Marvel: C-C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!!!

So this week Marvel did a live announcement concerning Secret War and I'd just like to say one thing:

I was right.

Marvel is kind of sort of pushing the reset button on their universe.  They are breaking the long history combo with a reboot counter.  And I think this might potentially be a pretty good thing, but that's not what this is about.

Some people (read: ridiculous amounts of people) compared this to DC's Crisis on Infinite Earths when it's really a lot more like DC's Flashpoint.  Why?  Read on before you start flinging your poop at your monitor.

The event basically spells the end of several universes, two of which are definitely the standard 616 regular Marvel Universe and the 1610 Ultimate Marvel Universe.  Following the line of stories Jonathan Hickman has been writing, Earth will enter an Incursion and those two Earth's will definitely collide and sort of meld creating a new permanent Marvel Universe.  Of course several other universes will be part of this new "Battleworld" and most likely some of their histories will get tied up into this as well.  While I don't expect this hodgepodge world to exist as a puzzle, I do think it will most likely meld into one cohesive history like Nu52 (NuMarvel? Post-Flashpoint Marvel?) and become it's own world.  Now, if you followed the live feed you'd see some people just being dicks (like me) who kept claiming things about this being a reboot (like I did), and while they were right they represented the worst of the commenting crowd with most others either being wary or okay with the reveal.  Okay, about half.  But then Tom Brevoort said something, "If someone wanted to bring back Gwen Stacey, this would be the time to do it," or something to that effect about ressurecting Gwen Stacey.  

Twitter lost it's shit.

People who were simply posting along with updates became hostile, paranoid, sad, and/or angry.  Some decried the entire event. Some felt the event was irrevocably ruined.  Some felt the event was originally a great idea but now felt betrayed (which is funny since Marvel is on nobody's side).  In short, people actually turned against the event, but that wasn't the worst part.  People in a hope to establish some sort of normalcy began to turn on each other.  Some people were beyond furious their history of comics was possibly going to pot for what may potentially be a disaster, some were striking out in fear of losing ongoing books (which all ongoing books will be cancelled temporarily for the event), many were afraid of the Gwen example being evidence this event might just return comics to a state of horror.  

It was insane.  

Some poured their hearts out, some tried for calm, and everybody was so pitched it didn't matter since all sides could only field the extremes while trying to make sense of everything.  People followed and unfollowed.  People raged against walls they or others put up.  In one particular battle of names who won't be posted, one person tried to appeal for calm but did it in the worst comic fan position possible: Since he has read comics longer than the other person, the other person should get with the program and calm down.  While it's not what he meant (sort of) it's what he said, and that sent the other person into a furor because gee golly, she was definitely a comic book veteran at 12 years of collecting and with that much investment she was definitely entitled to her feelings.  Shocker, I know.  Others had similar experiences.  As an aside, I understand what the guy sort of meant because as one becomes older in any community they become dulled to the reality of that world like doctors and bill collectors and these things just don't effect them and the guy probably just wanted to share that (I hope).  If that is what he meant, he just shouldn't have been so crap about it and pull the, "MY POWER LEVEL IS HIGHER THAN YOURS!!" card, and probably should just realize the wounds were too raw to close right away. Discretion is the better part of valor and such. Some people didn't want to be told how to feel (valid), and some people felt that other opinions were the ones we should aspire to (touchy subject).  I honestly stayed out of it or just joked around by telling one particular poster "Look at it this way, maybe they bring back Gwen as Ultimate Carnage/Gwen."  Even though the person humored me with a witty "Lalalala Can't hear you!" I'm sure they were dreading this might be possible.  In fact, people were really worried the characters they've grown to love will be perverted in such a fashion.  One person claimed Peter would be outright replaced, and while he might, I think it'll most likely he'll be replaced with a MJ married Peter who is otherwise the same.  This leads me to a thought other than comic fans are the worst in any fandom.

