The ‘yay positive’ curve given to the creative direction of the X-Men’s Krakoa era following Jonathan Hickman’s exit from the line. Revealing Captain America as a long-time member of Hydra. Every decision made regarding Amazing Spider-Man since 2007 – while such editorial moves have been poorly received by fans, Marvel Comics Executive Editor Tom Brevoort says he’d rather readers be vocally outraged against a book than giving it no attention at all, as such a reaction would at least mean that people are, in some way, shape, or form, actively following a given project.
Brevoort, who in addition to his executive role also serves as the publisher’s Senior Vice President of Publishing and oversees its X-Men line, offered his take on the ever-raging debate of ‘Is there such thing as bad publicity?’ while answering a returning fan’s question for the latest entry of his Man With A Hat Substack blog.
The week prior, said fan had asked if there was any particular reason that the X-office declined to model the aesthetics of their recent ‘From The Ashes’ line-wide relaunch away after the team’s Animated Series depiction, which they argued had “the most mainstream recognition”, to which the editor explained that they chose not to do so because it would defeat the publisher’s current role as a content farm from which Disney can later produce television and film adaptations.
“X-Men ’97 and that Lego X-Mansion are based on the X-Men of a particular era—an era that fans were very vocally afraid things would be shifting back to when the progressive Krakoa era had run its course,” he explained. “But the purpose of Marvel Publishing is to be out in front, the tip of the spear, generating new ideas and new stories that can serve as creative fodder for eventual film and animation development. So trying to revert things to 1992 or whenever would seem to be defeating the purpose in a major way. Better, I think, to try to develop new status quos that future X-Men projects in film and television can draw from.”
Taking note of the passing reference to ‘fan outrage’ made by Brevoort in his post, the fan would follow-up his initial inquiry with another, this time asking “Does the online sentiment you see tend to correlate to the commercial success (or failure) of the books you put out?”
In turn, the Marvel Comics higher-up asserted, “The situation is seldom as cut-and-dried as that – especially since, for any project that you might announce, you can look around and find people holding almost any possible opinion on what is to come.”
“I will say that it’s always far better to have readers talking about a project than not, even if what they’re saying is largely negative,” he then opined. “The opposite of sales isn’t anger, it’s silence. So lots of angry people tends to correlate with a lot of people following a project, even if a bunch of them loudly do not like it.”
Notably, Brevoort is not the first member modern comic book creator to admit that ‘outrage’ is now considered a positive outcome across the industry.
Speaking to The Popverse’s Graeme McMillan in January 2024, long-time DC and current Superman Vol. 6 writer Joshua Williamson expressed his exhaustion at the fact that “Sometimes people get really angry and they spend money, which is the saddest thing.”
“But it’s been the hard lesson that I’ve learned from DC,” said the Dark Crisis writer. “It’s that when people are happy, they spend less. It sucks, but it is a pattern that I’ve seen in my time at DC.”
Speaking of Marvel Comics and outrage – Did you know they’re apparently gearing up to resurrect the real, actual Earth-616 Gwen Stacy?
Fun times ahead.