Holy Batmania (1989)

[Silver Nemesis]

This is starting to become a very interesting discussion. What are the ingredients of a Batmania?

I would argue there have been three significant Batmanias in my lifetime. B89, BF and TDK. Granted, BF was more of a baby Batmania. But I sure noticed it and over the years, plenty of other members here have remarked upon it. So, it's not just me.

So, what are the ingredients of a Batmania? Based on what others have said plus my own thoughts, the factors might include:

- Novelty; Batman is not inescapably ubiquitous

- Innovation; showing wide audiences things they've never seen before in terms of the characters

- Isolation; this may not completely apply because TDK came out in a relatively crowded comic book environment

- Vision; this, again, may not completely apply since Nolan's "vision" was irl. On the other hand, that was something new for Batman at the time, so hmm

- Pop culture recognition: B89 had the Prince soundtrack, BF had the U2 and Seal songs and TDK had the mainstream raving about Ledger's performance

But is that accurate? And is there anything else?

That's a good list. One ingredient I'd add would be a growing nostalgia for an earlier iteration of Batman. For example, in the 1960s many adults felt nostalgic about the old radio and film serials they'd enjoyed as children. The overly dramatic narration and cliff-hanger endings of Dozier's Batman appealed to that nostalgia. In 1965 the first Batman film serial was rereleased in art house theatres and college campuses across America under the title 'An Evening With Batman and Robin'. Apparently it was a big hit with students and paved the way for sixties Batmania.

There's an interesting blog entry about this here: https://ordinary-times.com/2021/06/16/an-evening-with-batman-and-robin/  Here's a particularly relevant quote:

"And it was nostalgia entertainment, something we know full well today. Many theatergoers had seen the serials as children and just wanted to experience them again. These new forms of media were allowing viewers to pluck pop culture items out of the past and experience them with unprecedented immediacy. It was the beginning of an age where everything old could be new again, whenever you want and for whatever reason."

Skip ahead to 1989 Batmania and a similar nostalgia had fermented towards the Dozier Batman. I remember reruns of the sixties Batman still being incredibly popular in the summer Batman Forever came out (and yes, I remember there being a Batmania that year too), and many people were praising Schumacher's movie for intentionally veering closer to its tone ("Holy rusted metal Batman!"). By time The Dark Knight came out in 2008, a new wave of nostalgia was emerging for the sixties Batman. But people who'd watched the Burton/Schumacher movies and B:TAS as kids were now also growing up and feeling nostalgic towards those iterations.

Were a new wave of Batmania to hit now, it would need to be at least partly driven by nostalgia for an older version of Batman. One which had transcended the limitations of a niche market to achieve broader mainstream appeal. The obvious candidate for that would be Nolan's TDK trilogy. If a new lighter, funnier and more family-friendly Batman was to debut for TDK's 20th anniversary, and if it proved popular with a wider audience and affectionately parodied the serious tone of Nolan's films, then that might be our best bet for a new Batmania.

Merchandising is a major factor too. Batman toys would have to become popular with kids again. Everyone would need to be wearing Batman t-shirts and baseball caps. Music also factored into the previous Batmanias. From Nelson Riddle's iconic theme to Prince's 1989 album, Seal and U2 – music helped cement Batman's pop cultural dominance. So we'd need a new tie-in album to accompany the latest movie, or at least a really catchy new theme tune that would go viral online.

I remember a few years ago, there was a rumor going around that DC Comics was basically going to close shop, and license DC characters to Todd McFarlane to publish over at Image Comics. As sad as that would be, historically speaking, I can't say I was really opposed to the notion given the vapid talent pool over at DC, and blatant mismanagement that's been going on for years. Now would McFarlane fair any better? Who's to say? But I think it would get some buzz that, going forward, THIS is THE status quo for the major select DC Characters, and relying on Elseworlds to keep the publishing properties afloat is, effectively, being placed on the back burner.

I think that given Batman is, far and away, DC's best selling character, he like Superman would get, at least, 2 titles. Personally, the older I get, the more I think the main canon should be streamlined excessively. In order to make comics accessible to someone who knows little to nothing about them. In this case, I would actually go back to classic Batman and Robin. Ergo, it's Dick Grayson as Robin, and a lot of continuity would be erased. I love the lore as much as the next guy, but it's a sacrifice I believe I would be willing to make if A. the industry can increase access to the product without relying on the dying business model that is the LCS, and b. actually get some people, probably old school veterans at this stage, to get the ball rolling and set the standard for those to follow. Which basically means a DOGE like cleaning house of many "creatives" working at the big two today.