Let's be perfectly honest:  In ten years, all the characters we know now will be different anyway.  I know people don't want bad change, but comics thrive on change.  I know I just said people's feelings are valid, but fans know this sort of thing is inevitable and this isn't at fans who are facing drastic change and are worried about their books.  This is pointed at the Gee Wun fans I also saw who probably believe comics went bad the moment Jim Hammond the Human Torch and Namor went toe to toe.  This is a chance for Marvel to spice up and shake up their roster and make changes they want but couldn't feasibly do without breaking a story ala Brand New Day. And let's face the facts that Marvel can't have Dan Slott write every freaking book to smooth things over with the fans.  People are really worried characters who just got their start will just go away.  But let's be honest:  The big examples of Ms. Marvel, Captain Marvel, and Squirrel Girl are here to stay.  You think they won't?  Ratings and sales (and the newness of Ms. Marvel and SQ) say otherwise.  Marvel is sly to the game and those three books represent some of their best writing currently.  The crowds they're attracting won't be forgotten.  Captain America (I wish was named Captain Falcon with an energy punch) and the new Thor will stay.  All recently changed characters get to stay, almost guaranteed.  Who might go?  Spidey, like I said, but will most likely be replaced with a similar Spider-Man.  Iron Man might be changed to a non-Extremis or just more jokey, less dickish Iron Man.  I'll bet thirty bucks vampire Jubliee is replaced by '92 X-Men Jubilee with the yellow jacket.  Hank Pym might get replaced/changed because he ALWAYS gets screwed in Big Events.  Maybe Scott Lang will.  The Fantastic Four are primed for it.

You know what might also happen?  A bunch of characters might get Power Girl'd, and not in the way you're thinking.  They might simply get added on to the universe.  Miles Morales I bet sticks around on the new world (Nu616?) as someone with a modified history to fit if Marvel goes full Flashpoint.  Spider-Gwen might stick around (ARGH!! HOW CAN I BETRAY PEOPLE BY SUGGESTING THIS?!?!?!)  Other long time dead characters, or minor characters, or really just anybody in need of a restart might get this treatment.  Alright, I'm joking about Spider-Gwen.  If she sticks around, she sticks to the shadows of L.A. and becomes ultra sparse.  The chance for Marvel to adapt characters actually becomes pretty unique and might potentially be good.

Clearly the next day everything more or less calmed down with some people feeling bad for their behavior, some feeling that their worlds were a little smaller from the fighting, some feeling better just simply for venting and thinking things out.  As always with comic fans life just sort of goes on until the next reboot or cash grab.  But really, we should argue and such but we shouldn't be terrible fans because of this sort of stuff.  Not when there's so much worse things happening to real people.

Did you know Dan Slott was put on Jury Duty this week?  Seriously.  And Slott had to explain what comics he worked on and a DA told him the DA knew what Slott did to Spider-Man implying possibly villainous undertones.  But that and Marvel's problem pales in comparison to Peter Simeti's cat who had to go to the vet.  Seriously, there is almost nothing more sad than a cat in a crate who needs shots. 

Do these look like happy cats?  No, they do not.  THESE look like happy cats:

Okay, so maybe cats always sort of look displeased with us humans in some way.

Don't be the reason these animals look down on us.  I'm sure they ponder why we got opposable thumbs when they're clearly more deserving.

Superman and Magic

Three posts?  One week?  I clearly have some time finally.  Perhaps I should actually be using this time to further my life, or help others, or just continue to blather on.

A pal of mine a couple days ago talked to me about ScrewAttack's Death Battle between Kirby and Majin Buu and stated Superman was lucky he didn't have to fight Buu.  I told him he was right because Buu would turn Superman into food via his junkfood attack, though I disagreed that would completely remove Superman due to how Vegetto was capable of continued fighting and Superman might be capable of the same.  It's a weird idea, since Superman is nothing like any of the characters there but that didn't matter.  My pal decided that wasn't the factor he was talking about.  He felt Buu should win since his power is fueled by and made up of MAGIC.

I about got up and slapped my buddy for that one.  But I couldn't since I really can't blame him for thinking that way and because of several other legal and physical reasons (I don't want to get beat up).  I can't believe people still believe this and that I'm doing a post on this.  So let's just do this.

