IDW's newest plans

[8of5]

A quote from IDW's Chris Ryall on StarTrek.com:

"That’s been the goal from the start, even when just working on TOS and TNG properties: to offer something for every era of Trek fans. That’ll always be our ongoing mission, too, to make sure there’s a Trek in every pullbox of any comic fan who wants one, whatever the era."

When they did risk it and do a DS9 mini-series, it seems they were disappointed in the eventual sales.

Though they didn't really help themselves by making that series another of their by-the-numbers nothing hugely special stories. It was alright, a fun read if you bothered with it, but not an incredible jump start to launch a continuing series of miniseries.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

That's all well and good, but they should be servicing BOTH markets instead of making the "diehard" fanbase feel like they've been dumped.

They have been servicing both markets. They had actually held off on buying the DS9 license because IDW was concerned it might not be viable. When they did risk it and do a DS9 mini-series, it seems they were disappointed in the eventual sales. There's been lots of IDW TOS and TNG stuff, just none of the stories have been to your liking, I guess. The "Spotlight on..." one-shots have been (mostly) great. The Byrne stuff has been critically acclaimed.

This type of thing is cyclic. They've been giving us lots of TOS, TNG and JJ spin-offs, but only the JJ stuff has sold gangbusters. So they'll supposedly concentrate on the JJ stuff for a while.

But no one's been officially "dumped" yet, have they? It's doubtful they'll be doing JJ sequels yet if Pocket Books can't play in that sandbox yet, and surely IDW's writers have mined the prequels to the first JJ movie by now. Perhaps IDW don't plan to renew their TOS, TNG and DS9 licenses next time the contract is up? If they do renew, then they'll do more for those series. If they don't, those licenses are available for other comic publishers to pick up. If they believe there's a viable market.

Maybe Andy Mangels, Tim Russ and others from here could start a new independent line and buy a "Titan" license?

The thing is, I want a comic company to buy a Star Trek license, not a TOS, TNG, DS9, whatever license. As I said here and in other threads, I want to see more of the untold stories of the Trek UNIVERSE, not just "lost voyage of Enterprise/Voyager/DS9/whoever" # googleplex.

 

[Therin of Andor]

The thing is, I want a comic company to buy a Star Trek license, not a TOS, TNG, DS9, whatever license. As I said here and in other threads, I want to see more of the untold stories of the Trek UNIVERSE, not just "lost voyage of Enterprise/Voyager/DS9/whoever" # googleplex.

Well, you're probably out of luck. Marvel had a full license last time they did ST comics - and the full license was too expensive for the sales they were getting, even though several of their titles were critically acclaimed. (Since then ENT's been added to the line-up, and IDW has said that Scott Bakula's likeness approval, and ENT's low TV ratings, hampers any thought of an ENT title from them.)

I'm sure for every darkwing_duck1 demanding all-new characters, new ships and new, untold stories, there'd be angry fans saying "Who wants to buy ST comics with no characters or ships I recognize".

 

[8of5]

The thing is, I want a comic company to buy a Star Trek license, not a TOS, TNG, DS9, whatever license. As I said here and in other threads, I want to see more of the untold stories of the Trek UNIVERSE, not just "lost voyage of Enterprise/Voyager/DS9/whoever" # googleplex.

They can and have done that with the existing license structure, Klingons: Blood Will Tell for instance told us a story from the point of view of entire new Klingon characters. The Alien Spotlight series has given us all sorts of non-standard settings (the Starfleet freighter crew in Tribbles (TOS), a story centered on a new Andorian character (TNG), the Cardassian story with almost entirely original Cardassian characters (DS9), and various familiar but obscure versions of the main settings, Reliant, Pike, etc) and of course kicked off John Byrne's Romulan series which is told mostly from the Romulan and Klingon point of view, and from Number One's ship when on the Federation side. In fact everything Byrne has done has been playing in less explored corners of the Trekverse.

One of John Byrne's strengths I feel is finding those little corners to explore. And isn't it interesting how that list also seems to be all the best reviewed series too...

 

[darkwing_duck1]

The thing is, I want a comic company to buy a Star Trek license, not a TOS, TNG, DS9, whatever license. As I said here and in other threads, I want to see more of the untold stories of the Trek UNIVERSE, not just "lost voyage of Enterprise/Voyager/DS9/whoever" # googleplex.

Well, you're probably out of luck.

I fully realize that appears to be the case.

Marvel had a full license last time they did ST comics - and the full license was too expensive for the sales they were getting, even though several of their titles were critically acclaimed. (Since then ENT's been added to the line-up, and IDW has said that Scott Bakula's likeness approval, and ENT's low TV ratings, hampers any thought of an ENT title from them.)

