COMMENT: On Reloads and Relaunches

Answer: Everyone that bought a copy of Astonishing X-Men #1. [See the end for the Question.]

As someone who stopped buying comic books back in the early 90s - missing the worst of the speculator-driven boom and bust - and started again last year, I can see both sides of the "Relaunch/Reload" debate that seems to be flaring up on several fan sites.

As Comics Buyer's Guide pointed out in a great article a couple of months ago, the comic book industry doesn't really know very much about its audience. Other than the accepted stereotypes - predominantly young, male, into superheroes and Barbie-doll proportions - there's no strong demographic, or more importantly, psychographic - data available. Even actual sales figures are privileged information, guarded closely by publishers seemingly nervous about what the truth about the post-90s boom/bust might reveal. The clues are there, though, easy to read for anyone paying attention: expanded story arcs, trade paperbacks, multiple variations of the most well-known characters with little attention paid to the B-listers...unless Hollywood comes calling.

Despite the protestations of elitist fanboys, rebooting a title can actually be a good thing for both the industry and the readers, especially for one that's been lagging in sales and/or in need of a creative spark. Comics publishers make little to no money from print advertising and, with best-seller status ranging in the 100-125,000 copy range these days - ordered, not necessarily sold - the bulk of their revenue comes from trade paperback sales and licensing. And that's Marvel and DC, the juggernauts of the industry.

Anything not related to the X-Men or Spider-Man, Batman or Superman, is basically lucky to be published at all.

While I would be (and have been) annoyed to see books I follow regularly get the reboot, simply from a cataloging/collecting perspective, if the reboot is as good or better than what came before, then I couldn't care less what volume or issue number appears on the cover. It's when a rebooted title takes a step backwards - ie: New Mutants, good; New X-Men: Academy X, bad - that I have a problem with it. But that can happen within the confines of a long-running series, too - ie: Batman, Loeb/Lee vs Azzarello/Risso vs. Winnick/Ngyuen - with the difference being that a 6-12 month hiccup in Batman isn't going to completely tank the book.

Short of a Bill Sienkiewicz or Greg Rucka jumping onboard, reboots are generally the only way I'll check out a book I'm not familiar with, or characters I've never particularly cared for or had lost interest in. I love Sleeper's "Season" concept, and felt comfortable jumping into that series because of it; and the reboots of Spectacular Spider-man, Teen Titans, and, while not exactly the same category, Ultimate Fantastic Four - all have ended up on my monthly pull list. As a matter of fact, its reboot is the only reason I picked up the new Iron Man, and I'm planning to check out the new Legion series, a title I've never had much interest in before but its reboot has me curious.

One reboot I definitely won't be picking up, though, is the New Avengers, because the Disassembled storyline that ended the original run (and completely tore apart the iconic team) was sloppy and lacking in credibility, and the new lineup simply doesn't interest me at all. [EDIT: I caved.] In fact, it strikes me as a blantantly marketing-driven concept. The ubiquitous Wolverine in yet another title? Where does he find the time?!?

In the end, it shouldn't surprise anyone that Marvel and DC's decisions reflect an unflinching eye on the bottom line. They're corporations first and foremost and, as lacking in common sense as it generally is, their investors rank far ahead of their fans in influencing their decisions.

That said, it's a relatively small industry and the majority of the creative types that move it forward are not mindless corporate drones. Any given book's fan base holds an inordinate amount of power, if wielded properly. Taking a stance that amounts to an elitist closing of the ranks with cries of "the good old days," and contradicts the financial realities of both the industry and the average reader, isn't the proper way to do it, though. While Joe Quesada may be peeking in on a message board here and there for shits and giggles, it's highly unlikely that anything he reads there is going to influence his decisions about whether a new Moon Knight series makes sense or not. (Joe, if you're reading this, it does!)

Question: Who bears the blame for all of the rebooted titles that fanboys across the internet are up in arms about?