Superman and how magic IS NOT a weakness

This will be easiest if I say that magic isn't a weakness of Superman as much as it is just a vulnerability of Superman.

"You just did it!  You just freaking admitted magic is a weakness!"

No.

No.

NOOOO!

Vulnerabilities and weaknesses overlap, but are not the same thing.  So let me try again.  There is no inherent weakness to magic in Superman.  If magic were truly a weakness of his, then magic should be listed as a weakness to Batman, the Flash, the President of the United States, Tony Stark, Captain America, Spider-Man, and pretty much any character who doesn't have a power which resists magic like...say... Captain Marvel Shazam (not the wizard, though he should too).  Why?  Because none of those characters have inherent resistance to magic, which puts them on the same field as Superman.  If we had to make a scale of 0-10 of magical resistance with 0 meaning no resistance and 10 meaning you're the omnipotent being of creation, Superman, Batman, and all humans would rest on 0. 

"But Mak!" you whine, spitting out Mountain Dew in contempt while using your smuggest and righteous tone, "I've read a comic once, and I know for a fact magic was stated as the outright reason for Superman's defeat!"  Sure, you did read that.  This is why I can't blame my friend for thinking that way.  Comics does itself no favors.

DC Comics has something of a continuity editing board, meaning that if someone tried to tell a Superman story where Superman tried to tell the tale of how his powers suddenly grow to project fire from his mouth and was born in Australia, the editors would fire back saying "No, change that."  The problem is this doesn't always work, and this is compounded when writers and editors don't quite understand what they're seeing/doing.  Let's not mince words, not everybody who works in the comic field understands the characters they manage or write about.  It just happens, and some writers who take over characters sometimes only know the bare bones or just what they've heard about characters.  When this happens, we have events of CIS, PIS, WIS, etc.  Then we have events where Captain Marvel punches out Superman because he charged his fists with magic, and magic is the reason as opposed to the fact Captain Marvel simply boosted his physical power output.  Or when Supergirl and Power Girl are separated by Alan Scott's ring because his barrier is made up of magic and since it's just a barrier shaped of magical energy the two Kryptonian powerhouses cannot move past it.  These are bad representations because if these were true then anybody, ANYBODY, could put on a magic ring which just sort of puts a little magic in their system and wail on Kryptonians (and presumably Daxamites), or just learn a basic barrier spell and trap Superman in a forever cage he could never escape from personally, facilitating a need for Batman and some sort of anti-magic spray.  

"But Mak, this is in the pages, it happens, therefore it's canon."  This is lazy and really just speaks to how people want a character to fit their mold without understanding what this implies.

Just as often, if not more often, Superman is also shown bashing through magical barriers, shrugging off magic fireballs, and otherwise just living.  "But Mak, the magic has to be done TO him!" YES!! We are half way there.  "No no.  I mean the magic has to come into contact to him."  And that's where we restart.  That's not true.  It's not.  Let's go back to the whole CM punching Superman deal.  Some will say it was the magic in his fists which put him down, or the magic lightning bolt which hurt Superman (lightning hurts Superman anyway, since his body isn't rubber and his nervous system is electrical like ours), but that's bunk.  Why?  Easy.  Living on Earth should then destroy Superman.  Earth is the focal point of magic in the entire universe, and it pervades it, and it is filled with magical heroes many of which have come into contact and have served alongside Superman.  It's why the Rock of Eternity is on Earth, because Earth has so much freaking magic.  Let's not even put into play that Captain Marvel is always a magic being, charged and ebbing with the stuff, and should render Superman unconscious every time they shake hands, let's look at the issue where Billy used the lightning bolt to weaken Superman because it was magic and how it pretty much goes against the rest of the issue.  Superman was being possessed by Eclipso. ECLIPSO.  Eclipso the proto-Spectre.  Eclipso is a ridiculously powerful magic being who decided to infuse Superman's body with the entirety of it's power.  MAGIC power.  If the whole "Superman is weak to the presence of magic" bit was correct, Superman should have straight up exploded if not just went all Raiders of the Lost Ark and melted into a pool.  