The industry, has become increasingly niche over the years, and asking readers to basically, 'do homework' to understand what the hell is going on, is just too much of a ask these days. Archie Comics is niche, but still incredibly accessible for any new reader. Can Marvel and DC honestly say the same without resorting to mentioning Elseworlds/Black Label and What If/ultimate titles? I don't know. Just feels the industry is going around in circles, rather than truly going for a long term remedy that, as a consequence, may run the very real risk of causing a ageing readership to spaz out.

I hadn't heard that rumour about McFarlane before. Unfortunately many of the problems afflicting DC are rampant throughout the industry. I doubt Image Comics would've handled the IP any better. Did DC's decline worsen when they moved their offices from New York to California in 2013? The decline was already underway by then, but things have only gotten worse in the years since. Then again, Marvel kept their publishing offices in New York and they're not doing any better. But I can't help thinking the ideological climate of California has contributed to DC's downfall, just as it has to so many film studios.

We've discussed the idea of a hard reboot of the DC universe before, and as time goes by it seems like an increasingly sensible suggestion. They need to apply the same ruthless streamlining process to their print and media output and start prioritising quality over quantity. This would of course entail cleaning house, and the problem there is that you not only need to get rid of the underperforming 'talent' but also the people who hired them in the first place. As long as the same management is in place, they're going to repeat the same mistakes. The best solution would be, as you say, to bring back some of the old guard – the proven talent – and let them right the ship. Then be a damn sight more judicious in selecting which younger comic creators to pass the torch to.

I also like the idea of returning the Batman stories to the era of Dick Grayson's Robin. Have a thirty-something Bruce Wayne working alongside a teenage Dick Grayson, with Alfred helping them from stately Wayne Manor, and do away with the rest of the Bat family. The Barbara Gordon Batgirl could show up eventually, but to begin with keep it simple. Take it back to the golden age of Batman and Robin. That would be a lot more accessible for newcomers.

Presenting Batman and Robin together as a crime fighting unit is absolutely crying out to be done after such a long time in the wilderness. Not in name only cameos like John Blake, but the absolute real deal. Mania is created when there's hunger, and you can't deny the dynamic duo back on the big screen in all their unabashed glory would be a big hook. I think Gunn knows that. No more excuses about why it can't or shouldn't be done, just do it.

I agree the Schumacher era would be a good place to look, but I'd be willing to go a tad lighter than that - in terms of the architecture and city ambience at least. I think the spirit of 1966 ebbing under the surface would awaken the world and help make such a film an event, juxtaposed to the business as usual that has set in. I've been critical of the new Superman film, but at least they've said "screw it" and put Krypto up there, doubled down on their decision to use the trunks and so forth. I'm willing to follow and support another Reeves film but I now feel a stronger urge for a change in direction.

It kind of feels like Batman will be treading water for a while before what should be happening finally gets to happen. The Reeves universe is still stuck in the Nolan era, and despite the more overt fantasy with Snyder, the 'go darker' vibe was still there too. Comic book movie fatigue is absolutely a thing, and I think Batman can survive. But tapping in to our inner child is where the magic is - presenting something that differs to our current existence. Begins was what people wanted in 2005, but I think that train has worn out its welcome. I think the ingredients are right for Batman and Robin to return in a 66/BF styled film, and honestly, it feels like Reeves is just a roadblock to that.

It's not about rejecting or preferring something lighter in comparison to B89 or TDK either. It's just time. Everything is of its time and every generation gets the Batman that it requires. History shows that innovation doesn't come if you stay fixed on one thing. I think colors' list is pretty accurate about what creates hype. Something obvious that seals the deal is the product matching the expectations of the audience. All the manias have done that, which is not easy and to be commended. Why is why they need to hire the right director and choose the right story. No reshoots - a clear vision and go for it.

Right. As with politics and pop culture in general, the pendulum has to swing the other way if it's to maintain momentum. Many would oppose a lighter Batman, but I'm completely in favour of it. We need a fresh new take to appeal to as wide an audience possible, and the time is ripe for a funnier more family-friendly Batman. There'd be a lot of opposition to it, but that's inevitable no matter what approach they take.

