Defiant Comics Spotlight - May 2007

[Defiant1]

Picking a DEFIANT Comic to feature is tough. Most are either key issues that have been shown a hundred times before or they are printed in such high numbers that you'll find dog-eared and damaged copies in any quarter box. That's why I went straight for a last issue.

Dark Dominion #10


Dark Dominion took too long to establish a direction. It didn't really start to gel until #6 and then it still had a lot of crossover content to align with which kept it from having an identity of it's own. Essentially, issues one through nine were good, but they were a lot of the same ideas rehashed an tweaked a little. The monsters from the substratum all looked and acted the same. Issue #10 went a different direction and it merged South American artwork with a whole different type of monster. It was a radical change from what had been going on and it was fun. The print run was lower too. If collectors want to dip into Defiant, they really need to make sure they get the last issues early either by buying complete sets or picking them up first.

Defiant1

[gowaltrip]

You know, for the 1st time I got to wondering if Defiant could have been more of a hit if they had a typical superhero in a superhero type costume?

Correct me if I am wrong, and I could be, but did they have any hero with a traditional superhero looking costume? Off the top of my head, I cannot think of any. And maybe that was one way they were trying to be "different" and appeal to an older crowd. But I feel compared to Valiant and Broadway, overall Defiant's had a more drab look to them that maybe a superhero busting out acting like a superhero could of helped shake that off. Im sure to some it would have been just wrong...but, can a comic company survive totally on heroes of the non-superhero norm? Perhaps so, but maybe it was too much too soon.

Thoughts?

P.S. I did look and I do have that Dark Dominion #10. Pretty cool cover btw.

[CORVETTEJIM1968]

i have two thoughts. they were ahead of their time and they used up the money due to the law suit.

[Defiant1]

gowaltrip said:

You know, for the 1st time I got to wondering if Defiant could have been more of a hit if they had a typical superhero in a superhero type costume?

Correct me if I am wrong, and I could be, but did they have any hero with a traditional superhero looking costume? Off the top of my head, I cannot think of any. And maybe that was one way they were trying to be "different" and appeal to an older crowd. But I feel compared to Valiant and Broadway, overall Defiant's had a more drab look to them that maybe a superhero busting out acting like a superhero could of helped shake that off. Im sure to some it would have been just wrong...but, can a comic company survive totally on heroes of the non-superhero norm? Perhaps so, but maybe it was too much too soon.

Thoughts?

P.S. I did look and I do have that Dark Dominion #10. Pretty cool cover btw.

I think it could have worked for them.

Three things killed Defiant.

1) The River Group - They jerked around collectors with so many stupid chase cards and limited items that fans got annoyed.

2) Negative Industry Publicity - The River Group published Jim Shooter's resume and industry creators that dislike Jim raked the contents over the coals and set him up as a burnt offering. The CBG in particular dedicated every issue to negative criticism about Jim in their letter column and they stirred the pot until people like Frank Miller were even irritated with Jim's claims. They basically challenged the contents of his resume by bickering over semantics.... not the basic facts. Jim made no false claims, but people chose to interpret his claims in a twisted way so that he sounded like a liar. Fans were pretty much just baffled and saw that things weren't going to be as idealistic as they were hoping.

3) The Marvel lawsuit. Yep. It drained all the operating money out of the company. It interfered with the toy deals. It had Jim Shooter sitting in court or with lawyers when he should have been focused on making the comics the best they should be. Quality was really fading in and out when it should have been solid.

That's my opinion. I was really pissed at the CBG back then. I was pissed at the River Group. I was disappointed with the story flow, but not the actual concepts. I was really starting to see improvements and I don't believe that Defiant would have faded into oblivion had not the finacial arrangements been so screwed up.

Defiant1

[gowaltrip]

I like the explainations. Thanks...so one step further because I think you guys know far more about Jim Shooter/Valiant/Defiant/Broadway than I do. What happened, or what went wrong at Broadway? I remember the look and feel of those books seemed to me at least like they had more potential. And I remember the bad blood over Defiant when it came out. I personally remember the Binder Fiasco when Previews came out with the same book. I dont remember the bad blood with Broadway. It sort of seemed like they made a good opening and they just stopped producing comics. I dont know exactly why. I hate to sound ignorant, but I just dont remember why...?

[Defiant1]

gowaltrip said:

I like the explainations. Thanks...so one step further because I think you guys know far more about Jim Shooter/Valiant/Defiant/Broadway than I do. What happened, or what went wrong at Broadway? I remember the look and feel of those books seemed to me at least like they had more potential. And I remember the bad blood over Defiant when it came out. I personally remember the Binder Fiasco when Previews came out with the same book. I dont remember the bad blood with Broadway. It sort of seemed like they made a good opening and they just stopped producing comics. I dont know exactly why. I hate to sound ignorant, but I just dont remember why...?

I think it's a pretty safe bet that Lorne Michael's started Broadway Comics as a means to develop creative ideas and hopefully make movies from them one day. That's pretty much what he was doing with the Saturday Night Live cast.

Unfortunately, comics were at a very low point. Collectors had started an exodus from the hobby. they only thing selling in decent numbers were "bad girls"... T & A. Broadway wisely created Fatale and attempted to capitalize upon what was selling at the time. It appears that they were poised to drop a title quickly if it wasn't pulling it's own weight. Powers That Be and Shadow State were essentially anthology type books.

If you go by the straight facts, Broadway shut down because it was sold to Golden Books and Golden Books had no interest in publishing comics. They bought Broadway for the video portion of the company. Broadway wasn't pulling it's weight so it was cut.

My estimates showed that Defiant was losing sales towards the end of it's reign and titles were likely dipping down to sales in the 20,000 range. Broadway started not much better with their sales and was starting to dip down to the 10,000 copy range towards the end. Comics needed to sell better than 20,000 copies back then (and probably now also) to make money. It's a safe bet that Broadway was losing money from the beginning.

Even though Star Seed & Fatale were EXCELLENT books and starting to really get noticed, it was all happening way too slowly. I think Broadway could have turned around had the people with the money really cared to stick it out. Broadway could have been the next Valiant, but it takes patience because Jim Shooter's stories reward patience.

Defiant1