So let's spell out what magic and Superman do when they interact.

Superman is simply subject to the effect of the magic spell if it moves past his physical durability.  For instance, if you were some sort of magician which specializes in fire casting magic and you sent explosive fireballs at Superman, they would effect him as any explosive fireball would.  Not because Superman has a resistance to magical fire, but because Superman is normally resistant to the effects of that spell.  The source of the fire is magic, and unless the intended spell is to burn literally everything rather than just be magic caused fire, it will not effect Superman in any abnormal way.  The same goes for lightning, ice, water, etc.  However, if the intended spell is something like a sword which cuts anything or has a spell which increases it's cutting power to levels above Superman's natural durability, then Superman will be harmed.  If the spell makes people go to sleep, Superman will go to sleep.  If it's a spell that lumps a chunk of magic like a big rock, then chances are Superman can punch it into space.  It isn't hard.  It shouldn't be this hard to explain.  It shouldn't be this hard to understand.

Magic was used to show how people can exploit and work around Superman's near invincibility as a character.  Telepathy, magic, emotions, things like that as ways of showing Superman can't just walk into every fight and punch things until he wins.  Recently in the New 52, Superman had to fight Captain Comet and Comet pretty much shut him down.

So where is all the banter about Superman having an increased weakness to telepathic characters?  The matter is, telepathic character interactions are easy to map out.  Is the opposing character telepathic or stated with overt telepathic resistance?  Then 9/10 times the answer is obvious.  But magic and Superman are so intertwined with confusion on how magic works that is creates a lot of confusion and poor writing.  When it was introduced as a vulnerability for Superman some confused the idea as Superman having some sort of weakness like Kryptonite because that's how weaknesses tended to be presented for the Man of Steel.  Unknown variable causes negativity which then must be a weakness.  Kryptonite, Red Sun energy, etc.  Especially given how immediate it works, and everybody just being used to Superman tanking anything which comes his way.  It sucks because people see it and say, "Well, it's Superman.  If he can't even resist it a little it must be a weakness.  That's how Superman works!"  But it's not.  And I have no clue how people still think this.  Newcomers to comics see older fans say things like that and the cycle restarts, but I have no clue how older comic fans still say this.  Fanboyism?  Enforced internal ignorance? I have no clue.

Please enjoy this:

Once upon a time, a weakness of Superman's was not knowing how to teach lessons that made sense. And modesty

The Comic Bubble

Good day.  I hope everything is doing good for you.

Anyways last post I was talking about Variant Covers and how it was helping to inflate the Comic Bubble and potentially may be hastening the bubble burst. I didn't?  Well, it is.  But just what is the comic bubble, and what are my worries?  I guess I should somewhat explain what I be talkin' bout.

Not this sort of bubble

More like this sort of bubble, the fragile kind that when you "KAPOW" it, it just pops

See, the comic industry like any industry which relies on speculative value and work to expand influence.  Basically the comic industry like all industries will grow and deflate over time, and when it happens with comics it tends to be extreme.  But it's not because that's just how people are (though it has something to do with it) it's because how some in the comic industry are looking to turn a very quick buck.  In my previous post I talked about variant covers and market glut, and this is a huge part of it.  However there are other factors such as saturation of product, visualization, outlets, publicity and so on and so forth.  

Let me try to organize my thoughts into a slightly more coherent view and start at the bottom.