Why is a "generic" Trek license more expensive than one that features pre-existing characters, names, etc? I would figure that a license that stipulated you could not use Kirk, Picard, et al or their ships, etc would be cheaper, because you are borrowing fewer trademarked/copyrighted elements.

I'm sure for every darkwing_duck1 demanding all-new characters, new ships and new, untold stories, there'd be angry fans saying "Who wants to buy ST comics with no characters or ships I recognize".

There have been several people right in this thread who have turned their noses up at "more of the same"...what could be LESS that than new characters, ships, stories?

 

[Christopher]

It's doubtful they'll be doing JJ sequels yet if Pocket Books can't play in that sandbox yet, and surely IDW's writers have mined the prequels to the first JJ movie by now.

They haven't done a Kelvin miniseries or an Academy miniseries yet, so I'd say they haven't fully mined the prequel possibilities.

Maybe Andy Mangels, Tim Russ and others from here could start a new independent line and buy a "Titan" license?

Is there even such a thing as a Titan license? That might fall under TNG, since the concept is a spinoff of Nemesis.

 

[indianatrekker26]

I don't mind the shift to the JJ Abrams universe. But it's just my personal opinion. I've grown up on star trek comics as far back as the first DC comics series back in 1984. That's 20+ years of comics adventures with the TOS and TNG crews. How much more can you do with these characters when you are so limited to what you can tell about them?
I would love to see IDW take a similar route that Pocket is doing (i.e. Vanguard) and maybe have an ongoing book set aboard the Kelvin. And they can really develope the characters we saw, maybe add in characters we didn't see.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Why is a "generic" Trek license more expensive than one that features pre-existing characters, names, etc? I would figure that a license that stipulated you could not use Kirk, Picard, et al or their ships, etc would be cheaper, because you are borrowing fewer trademarked/copyrighted elements.

The only example of a cheaper "borrowing fewer" elements license for ST would be things like the old Franz Joseph "ST Technical Manual", which was only semi-licensed, and had a poorly considered contractual agreement that permitted Joseph, not Paramount, to license out his designs to "Star Fleet Battles", leaving Roddenberry and Paramount unable to insist on changes.

A ST license, AFAIK, would either be for all ST - whether the licensee tried to gather manuscripts for strictly-only "big seven" cast member stories or more vaguely-related "Lost Era" style stories - or individual TV series titles, which again could be "big seven" cast member stories or more vaguely-related "Lost Era" style stories.

TV tie-ins are nearly always closer to the parent material because that's what the audience expects. Every ST comic is somebody's first ever ST comic. Imagine seeing your first canonical ST, then buying your first direct tie-in, only to find it's set on a ship that wasn't in that movie/TV show, and features characters you didn't know? Perhaps a dream read for jaded fans, or long-time fans, but not very useful for brand new ones.

They haven't done a Kelvin miniseries or an Academy miniseries yet, so I'd say they haven't fully mined the prequel possibilities.

True. But a Kelvin mini-series does get rather distant to the movie. An "Academy" comic may be better at attracting younger comic readers, although are they a dying breed?

Is there even such a thing as a Titan license? That might fall under TNG, since the concept is a spinoff of Nemesis.

No idea, but if IDW gives up TNG, then that license too, is up for grabs. And the highest bidder could start sending "Titan" stories and TNG stories to CBS Licensing for possible approval.

 

[JoeZhang]

TV tie-ins are nearly always closer to the parent material because that's what the audience expects. Every ST comic is somebody's first ever ST comic. Imagine seeing your first canonical ST, then buying your first direct tie-in, only to find it's set on a ship that wasn't in that movie/TV show, and features characters you didn't know? Perhaps a dream read for jaded fans, or long-time fans, but not very useful for brand new ones.

What does it have to be one of two extreme positions? Why can't you have on-going stories on Ships we know with old and new characters?

 

[Therin of Andor]

Why can't you have on-going stories on Ships we know with old and new characters?

Essentially we still do have that now - all the John Byrne stuff has linked up, even the issues that appeared to be more standalone!

But hasn't the comic industry determined that the days of the never-ending saga is essentially gone - and almost all titles do the mini-series or maxi-series arc now, for ease of reprinting as trades, and because comic buyers have shown they are reluctant to commit to long-running storylines? Wasn't that why long-running titles like "Superman" and "Fantastic Four" relaunched as #1 instead of going past #500? Several times? Because reader numbers were dropping off and people were given a new jumping-on point? Aren't there just as many people as ever asking "Do I have to read all the previous novels to like this new one?" Isn't that partly why Pocket discontinued numbering their ST novels? Don't people wail and moan when supposedly connected instalments of ongoing storylines don't line up properly ("Before Dishonor")?