When franchises started catering only to the core fans, they run the risk becoming dependent on a niche aging fanbase. If the franchise is to survive in the long run, it needs to win over younger fans as well. That's not to say studios and publishers should ignore the core fans and only pander to the masses, as in the case of modern Star Trek. There's a balance to be struck. But kids deserve to enjoy the magic of Batman the way we did when we were children. Ultimately superhero stories are power fantasies. They're adventures that appeal to our imagination.

I also think a lot of adult fans would enjoy a lighter more innocent take on Batman. The last few years have been grim for everyone, what with a global pandemic and skyrocketing rates of depression and cost of living. People need escapist entertainment to cheer them up and take their minds off their worries for a few hours. The Caped Crusader is the perfect hero to do that.

Matt Reeves' sequel to The Batman is a tricky proposition. The first film had a positive response, but doesn't appear to be as beloved as some of the other Batman movies. It also didn't set the box office on fire the way Nolan's last two Batman films or Joker '19 did, and the announcement that the sequel won't be out until 2027 at the earliest has deflated what little hype there was. On the other hand, the response to The Penguin TV show has been overwhelmingly positive. So there's clearly interest in the Reevesverse. One solution Nerdrotic suggested is to scrap the second movie and instead make it into a TV series. Let Pattinson's Batman return on the small screen and continue as a TV franchise, similar to how Marvel's handling Daredevil. That would allow fans of the Reevesverse to get their fix while clearing the way for a different Batman to dominate the big screen. 

[thecolorsblend]

So we'd need a new tie-in album to accompany the latest movie, or at least a really catchy new theme tune that would go viral online

I'm positive that Todd Phillips could've delivered that had he actually given half a sh*t about the JOKER sequel.

That specific ingredient was already baked into the cake with Lady Gaga's participation.

But, as we all know, the sequel was an abortion. Phillips subverted audience expectations... so, as a direct result, his sequel subverted box office expectations. Great job, dummy!

[The Joker]

I'm positive that Todd Phillips could've delivered that had he actually given half a sh*t about the JOKER sequel.

That specific ingredient was already baked into the cake with Lady Gaga's participation.

But, as we all know, the sequel was an abortion. Phillips subverted audience expectations... so, as a direct result, his sequel subverted box office expectations. Great job, dummy!

Unless I've missed Phillips stating otherwise, and contrary to the click bait narrative, it was evident that the Joker sequel was going to be just as much of a risk in how it would play out, as it was with the first Joker movie. Where things were literally being filmed 100 different ways, and stuff brought up literally on the fly (Wasn't the solid white makeup Arthur has on when he kills Randall right in front of Gary Puddles an idea brought up as the film was being made?). I think the same was pretty much being done with Joker 2, as I vaguely remember some report that Phoenix was changing things with the script and such during the filming production. Indicating that the script Phillips initially wrote, the same one he took a photo of Phoenix reading and posted on Instagram, wasn't what wound up on the silver screen.

Probably not the best way to make a movie (lol), but sometimes it works out. Iron Man is guilty of this. So is Batman 1989 ("Why am I walking up all these stairs? Where am I going?"' asks Jack Nicholson. "We'll talk about it when you get to the top!" Burton responded.)

Where Joker 1 was a swing and hit. It's undeniable that Joker 2 was a swing and miss. Neither was risk adverse, and that's why I appreciate both as they are anything but standard fare when it comes to the over (CGI) saturated superhero market. I just have difficult time thinking it was purely a Rian Johnson troll job by Phillips and Phoenix, and if it was, Todd Phillips could've at least posted a social media photo prior to release, illustrating to everyone that all the Joker sequel/Harley theories SUCK!   

[The Joker]

I hadn't heard that rumour about McFarlane before. Unfortunately many of the problems afflicting DC are rampant throughout the industry. I doubt Image Comics would've handled the IP any better. Did DC's decline worsen when they moved their offices from New York to California in 2013? The decline was already underway by then, but things have only gotten worse in the years since. Then again, Marvel kept their publishing offices in New York and they're not doing any better. But I can't help thinking the ideological climate of California has contributed to DC's downfall, just as it has to so many film studios.

I think that is certainly a element as far as DC goes, but I also think that Jim Lee has literally no F's given as Chief Creative Officer of DC Comics. Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of Dan Didio, as he assuredly had his problems (apparently wanting to change direction almost immediately after DC Rebirth got started), but I'll give him the credit of being more of a leader than whatever Jim Leen has been doing (whom apparently is working on a sequel to "Hush" with Jeph Loeb ... again a band-aid and not a fix).