The basic market for all comic book companies are the primary comic book fandom.  These are people who generally buy comics and will spend more and take risks on different series and stories as they grow as fans and collectors.  From here comic companies test their products and see how dyed in the wool fans respond.  Then comic companies reach out to kids with toys and cartoons, and more recently the public at large with movies and tie in deals and food company advertisements and all sorts of stuff.  The merchandising aspect of comic book characters is insane and even the movies make far more money than comic books because movies are easier to get into and don't require a monthly investment.  Comic books do.  And that's where comic companies are having a hard time right now with converting movie watchers and other fans into comic purchasing fans.  This is reflected with how comic books actually begin to reflect their cinematic counterparts, such as Iron Man getting the Robert Downey Jr. effect in Keiron Gillen's relaunch of Iron Man (pre Guardians of the Galaxy which was pre Superior Iron Man).  Cap's new costume, the entire lineup of the Avengers, the Chituari becoming a Skrull subspecies as opposed to being alternate universe Skrulls, the entire Guardians of the Galaxy being changed from a cosmic horror team into a more lighthearted space adventure, the prominence of DC teams and characters who are getting movies (though it could be argued DC is simply trying hard to generate interest in these characters from two fronts).  Okay, so Marvel's a little worse about it.  But let's face it, Marvel is happy to whore it out to whomever pays up.  That's the Disney/Marvel way.  And not that this is particularly bad in some ways, but it is bad in the whole "Bubble" aspect, and here's why: Comic Character Movies are a fad.  

Sure, comic movies have been popular to some degrees since the 70's with a few successful and critical Superman films, the first couple Batman films, the first two Raimi Spider-Man/Singer X-Men films, and the Nolan Dark Knight Trilogy.  These were far from the only comic films as several were rolled out during the 2000's, but none of them really managed to catch on like the Nolan Trilogy which truly changed everything in 2005.  When Batman Begins hit, the movie going public and greater public in general began to more seriously contemplate and pay for superhero movies.  This was a big change in the industry after X3, Spider-Man 3, and Batman & Robin pretty much kept shoving superhero movies back down into the gutter.  But Batman Begins proved that the public was ready to embrace comic book characters as action heroes and Batman Begins launched them to the big time.  After Batman Begins, superhero movies were the big thing.  And not to say all superhero movies were as well received as the very next year with Superman Begins, the public wasn't as receptive.  However, Marvel found unexpected success (from many fan's at least) with Iron Man.  And from Iron Man, we all know how prevalent the superhero movie is every year now.  So for a decade starting next year, superhero films will have dominated cinema releases alongside YA movie adaptations for a decade.  It will not last.  And the comic industry is going to crash again when the movies fold?

"I don't see why the movie industry folding will crush comics, Mak.  You just said the industry has a hard time making readers out of viewers, and the readers should remain so stop being a bitch."

Wrong.  Why?  Because readers will ditch for the same reason viewers will: Burnout.

In the 90's, comics crashed due to things like oversaturation of covers, terribly written sensational stories, fatigue, and the fact you couldn't turn around without superheros trying to insert themselves into something.  Also Rob Liefeld should get some personal blame since Image (and his work in Marvel) were pinnacles of what was wrong.  And we see this now repeating with modern times with companies re-employing heavy usage of variant covers, TWISTS!! TURNS!! EXTREME RETELLINGS!!, redrilling into terrible 90's ideas, ridiculous changes to characterization, and the fact they have an Earth shattering big event every single year, sometimes more than one a year.  This is not to say comics are ONLY doing this.  When the burst happens this time, it won't be as bad as companies are doing their best (through pressure of the public) to branch out and try to appeal on levels that aren't simply extension of movie fun.  With women and minorities getting an expanded role, comic companies will not hurt as bad when they crash.  But crash they most likely will, because riding a boom on the very edge of it for a quick buck ensure that when the bubble bursts, the fall is just that much further down. I do want to talk more on this and explain why these herald a dark time, but maybe not.  We'll see.

The man who drew this, Rob Liefeld, was the highest paid comic writer and artist of the 90's.  'Nuff said.  We're also sort of returning to this mentality. 'Nuff said...?

New Week, New Topic: Variant Covers and they tie to the Comic Bubble

Alright, I'm ready to just start the rants about things I love and hate about comics and today I'm taking a shot at something I vehemently dislike: Variant Covers.

Oh lawdy, variant covers.

First off, sorry it's been a couple weeks since my previous entry but life's tough and shizz.

Second off, let me reiterate: FUCK. VARIANT. COVERS.*

*Sometimes they're okay.

