just kicking around an idea or two. doesnt really fit on this board but I'd like to get any other opinions if possible.
I stopped reading comics in the early 90s and never really came back. when I did, I contented myself with silver and bronze age books, mostly because, it felt like all the good stories had been told. Im a bit of a proponent of the idea that characyers can only have a finite set of adventures in their lives. There are only so many times spider-man can fight Electro or Doc Ock before it becomes weariningly repetative.
But this introduced the problem of what to do going forward. companies still want to sell comics. I was thinking of possible solutions. These are some of mine, set in the 90s since thats when I felt things really fall off.
1. Replace older heroes with younger new heroes
What I consider the "New Warriors" approach. The idea is bring in a younger generation of heroes, either existing ones and/or new ones to slowly supplant the older ones.
to me the advantage of this is that we get new characters and new modern adventures and hopefully the older heroes can retire gracefully. Spider-man gets to retire with mary Jane. Bruce banner gets cured. etc. I like it because it gives our heroes what they have never had, a happy ending.
the downside is that it would be hard to make the new heroes as popular as the old.
2. Move on to the 2nd generation heroes:
Or the "Spider-girl" approach. Here we get generational heroes to replace their parents.
It has the same implications as above but keeps closer ties to the originals.
3. Carry on
I feel this is one of the options marvel chose, meaning we have 60 years of spider-man stories with Peter still in his 20s. Honestly, Im not sure if there are enough days in the year to match his adventures at this point
This is kind of what happened in the 90s and after. Creating all these alternative universes makes continuity, one of marvels main appeals, redundant. But I think the MCU used this well to cherry pick good stories.
5. replace heroes with new, younger versions
This is another option marvel went with and maybe the worst one. So instead of one spider-man you have many versions, none of which could be as popular as the original. Rather than create an original character, they just replace heroes with shadowy versions of them. Of course the originals havent gone away, so we have the worst of all worlds.
Were there any other options in your opinions? Personally I would have prefered version 1 or 2 from my options. But I'm sure sales would have suffered with either option. But I think comic sales died off anyways.
I like the question, but it occurred to me that I'm now woefully unfit to answer it because I couldn't get within a thousand miles of being able to tell anyone the plot of any modern comic book. I ended my forty year love affair with mainstream new comics nearly fifteen years ago and have focused only on reprints since with a few very minor exceptions. I will get a copy of the Comic Shop News now and again and I am always struck by how few of the creators I even know anymore. My guys and gals have largely hung up their pens and moved on or sadly passed on.
But I won't total ignorance get in the way of offering my opinion. I've always been a fan of the regeneration of a hero. I liked it especially in the 80's when Rhodey became Iron Man, Super-Patriot became Cap, and Beta Ray Bill became Thor. These were the same heroes, sort of. Giving us a new generation of characters is fun too as the Avengers Next was a darn entertaining comic I thought. I like that stuff for the same reason I adore The Justice Society of America, the original great-grandfathers of the current breed of heroes.
I always thought the Crisis was a major screw-up but if it boosted sales and saved the DC line then who am I to argue. Most of it's changes were washed away before I left anyway. Truth told, I read DC is going to make their comics coincide with the movies and the TV shows. That makes sense to me really, since comic books themselves are only ancillary entertainment these days.