We've discussed the idea of a hard reboot of the DC universe before, and as time goes by it seems like an increasingly sensible suggestion. They need to apply the same ruthless streamlining process to their print and media output and start prioritising quality over quantity. This would of course entail cleaning house, and the problem there is that you not only need to get rid of the underperforming 'talent' but also the people who hired them in the first place. As long as the same management is in place, they're going to repeat the same mistakes.

We're on the same page, Silver. A reboot is just another gimmick when you still have the same dolts behind the scenes that would just continue on with their unsanctioned buffoonery. A overhaul would have to be necessary and required. It's all or nothing, unless they just want Manga to continue eating their lunch in both interest and sales.

The best solution would be, as you say, to bring back some of the old guard – the proven talent – and let them right the ship. Then be a damn sight more judicious in selecting which younger comic creators to pass the torch to.

True. As the years march on, the old school pro's are ageing just like everyone else, but whenever you watch a video with these people being interviewed, it's blatantly apparent that they still have a undeniable passion for these characters. To give these guys a good head start for a 3-5 year run, while setting up their successors, would be a pretty good starting point. As you say, less about quantity, and more about quality. When you have facsimile editions recognizably outselling a good portion of your current product, you have a business problem, and it's not just readers being stuck on nostalgia.

I also like the idea of returning the Batman stories to the era of Dick Grayson's Robin. Have a thirty-something Bruce Wayne working alongside a teenage Dick Grayson, with Alfred helping them from stately Wayne Manor, and do away with the rest of the Bat family. The Barbara Gordon Batgirl could show up eventually, but to begin with keep it simple. Take it back to the golden age of Batman and Robin. That would be a lot more accessible for newcomers.

That's what I'm thinking. It's less about a reboot, but more of a RESET. Bring back the more bronze age approach to storytelling (which would mean setting perimeters like stories being one-and-done, or 2-parters if it's necesssary, ect), and I would apply something of a laid back approach to continuity. Where a villain like Bane wouldn't have to be re-introduced (Want to read his intro for this new status quo? It's all right there in Vengeance of Bane by Dixon and Nolan), and the undertaking to storytelling would be akin to the bronze age/BTAS form. Straightforward, easy to follow, and almost 'comfort food' if you will. 

I'm not sure who would be the most ideal to head a duology of Batman titles under this premise, but I think Dan Jurgens for Superman books would be a no brainer for such a implementation....

[The Dark Knight]

Colors is right about BF having real hype about it. I was, what, six years old at the time? I have to say it was a great period to be a fan, and if others could experience that level of excitement they're creating a lifetime of memories.

Apart from U2 and Seal (do not underestimate the influence of these songs at all), expanding into a bigger blockbuster type film after the more claustrophobic character study of Returns was probably a reason for the excitement. Being toyetic isn't just good for merchandising either, it's good for entertainment. The B66 Movie featured the Batmobile, Batcycle, Batcopter and Batboat. It showed how fun and cool it would be to be Batman, rather than just the trauma. Add in a fully decked out cave that isn't bare bones.

I'd rather Dick, but if it has Damian I guess that is generally familiar enough but different from what has been presented in the past. Bruce being a mentor and father figure is what I want to see again, period. As for the costume, go for the blue and gray. Screw it.

As for the comics, I definitely agree there are too many out there. If people aren't buying them as they have been it doesn't seem wise to have that many titles for sale at one time. They really need to choose better plot lines first and foremost because nothing in recent times appeals to me, such as Alfred's death. The Court of Owls saga was great but that's a long time ago now. I don't see where another arc of that quality is coming from.

[thecolorsblend]

We're on the same page, Silver. A reboot is just another gimmick when you still have the same dolts behind the scenes that would just continue on with their unsanctioned buffoonery

This is the main issue. The only thing a reboot could fix is continuity. And while DC's continuity is questionable at best, that's ultimately not what's harming the company (or the industry at large).

If you want to fix the industry (if such a thing is even possible anymore), then it has to begin with rooting out the activists and extremists. After that, you can keep the existing continuity or reboot or whatever.

To tangent, certain DC Comics properties have already been rebooted into unsustainability. Chief among them are probably Superman as well as the Legion Of Super-Heroes if you ask me. I don't think yet another reboot would do either property any favors.

For as good as the Post-Crisis Superman might be, I'm truly starting to believe that Crisis On Infinite Earths, as a corrective measure for DC continuity, wasn't a good idea. Same thing with Zero Hour, Infinite Crisis, Flashpoint and every other "continuity fix" DC has ever attempted.

