Thoughts on Annuals

October 8th, 2006

Filed under: Comics

Flipping through my collection this weekend, I started re-reading many of the old Marvel and DC Annuals. Since releasing Annuals seems to be coming back into style, I thought I’d share my thoughts on Annuals:

  • Annuals need to justify their extra expends. They need to contain a story that is simply too magnificent to fit in a regular 22-page comic. Annuals made up of several shorter stories work well too, as long as the stories are extra-special and not just filler. Reprints are not a good idea for Annuals anymore with the prevalence of Essentials, Showcases, and Masterworks. If their must be a reprint story, make it something extra special and hard to find.
  • Annuals should be based in continuity. They can be loosely based, as in the Armageddon 2001 Annuals, but should have some connection to the regular title. The Elseworld themed Annuals from several years ago didn’t seem to go over that well for just this reason. Who wants to pay out a premium for yet another reimagining of Superman?
  • On the other hand, Annuals shoudn’t be required reading for continuity. Speaking from personal experience, Annuals aren’t always easy to find and I am always frustrated to discover a story in the regular title that is dependant on knowing what happened in an Annual.
  • It’s fine to introduce new characters in an Annual (for example, Lila Cheney was introduced in New Mutants Annual #1). However, Annuals that seem to exist for the sole purpose of introducing new characters (c.f. Bloodlines, Planet DC) generally aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on.
  • Redefining chracters. or reintroducing older or little known chracters works well in an Annual. Captain Britain and Psylocke were introduced/reintroduced to American readers in New Mutants Annual #2. Amanda Sefton was revealed to be Jimaine Szardos in X-Men Annual #4. A great example is the Legion of Super-Heroes Annual #1 (1990 series). This was the first of the “Five Years Later” Annuals and it did a good job showing how the history of the Glorith-verse differed from previous history, as seen through the eyes of Ultra Boy.
  • Annuals from different stories that all tie together to tell a single story are a bad idea if each Annual is required reading to understand the whole story. You’re going to lose more readers than you gain thay way. It’s no coincidence that Atlantis Attacks, The Evolutionary War, and Days of Future Present have never been collected in trade paperback. Annuals that share a looser connection are fine. The Armageddon 2001 Annuals shared the same framing device and basic storyline, but reading them was not required to understand the whole Armageddon 2001 story.

6 Responses to “ Thoughts on Annuals ”

  1. Conor E
    October 9th, 2006 at 12:29 am

    I actually have the Days of Future Present TPB.

  2. Chris Laffoon
    October 9th, 2006 at 9:20 am

    YEEEAAAHHH!!! A single post with 2 countem 2 references to my all time favorite comics (New Mutants)…a think I’m gonna pass out and probably suffer a nose bleed. My favorite first appearance in an annual of course was Rougue in Avengers Annual #10.

  3. jake saint
    October 9th, 2006 at 10:13 am

    I like my idea (ha!) that annuals should be either
    1) creator spotlights for
    a) creators that simply don’t have time for an ongoing (or even a complete mini-series– I’m looking at you, Hollywood)
    b) old-timey veterans with nostalgia appeal

    or

    2) character spotlights for B- and C- listers without their own ongoing. Do we need another X-Men comic? Wouldn’t you prefer something different, like a Black Golia– er, a Tigra story? This seems to me a cheaper and easier measure of a character’s current appeal than waiting for dreadful numbers on a five-issue mini. If the numbers are good, move the character up to a mini, if they’re only OK, give them another shot next year, if they’re awful, wait two years and kick ‘em with the re-boot …boot.

    Big Yes to continuity, but I don’t like annuals to be a part of an ongoing’s story done by the same creators (guess which part of the Judas Contract I don’t have?) — though I gather this is pretty much the format of the well-received Ultimate annuals.

    Also, annuals should have short back-up stories used to break in new talent. Maybe that’s just ME.

  4. Lyle
    October 9th, 2006 at 3:20 pm

    I think, if I were reading comics at the time, I would have liked the elseworld annuals if only because they gave us reimagined versions of franchises who wouldn’t normally get such a treatment, like the two Legion elsewords annuals.

  5. Jer
    October 10th, 2006 at 11:55 am

    Its no coincidence that Atlantis Attacks, The Evolutionary War, and Days of Future Present have never been collected in trade paperback.

    Yes, its because the story in these books stank to high heaven AND had almost no impact on the continuing Marvel universe as a whole (seriously - there was never any fallout from the Evolutionary War or Atlantis Attacks, despite the fact that the premises of both could have led to some good follow-up stories). Why bother collecting them? Who would want to buy them? Especially at the cost that volumes of the size these would need would have. I mean, Armageddon 2001 hasn’t been collected either, despite being a slightly (only slightly) better “Annual Event” and having actual ramifications for the DC Universe (however small they turned out to be). It would be a bear to collect all of those stories, weave them together into some coherent whole, and end up with a volume that retailed for $20 or less - any of these stories would probably require 2 volumes (maybe 3) - again I ask, who would buy them?

  6. SanctumSanctorumComix
    October 11th, 2006 at 8:42 am

    Agree with you 100% on nearly all points (except 2):

    1) I would actually buy the trade to Evolutionary War & Atlantis Attacks
    *PURELY from a completitsts mentality. I’ve been trying to cheaply finish those “runs” for awhile and NO SHOPPE ever has half of the titles / issues.
    Seriously, was anybody BUYING the NAMOR title during that time? No store has those issues.

    2) Captain Britain actually came to U.S. comics in the pages of MARVEL TEAM-UP # 65-66.
    Long before New Mutants were a gleam in the Radioactiveman’s eye.

    ;-)

    ~P~
    P-TOR

Leave a Reply

« Your Weekend Moment of Psychic Nosebleed Zen: Emma Frost, part deus Monday PSA: A Salute to Our American Indians! »