out on? How can something be a top seller on the one hand and so greatly disliked on the other?

Something that one needs to come to terms with here on the Comics Internets (tm) is that we are so not representative of the comics market in general that it isn't funny. This has been true at least as long as the Comics Internets (tm) consisted solely of rec.arts.comics on Usenet (which was when I discovered the Internet myself).

Even as the use of the web has grown, the profile of the people on the Comics Internets has stayed pretty consistent -- a dislike of crossovers and marketing gimmicks, and a strong pull towards books written by a small group of creators instead of scripting events driven by the editorial staff.

My impression has been that we're a minority subgroup of an already small niche group. If the folks on the Comics Internets were the dominant group in comics fandom, Wizard wouldn't sell in numbers as high as it does, crossovers wouldn't sell as well as they do, and books sold on the premise of "everything that you know is WRONG" would be shunned.

I'd like to ask the retailers here if that seems true to you -- are the folks buying your books more or less like the people who post on the blogs and messageboards around the Internet in their opinions and/or their buying habits?
Jer | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 9:57 am | #

The people reading all those books that Marvel and DC put out probably don't have much time to spend on the Internet.
Ian Brill | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 10:14 am | #

Jer - That's a point I was planning on making in my last post, before sleepiness took over. My general feeling is as you say...that folks who take the time to read/write/comment on weblogs and message boards are a minor subset, and that our opinions don't necessarily match those of readers whose involvement in the hobby begins and ends on New Comics Day. They buy 'em, read 'em, and file 'em away, and that's it 'til next Wednesday.

I can tell you that many of our customers for superhero books generally get involved in the crossover/event titles. They may grumble a little about it, sometimes, but they're still buying them. And I have a good number of customers who are downright excited about each new event, and God bless 'em.

Mory - Don't worry, you're (probably) safe.
Mikester | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 11:03 am | #

I don't like crossovers. I don't want any story to tell me which titles I have to buy to read them. In other words, if I like Johns' JSA but dislike Meltzer's JLA, I don't want a big story that forces me to buy JLA just to understand what's happening in JSA.

I do like events - sometimes. The more self-contained they are, the better. House of M was bad enough in the main title, but then each character had their own four-issue spinoff that went nowhere. (I gathered - I didn't read them.) Those Batman crossovers like War Games and Murderer where you have to read all these titles to keep up. Gah.

It's just frustrating when character integrity is sacrificed at the expense of editorial mandates. Marvel "heroes" act out of character to further the predetermined plot of Civil War. DC's heroes acting increasingly pissy with each other so that they can heal during and after Infinite Crisis.

They barely have time to react to the events in their own titles before the next one is coming up. Spider-Man dies and is reborn with some new powers, and rather than take time to deal with that and explore it, he's too busy getting a new costume and doing Tony's bidding and setting up for Civil War.

When a writer has an actual plan for the character, seeing that story interrupted by events can be extremely frustrating.

I'd rather they flip it. If the major event is going to interrupt or screw with a title character's ongoing story, they don't get to use him or her. Millar can't have Captain America for Civil War because Brubaker actually has a long-term, thought-out plan for the character.

What's wrong with just having some big stories within an ongoing?
Tom the Bomb | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 3:13 pm | #

I've always found crossovers to be very self-contained.

They're all over there somewhere.
Tom Spurgeon | Email | 06.19.07 - 3:48 pm | #

You know what I want? An AiT/PlanetLar crossover. I'm talking Werewolves on the Moon versus Astronauts in Space.

Also and not related to the conversation, but has anyone re-read Demo since the TV show Heroes wrapped up its season. Sure, it's not the same beast, but I found it interesting that both dealt with superheroes for the non-cape crowd...only one was way less continuity bound.
Chris Brown | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 3:57 pm | #

Re: Mory's comments:

I don't know if I want to live in a world where Captain America is known as "The Antagonist".
Todd Lawrence | Email | 06.19.07 - 6:40 pm | #

"These aren't "giant" commitees, surely. Most top notch television drama produced in the US in the last few decades has been written by commitee..."

Given the quality of the average TV show, this hardly disproves my point.

Apples and oranges in any case. Each committe of TV writers makes *a* show with a narrowly defined cast of characters. A modern event crossover, on the other hand, is generally made to affect the majority of titles from that pulbisher, so that there are spillover effects on every writer working for that company. To get something similar on TV you'd have to have, say, a LOST crossover that affected not just *one* other show, but *every* show that's shown on ABC.
Ziggarut | Email | 06.19.07 - 7:25 pm | #

What is the Dharma Initiative? Watch the next episode of Dancing With the Stars to find out!
Ian Brill | Email | Homepage | 06.19.07 - 9:08 pm | #

"Given the quality of the average TV show, this hardly disproves my point."

But then I was referring to quality TV, not the average.

I take the apples and oranges point but if we're continuing the analogy let's acknowledge that in production terms, shooting an episode of, as you say Lost, is a complex and time consuming process. Comics, while still requiring skill to do well, is an obviously less complex and labour intensive process. I would suggest that the amount of labor, organisation and talent that goes into a series of Lost is the same if not more than that of the combined art, writing, editorial, printing, publishing and distribution of your average comicscrossover.

My point is that no one complains that the concept of TV series suck becaus they've sat through an episode of (insert bad TV show here). They judge it on its own merits.

What appears to be prompting net moaning, I would suggest, is the lack of quality, the lack of respect for the audience, and a curious situation where most books these days are both too obscure for the passing reader and too bady thought out for the die hard.

And quite right, we in internet land don't count. We are the minority of junkies who will keep buying and selling this pap despite its quality. But remember this. Comics do not have huge sales. Civil War was not a HUGE hit. Convert these numbers to viewing figure equivalents, and all these crossovers would get canned after the Pilot.
Anonymous | 06.20.07 - 3:41 am | #

Re: crossovers & TV, IIRC there was a crossover event on NBC one night when a blackout occured that affected all of the NY-based sitcoms. I think Jerry Seinfeld fixed it all with a continuity punch.
Phill | Email | Homepage | 06.20.07 - 4:43 am | #