Earlier yesterday I was bopping along the internet searching about comic news as I will when I came across something in The Escapist about the new Marvel Star Wars comic having 20 variant covers.  It attributes these covers to the fact this issue will outsell any other single comic book in a long long long time.  I clicked the link to Bleeding Cool (The Escapist's source) only to find out over 60 covers are planned for this series and they're only up to issue 1.  Wait... Yeah, that's right.  ISSUE FUCKING 1.  The first blitzing issue has over 60 planned variant covers.  Granted you can't hop on down to your LCS and find all sixty plus covers.  No.  Some of these will be far rarer than others, and your LCS has to shell out for X amount of copies to get access to some of them at all.  This is a direct appeal to collectors and investors in comic books and this is fucking disgusting.

FUCK THIS PRACTICE.

Let me tell you why I hate variant covers.  Do you remember the 90's for comic books?  I sure do, it's when I actually started getting into them, and I used to love comics a lot from that era since I didn't know better.  Comics during the 90's (early 90's) was the biggest time for all comic books and comics sold like hotcakes, pressing people into literally investing into comics by buying all the editions they could.  Marvel in their infinite glory and wisdom began to make variant covers by the truckload to directly appeal to speculators and collectors and the like.  This meant that many issues of comics would be sold with several versions of a cover to have people who were looking to cash in on the future but the same issue multiple times.  The same story over and over and over again just in the idea that if you were to sell this issue it would be worth so much as a collection.  

This tied in directly with the feel of excess the 90's carried.  America was doing great, economy was on the rise, do what feels good was the fun, the whole investment thing was bigger than ever.  Comics reflected this in the worst way.  We were growing out of the 80's into a more extreme decade which meant everything had to be turned up "TO THE XTREME!!"  No time for that first "E" that shit just gets in the way of how XTREME comics were becoming.  Variant covers were the ultimate expression.  Only an XTREME fan would have all the issues because the future looks so bright with dollar signs from collecting the four X-Men covers with the chromium sheen and gold/silver/regular covers to Avengers stories.  XTREME covers to match the XTREME stories.

Then the crash.

See, the problem with this sort of blaring overabundance is that eventually the entire medium suffers and it drives the fans away.  It was a model unsustainable because you can only go so far with comic books.  The market crashed on comic books and now books from that decade are straight up worthless.  Some hold some value, yes, but on the general curve you can't barely give them away.  I was in my LCS some years ago when a guy walked in with three boxes of comics (long boxes, not the short kind) and the owner gave the man a pained and sad look and told him he couldn't buy them because nobody wants them.  Comic books designed only to BE collected just wouldn't sell because of the missing covers, the lackluster stories, and overall poor quality.  The entire crappiness of an industry destroying trinkets people held on to for a decade and a half just for the former collectors to be told their fake loyalty was a waste of potentially thousands of dollars.

Okay, I'll back up a bit.  I do not hate variant covers.  At least I do not hate the idea of variant covers.  The very first time I came across a variant covers was during Marvel's "Heroes Return" bit when heroes who previously were jettisoned into a Counter Earth dimension ("Heroes Reborn") were coming back to regular Earth and to celebrate were relaunching these lines with alternate "Sunburst covers."  So each new first issue would have a regular cover and one with the hero coming over some clouds with a symbol resembling their power (or something) like a sun shining with the character over this.  It was special, because this was a special event.  This makes sense for variant covers.  I also sort of give a pass  for variant covers in the "flavor of the week" style.  These will have variant covers for an entire week (sometimes far longer which is inexcusable) and feature a theme such as "Deadpooling" or having the DC titles look like child cartoons.  I guess these can be okay so long as they don't get out of control.  However, they tend to and that's crap.  There is also a subtype of variant cover I also do not mind which is the Chase Cover.  A chase cover is when a print of an issue is reprinted with a new cover to be sold at stores after the first printing has run out.  Basically there is a "First Print" cover and a "Reprint" cover.  This gives an air of specialness (which I also somewhat dislike) for owners of an original issue.  THAT is special.  THAT is okay.  What's not okay is when specialness is artificially given to an issue by having multiple covers printed at the same time without any expiration of supplies.  That is just industry crap forcing the idea onto you that these issues are so special you need to buy them all.  "But Mak," you retort, "I don't have to.  Nobody has to.  If you don't want three covers of the same issue, then you don't buy them.  Comic companies aren't twisting your arm on this one." But you're wrong.  They are.  This implied specialness is real.  Especially when variant covers are reduced in number compared to their more plentiful "non variant" cover.  This makes the variant cover seem actually more special than the already implied special issue.  It makes collectors feel their collection is incomplete without these potentially more expensive covers.  And don't be fooled, these covers CAN be more expensive than their "regular" siblings.  And this practice is crap because it's like the industry is acting like getting this cover is some sort of special cover not available to other issues, but when you buy this cover and the other one and walk away, you realize the original cover already WAS individual to the cover.  In this way you're being deceived into thinking the issue is groundbreaking, great, acclaimed, or otherwise something more than just another issue of your favorite character.  It is banking on your feeling of being left out or incomplete when there is a variant issue presented.