A never-ending saga can be just as off-putting to some than a series of one-shots or mini-series.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

TV tie-ins are nearly always closer to the parent material because that's what the audience expects. Every ST comic is somebody's first ever ST comic. Imagine seeing your first canonical ST, then buying your first direct tie-in, only to find it's set on a ship that wasn't in that movie/TV show, and features characters you didn't know? Perhaps a dream read for jaded fans, or long-time fans, but not very useful for brand new ones.

You make the same assumption the PTB make, to wit: the readers/viewers are to stupid to understand, particularly if the material said up front that it was a part of the UNIVERSE, not stories about the "core characters", a la Starfleet Academy, one of the best damn Trek comic serieses ever done.

You could call it "Starfleet Adventures" or "Tales of the Starfleet" or some similar title.

Ultimately, you're probably right (or whomever it was that pointed this out earlier...I'm probably SOL wanting the licensee to take some risks...risk is something companies avoid when times are tough.

But hasn't the comic industry determined that the days of the never-ending saga is essentially gone - and almost all titles do the mini-series or maxi-series arc now, for ease of reprinting as trades, and because comic buyers have shown they are reluctant to commit to long-running storylines?

Actually, it's the other way around. Stories have become stretched out to fit the TPB format (called "pacing for the trade"). Comics used to tell more 2 and 3 issue "stand alones" per year that also losely tied into a bigger story arc that would be resolved in the summer "annuals season" or "family wide" crossover (all the X-books, all the Avengers' books, etc).

Wasn't that why long-running titles like "Superman" and "Fantastic Four" relaunched as #1 instead of going past #500? Several times? Because reader numbers were dropping off and people were given a new jumping-on point?

No, they were relaunched because Marketing realized that #1s always sell more so they keep doing it to "spike up" the sales numbers.

Aren't there just as many people as ever asking "Do I have to read all the previous novels to like this new one?" Isn't that partly why Pocket discontinued numbering their ST novels? Don't people wail and moan when supposedly connected instalments of ongoing storylines don't line up properly ("Before Dishonor")?

I have never encountered that in real life, only on message boards 2nd hand. And even if true, some people are just that dumb. Why should we have to have our entertainment reduced to the challenge level of pablum to accomodate stupid people?

A never-ending saga can be just as off-putting to some than a series of one-shots or mini-series.

If they're poorly written, yes. Write better one shots and minis.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

merged

 

[JoeZhang]

Why can't you have on-going stories on Ships we know with old and new characters?

Essentially we still do have that now - all the John Byrne stuff has linked up, even the issues that appeared to be more standalone!

But hasn't the comic industry determined that the days of the never-ending saga is essentially gone - and almost all titles do the mini-series or maxi-series arc now, for ease of reprinting as trades, and because comic buyers have shown they are reluctant to commit to long-running storylines? Wasn't that why long-running titles like "Superman" and "Fantastic Four" relaunched as #1 instead of going past #500? Several times? Because reader numbers were dropping off and people were given a new jumping-on point? Aren't there just as many people as ever asking "Do I have to read all the previous novels to like this new one?" Isn't that partly why Pocket discontinued numbering their ST novels? Don't people wail and moan when supposedly connected instalments of ongoing storylines don't line up properly ("Before Dishonor")?

A never-ending saga can be just as off-putting to some than a series of one-shots or mini-series.

Why are all your comments about extreme positions that nobody is actually suggests? Why can't IDW do an series with on-going arcs and stand alone mini-series? It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

 

[Christopher]

True. But a Kelvin mini-series does get rather distant to the movie.

Not as distant as Spock: Reflections, which was developed and promoted as a movie tie-in. And hey, it's about a ship and characters that that were mostly created for the movie and that appeared in the movie, indeed opened the movie, so I wouldn't agree that it's distant. Heck, it's less distant from its movie origins than Titan is, because we never actually saw the Titan or its crew in Nemesis.

An "Academy" comic may be better at attracting younger comic readers, although are they a dying breed?

They'll certainly be a dying breed if nobody tries to attract them.

No idea, but if IDW gives up TNG, then that license too, is up for grabs. And the highest bidder could start sending "Titan" stories and TNG stories to CBS Licensing for possible approval.

Well, if that ever happens, I hope they call me...

But hasn't the comic industry determined that the days of the never-ending saga is essentially gone - and almost all titles do the mini-series or maxi-series arc now, for ease of reprinting as trades, and because comic buyers have shown they are reluctant to commit to long-running storylines?