[Silver Nemesis]

That specific ingredient was already baked into the cake with Lady Gaga's participation.

This touches on another important ingredient for Batmania – star power. It's no secret that the modern movie star system doesn't work anymore. For the past 15-20 years, the box office appeal of traditional stars has failed to draw audiences the way they used to. Instead its brand recognition and IP that sells tickets these days. But weren't stars an important part of past Batmanias? A big selling point for the sixties TV show was all the famous faces who guest starred as villains. Batman '89 had Nicholson's star power behind it, while Forever's publicity campaign was propelled by Carrey's stardom. And we all know the role Ledger played in The Dark Knight's success. If movie stars aren't the big draw they once were, then that could be another obstacle preventing a new Batmania.

On paper, bringing in a pop star looks like a good idea for attracting viewers. Someone like Taylor Swift or Lady Gaga can attract huge crowds at their concerts, but evidently their popularity doesn't guarantee box office success when it comes to films. Not if Joker 2 is anything to go by. So how can the star factor be recreated in modern cinema? If movie stars can't sell tickets, and neither can pop stars, then who can?

Directors. Or to be more precise, a very select number of directors. People like Chris Nolan and James Cameron. Nowadays their involvement with a movie is a much better predictor of box office success than any actor or pop star. Unfortunately the current business model favoured by big studios, prioritising shared universes and big franchises using a one-size-fits-all approach to style, is not exactly accommodating towards promising auteurs. But if WB could find the next Nolan, a director whose unique and contemporary vision captivates cinemagoers the way Burton's did in 1989, then that might help Batman win favour with a wider and younger audience.

That's what I'm thinking. It's less about a reboot, but more of a RESET. Bring back the more bronze age approach to storytelling (which would mean setting perimeters like stories being one-and-done, or 2-parters if it's necesssary, ect), and I would apply something of a laid back approach to continuity. Where a villain like Bane wouldn't have to be re-introduced (Want to read his intro for this new status quo? It's all right there in Vengeance of Bane by Dixon and Nolan), and the undertaking to storytelling would be akin to the bronze age/BTAS form. Straightforward, easy to follow, and almost 'comfort food' if you will. 

As someone who generally prefers old comics over modern, I'd definitely favour standalone or two-part stories over longer storylines. I get why they do multipart stories from a marketing perspective. They can more easily package them into trade paperbacks and release them as 'graphic novels'. But a series of good standalone stories linked by a subtle arc can be just as satisfying to read in TPB form. For example, Strange Apparitions/Dark Detective. Most issues in that run work as standalone stories, but there are also plotlines that unite them into a broader narrative (the Hugo Strange saga, Bruce's relationship with Silver, etc). The Batman '66 comics also comprised standalone stories that were fun to read in a collected format.

Again, this might just be me being an old git who prefers older comics, but if we're talking accessibility then making each individual issue stand on its own merits would offer the perfect remedy to crossover fatigue. I like the idea of a kid being able to pick up a random issue of Batman or Superman and make that comic his entry point into the series. I want that kid to enjoy the one issue he owns so much that he decides to spend his pocket money buying the next issue, and the one after, until he builds a collection that constitutes his Batman or his Superman, without regard for the overwhelming volume of comics and lore that came before.

I've been reading quite a few Silver and Bronze Age Superman comics lately, and while I love the Pre-Crisis version I've got to admit that John Byrne's re-launch was a great way of giving the character a clean slate and creating an entry point for new readers. I've never considered 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' a canonical conclusion to the Earth-One Superman's story, but it does work as a possible final story that draws a line of demarcation before the restart. In retrospect, I wish they'd done that for every major DC character.

I suppose The Dark Knight Returns could be viewed as the Batman equivalent, as Bruce's age in that story roughly corresponds with the Silver Age/Adam West Batman. I don't think TDK is the canonical conclusion to the Silver Age Batman's adventures, but it works as a possible final story. Crisis on Infinite Earths proved to be the final story for the Barry Allen Flash, at least until they resurrected him years later.

Imagine if DC published a line of stories like that now. Each one offering a possible 'final story' for the current versions of DC's greatest heroes, each written and drawn by top industry talent, and each comprising no more than two or three issues. Alan Moore managed to tell an epic finale in just two issues with 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' Today's top comic writers should be able to do the same. They could make it clear that this is the end of the current DCU before everything begins anew with a clean slate. I've fallen behind with DC in recent years, but a bold move like this might just recapture my interest.

