Why comic book movies don’t sell comic books.
For many years the higher-ups around the offices at the Big Two had the strange idea that new comic book movies would drive sales of the material that inspired them. It’s not exactly a counter-intuitive idea, in fact, it almost seems a given. What better advertising for the source material could there be than a blockbuster summer movie? And so without fail, every time there’s a new movie out, there’s the eventual tie-in; from preludes, to roster changes, each of them designed to appeal to that ‘elusive new reader’. Eventually the synergy between on-screen and on panel would tighten in a vain attempt to make it easier for new readers to get on board. This synergy is not typically well received by fans of the publications — Spider-Man’s organic web shooters was a miss, the X-Men lost their colourful costumes, and Cerebro was no longer a weird helmet which just sort of dangled from the top of the panel — it was now that big round room as seen on the big screen. Of course it’s not all bad, but comic fans are a notorious bunch for resisting change, despite often calling for it. What do we want? Change! But not too much! No, not like that! Change it back!
The problem with the elusive new reader is that the call is usually coming from inside the house, or, in other words, the people that increase the sales of the book are typically already comic fans, they’re just not buying whatever it is you’re selling — so all that synergy is wasted energy; no one’s benefiting from seeing the screen reflected on the panel and it all ends up just pissing people off.
The truth is, the last time comic sales were effected by either the small or silver screen was way back in 1966, when the campy Adam West Batman TV series first aired — that sent sales of comics, back issues, and other products through the roof — but it was the first, last, and only time it happened — even the Richard Donner directed Superman flick (the one with Christopher Reeve) failed to ‘move the needle’.
But why? Why is the idea of movies boosting comic sales such a ridiculous concept? Well, where do you want to start?
The first problem is the oldest problem, it’s one that’s surrounded the medium since its inception and it’s not likely to change any time soon — perception. For many people comics are like tricks, they’re for kids. The funny thing is, this condescending comment will be tossed, unironically, over the cover of their Harry Potter book. Call them comics or call them graphic novels (please don’t call them graphic novels), it doesn’t matter; it’s a perception that’s sticking around.
Dispel the perception problem and you’ve still got the second issue: taste. Comics are niche, and what do niche things have? A very narrow appeal. Much in the way not everyone is a fan of science fiction, or romcoms, not everyone is going to be a fan of comics. Just because someone likes seeing Superman in a motion movie, it doesn’t mean they’re going to love seeing him in all the technicolour glory of a static picture. Chances are, the only people inspired to pick up the source material will be people already fans of the source material’s medium. It’s like movies that have been adapted from books — the only people going to buy that book are the people who are already readers.
The third and by no means final problem — comics are confusing. I’ve introduced enough people to know the bewilderment comics can bestow upon their new fans. People like to be clued in, they don’t like to feel as though they’re missing out on something, and so despite telling someone where to start, they want to devour the past 60 years of publication history almost instantly. In other words, a fictional universe with its own history is daunting, people want to understand it all from the moment they crack open the book — and if they can’t, they may just not bother at all. Well, why not renumber issues? We all know the only purpose it serves is pissing of long time readers and confusing the fuck out of new ones. Wait, why does it go from #567 to #1? And after #3 it goes back to #1??? Not only are they confusing in terms of back story, they can actually be pretty confusing to read. If you’re new to the medium and pick a book that has in any way deviated from the standard grid layout, which is pretty much any book these days, you may not know where to start — and that can be off putting. Reading, how hard can it be? You’ve been doing it the majority of your life and suddenly there’s a book with pictures, and it’s confusing the fuck out of you! Now, we may forget how confusing it can be, but I’ll hold my hand up and say there are times I still read something in the wrong order, and I’ve been reading the damn things for 18 years. To me it’s no big deal, I’ll just re-read it in the right order, but if you’re just starting out, it might be slightly off-putting to think you’re being bested by a picture book.
But the thing that’s changed the most since 1966, the double edged sword of it all, is availability; not availability of books, but the availability of the characters. Back in ’66 when that campy Batman TV show kicked off the caped-crusader’s craze, the comics were the only way to get more. Today you can go see a Spider-Man, Superman, X-Men, fuck, you can even see a Guardians of the fucking Galaxy movie, but unlike yesteryear, if you want more, you don’t need to go to the well. You can stream sequels, prequels, and spin-offs, you can TiVO the cartoons, hell, you don’t even need to just watch the characters, you can become the characters — you can play any number of games and you don’t even need a console, all you need is the dumbest smartphone and a 3G connection. If that’s not enough, all the information you could ever want about a character is at your fingertips, from Wikipedia articles to YouTube videos, source material is the last place people need to go. It’s a strange, divergent situation — the source material’s popularity wanes as the character’s popularity rises. The availability of characters and stories in other mediums may not be detrimental to the source, but it certainly isn’t helping it.
As hard as it is to believe, there was once a time when DC found itself struggling for cash but was saved by the profits from their licensing deals. Existing via profits from merchandise is a short-term plan, if you’re not producing new material your characters’ cultural currency nosedives, they’ll before long become irrelevant, and no one wants to buy the merchandise of a hero that’s long lost their lustre. Back then, the source material was needed to keep the icons in the public’s eye. Today, that’s no longer the case. We’ve reached a tipping point — at least with Marvel (DC movies suck, don’t @ me). Marvel movies have created a fan base that goes so far beyond the confines of the comic lovers, the movies are now the first exposure many people have to the characters, and while the source material is great inspiration for storylines, they no longer need to rely on them. Should the books cease publication tomorrow, the movies and merchandise could (and would) continue, unhindered. A worrying thought for those of us still in love with the medium.
Not so long ago, thanks to the Kindle, it seemed the death knell for physical books had sounded, and while there’s been something of a renaissance, this hasn’t reached comic books yet, if it ever will (it won’t). As sales of physical comic books decline, it will reach a point when it is no longer profitable — there simply wont be enough money to support the stores that are needed to house the stock, nor the staff needed to sell them. Digital is the way forward, and the industry seriously needs to start considering how they’re going to appeal to a new generation of readers, because it wont be through the movies.