"Comics make money this way.  There is nothing wrong with that.  Comics should ride this boom."

Alright, I understand this mentality.  Comics are riding a boom since the early to mid 2000's.  And it's welcome since the huge crash of the early to mid 90's.  I get it.  Comics are a bigger business than pretty much ever with all the tie in entertainment.  And variant covers figure into more sales since it encourages readers to buy more than one copy.  While the speculator boom is nowhere near as bad as the 90's, a similar feeling is pervading this boom.  There is much reporting on certain comics going sky high at auctions, lots of media coverage such as this Star Wars one, and the tie in comics (which is a topic for another time) shows us that comics are again very popular and sales show a growth.  Variant covers are a symptom of growth, but the perverse amount coming out is nothing short of disgusting and will fuel another pop when collector glut reaches another nauseating level when comics again decline after the public moves on to the next big entertainment fad and production costs can't keep up with the shedding of collectors who will begin to realize all these covers are a waste of their money.  If you really think that beloved Valkyrie variant of Secret Avengers #6 or vampire, Adventure Time, Lego, Hollywood, retro, and Tron (to name a few) variants are going to be worth anything in the next twenty years, you are fooling yourself.  None of those issues were worth of note, none of them had any demand to be recollected, and when you go back to look at these issues you'll more or less wish you had the hundreds of dollars back to respend on something else. Probably another waste of time and money, but at least a different waste rather than the same thing.

"But it's only a few bucks.  That's not bad, Mak."

A few bucks here and there becomes hundreds of dollars.  If you're a semi-"serious" collector, you probably buy a few issues every week, and we'll say 10 issues a week total.  Otherwise known as 30 bucks because Marvel and DC charge anywhere between three to five dollars per issue.  Let's say 2 issues every week come out with a variant cover and you being the semi serious completionist feel the need to buy them.  Another six to ten dollars a week.  This comes out to be around 520 dollars per year in variants alone.  And that's IF the variants are the same price as the regular covers, which they aren't always.

"We don't have to buy them."

I already talked about this, but I'm repeating myself anyway.  This is technically true.  In the same way we don't have to do pretty much anything like living in increasingly nice places, eating well, going to the doctor, buying new electronics, buying trendy clothes, or really anything.

"Mak, don't be such a stupid drama queen.  That's not the same thing.  You're comparing apples to oranges and reaching hard for this one."

Wrong.  It IS the same thing.  If it seems exclusive, special, trendy, or otherwise "cool," we as people want them.  We want them MORE than the things we currently have and others might not even if we already own them.  It lends us this air of exclusivity we don't normally have.  Like buying a fancy hat which you know will look "cool" or buying a new phone because it's flashy, variant covers do a very similar thing to us.  We can easily justify and compartmentalize this because it's significantly cheaper, but as we do this we end up allowing ourselves to spend more and more on these things.  It's why people own a hardcover Absolute Edition of the Watchmen while already owning the issues and soft cover TPB of it already.  It's why people own several colors of the same pair of shoes or jackets or hats.  Even makeup does this.  And the fact comic books do this is terrible.