I'd rather Dick, but if it has Damian I guess that is generally familiar enough but different from what has been presented in the past. Bruce being a mentor and father figure is what I want to see again, period. As for the costume, go for the blue and gray. Screw it.

I love the blue and grey batsuit in Keaton's armoury in The Flash. Ideally I'd prefer them to drop the sculpted armour look and go for a simpler fabric, but that might be a step too far for some fans. I'd be content with something like this.

I'd like Damian (or Dick) to be portrayed as the son, with Bruce as the father/big brother, and Alfred as the uncle/grandfather. The three of them should work together fighting crime, while also looking out for each other as a family. We've had enough movies with just Bruce and Alfred. It's time to add Robin to the mix. I also want to see them living in stately Wayne Manor again and not another penthouse.

Another thing I want to see is the return of impressive villain hideouts. In old CBMs the bad guys usually had cool bases that were just as spectacular as the heroes'. Some of those sets were colossal and offered a spectacular venue for the denouement.

The last time I recall seeing an awesome villain base like that was Ozymandias's Antarctic retreat in Watchmen (2009). Bringing back practical sets like these would help restore the cinematic spectacle that separates movies from 'content' on a streaming service.

If you want to fix the industry (if such a thing is even possible anymore), then it has to begin with rooting out the activists and extremists. After that, you can keep the existing continuity or reboot or whatever.

Rooting out the activists is an essential first step towards recovery. There's no point treating the symptoms of the disease if you're going to leave the source of the infection in place.

[thecolorsblend]

I like that! Neal Adams on one side, Jim Lee on the other. I'd be happy with either one.

If we're fancasting, who do you like as the director?

[Silver Nemesis]

Whenever I think of a director who might make a good Batman film, it's usually someone that would make a gritty serious movie a la Nolan. It's hard to think of a director who could successfully put a lighter spin on the material. What we really need are some quirky idiosyncratic filmmakers who can do something new with the medium, the way David Lynch or Tim Burton did back in their primes. We need auteurs with unique styles of their own who could breathe life into stale subject matter. Hollywood just isn't producing many people like that anymore. Or maybe there are filmmakers like that around, and they're just not getting the breaks they might've got in previous decades.

I'd like the new Batman director to be an up-and-coming filmmaker that none of us have thought of. Someone who loves old Batman comics and whose talent can surmount the soul-destroying Hollywood machine to produce something unique and special. Another option might be to look outside of English-language cinema. Maybe give an Asian filmmaker a chance. A Japanese or Hong Kong director would make for an interesting pick. Can anyone else suggest a suitable director? Someone who could take the franchise in a lighter direction and not just echo what their predecessors did?

On the subject of streamlining the comics, I was just reading 'The Curse of the Atomic Skull' (Superman: The Man of Steel #7, November 1991), and the main topic on the letters page concerned the fact there were four monthly Superman titles in print at that time: Superman, Adventures of Superman, Action Comics and The Man of Steel. This was back when they had those little numbered triangles on the covers telling you which order to read them in. One fan wrote in saying that it was more like having one weekly Superman title than four monthly. Other fans wrote in praising the fact each of those titles had its own distinct style courtesy of their different creative teams.

This gave me an idea for how DC could streamline their comics while still offering enough work for creators and producing enough issues annually to release multiple trade paperbacks – why not start publishing their comics weekly instead of monthly? British comics were traditionally published once a week or once every two weeks and usually took the form of anthologies, with multiple creative teams working on them at the same time. If American comics adopted a similar strategy, they could have one weekly title for each major hero. Instead of publishing 52 titles a month, how about publishing 12 titles every week. Obviously one creative team couldn't produce multiple issues in so short a span, so you could have at least four separate creative teams working concurrently on each title under the guidance of a single editorial group.

If they were to publish 52 weekly issues a year for each title, then that would allow lots of comic creators a chance to work on the major series. It would also allow the editors a chance to test out new talent. They could reserve 10 of those 52 issues for new writers and artists. If they do a good job, give them more work. If the regular contributors attract a negative response from readers, they aren't locked into lengthy runs and can be moved onto something else. This system would also help promote standalone stories over lengthy multi-issue arcs. Occasionally the editors could give a proven writer-artist team the chance to work on a two or three-part storyline, and use new writers to cover for them while they're working on it.

This system would also be more meritocratic. Instead of a small number of people dominating a particular title with lengthy runs, you'd instead have lots of different people contributing and getting more/less work based on how well their individual issues were received by readers. It might not work, but it would be worth a try just to shake things up a bit.