Oh, not at all. Not by a very, very long shot. The storylines, if anything, have only gotten longer and more elaborate. Yes, they're structured in blocks of five or six issues to fit in trades, but they're anything but standalone. Each trade is just an installment in a long, ongoing story, the next chapter in the saga. Indeed, I've read complaints about how the various big DC events of recent years, which are marketed as distinct stories (although many consist of multiple trades apiece, I believe), have no real endings, just cliffhangers leading into the next big-event series. And other publishers are much the same.

 

[captcalhoun]

indeed, Marvel's Civil War led into the next event which led to Secret Invasion which led to Dark Reign, which begat Seige and now we have Heroic Age, although that's less an event and more a new direction in general.

 

[Therin of Andor]

have no real endings, just cliffhangers leading into the next big-event series. And other publishers are much the same.

Okay, but these events have still been done in sections, giving an illusion of shorter arcs. This is not what the OP was wanting for ST comics either.

I've been trying to think of when "Star Trek" comics have ever had an ongoing saga, from any company. No major storyline really lasted beyond eight or so issues. DC Series I's "Mirror Universe" storyline was probably the longest. The Konom subplot arc did stretch across most issues in the run. TNG's first mini-series was six issues, but only three in the middle were connected Q stories, the others were standalone one-offs.

DC Series II obviously started with the intention of ongoing storylines (Sulu being romanced by M'Ress, redrawn as M'yra; Kirk vs RJ Blaise), but Richard Arnold nixed those plans and all guests had to be written out after each arc.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Why are all your comments about extreme positions that nobody is actually suggests?

I dunno. I'm just a total failure as a human being and contributor to BBSs.

Surely not "all my comments" are extremes? So who's being extreme now? Gosh. I guess it's sometimes easier for me to give extreme examples to show that what a poster was suggesting might not be a good idea. It would be so much easier to just skip these threads altogether, but I thought I was adding something interesting to the ongoing discussion. When you're testing out ideas you don't assume they'll be grey middle-of-the-road ideas. Isn't it better to see what the black and the white look like, too? Possible extremes of a supposedly good idea?

I sit here reading the posts like everyone else. People say things here and sometimes it seems like they're being negative because they like being negative. I point out a positive, or a possible alternative view. Then I get PMs asking me whether I'm a Pocket, CBS Paramount or IDW representative, here only to stomp on fan negativity. Bizarre!

Why can't IDW do an series with on-going arcs and stand alone mini-series? It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

But they do. John Byrne's stuff, even though it has been promoted as several IDW mini-series, has all turned out to be one long, interconnected saga!

How long do you want "ongoing arcs" to be? They've done several six-issue arcs. That's six months of storyline. You'd prefer a story that won't end for a year? Two years? Ten years? Obviously IDW's marketing strategy has told them that ST fans respond well to that strategy. IDW's stategy seems quite similar to WildStorm's when they had the license.

I'd hate to see a repeat of Marvel's "Early Voyages", where letting their ST license lapse left a storyline unfinished!

People complain when the books do multi-part stories. People complain when the books are standalone. People complain when new, non-canonical, ongoing characters are introduced. People complain when characters are killed off. People complain when characters are resurrected.

People complain.

You make the same assumption the PTB make, to wit: the readers/viewers are to stupid to understand, particularly if the material said up front that it was a part of the UNIVERSE, not stories about the "core characters", a la Starfleet Academy, one of the best damn Trek comic serieses ever done.

In your opinion. I loved Pava, but much of "Starfleet Academy" felt very contrived. I never really got lost in the storylines and I hung out for appearances by familiar canonical characters.

And as far as IDW's reaearch would show, "Starfleet Academy" did not sell enough issues for Marvel to continue its license.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I loved Starfleet Academy. The first issue was rubbish, but the rest were great. The story with whats-her-name the Vulcan/Romulan spy (it's late. I'll remember the name tomorrow) was brilliantly done, IMO.
I was disappointed to see Pava as a security nobody with a one-line cameo in one of the early Titan novels. These people deserve better!

It's such a shame that SFA was cut short (along with Early Voyages)

 

[Therin of Andor]

I was disappointed to see Pava as a security nobody with a one-line cameo in one of the early Titan novels. These people deserve better!

Umm, then you haven't read enough "Titan" (or "Destiny"), because that first cameo was just a tease of things to come.

SPOILERS: http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Pava_Ek'Noor_sh'Aqabaa

 

[JD]

^Yeah. She's actually become a fairly regular recurring character in the books. She's another one of the semi-regular junior officers along with Dakal, and Torvig.