Sundays are known for folks gathering around tables on television and pontificating about some of the hottest topics out there, offering their expertise. We bring that tradition to Graphic Policy as the team gathers to debate in our Sunday Roundtable.

On tap this week?

Marvel has announced a new Apocalypse centered event, and the Avengers look to be dealing with Civil War II. Both events tie in to next year’s movies. Is cross media marketing a good idea? Will it help or hurt either medium? Does it get you interested more or less in any of it?

Mr. H: I particularly am not the biggest fan of it as I feel it’s shameless product placement to a certain degree. Also it places the books under a level of predictability which can hamper the creative teams on a roll or just stunt the current progress of a feature monthly title.

Elana: I’d be fine with product placement if it was actually going to be good reading. But this is just going to make things more convoluted.

Daphne: Feeling like I couldn’t understand current storylines unless I bought eighteen other books is exactly what kept me out of comics for such a long time, and what keeps newcomers away as well. Too much cross-promotion just undoes the MCU’s efforts to be (mostly) self-contained and accessible to new fans. If Marvel was using the Battleworlds/Secret Wars reboots as a way to fix the fact that their properties are collapsing under the weight of their own canon, promotions like these just sabotage those efforts. I’m probably going to skip all the event stuff and focus on self-contained stories like I did last year.

Alex: I doubt I’ll read Civil War II, to be honest. I’m more inclined to look at the Apocalypse story line but only because I’m reading Extraordinary X-Men, not because I’m looking forward to it.

But that’s more to do with my general unhappiness with Event and Crossover comics. Like Daphne, I’m going to stick to titles that are unrelated to the crossover/events, or save my money.

Troy: I’m going to be a mean girl for a moment and remark that we kind of already had Civil War II with the whole mess that was AXIS. In some ways cross media crossover, such as Cerebro taking after the cinematic version the comics are subtle and effective. Other examples like Nick Fury Jr’s and Coulson’s inclusion into the comic canon are hamfisted and required a significant degree of gymnastics narrative wise.

Civil War II (AKA III) In the comics feels like the obvious. A desperate plea to cash in on the movie counterpart. I’m really hoping I am proven wrong and that the story does it justice.

Troy: I have to agree Mr. H, above and beyond the predictability issue, I am really worried that a crossover is being announced so soon after a major relaunch. I fear also worry for the creative flow of the narrative. In a way, crossover have tended to hijack stories as of late. You could almost sense the writer’s reluctance or perhaps struggle to make it fit. The all Female X-title during Battle of the Atom comes to mind here. I think it’s safe to say that most if not all comic fans will see the corresponding summer blockbusters. But it’s not necessarily the case that the converse of that is true, particularly the casual movie goer.

Elana: YES the idea that they have to get COMICS readers excited to watch their new movies?!?! Dude, do they not notice that the movie viewership dwarfs the comics readership? Do they not know everyone who reads their comics is already going to see the movie?!? This is just insane

Alex: Even comics fans who don’t read those specific comics will see the movies. Unless it was Fantastic Four.

Brett: I actually have a question to add on top of that. We’ll be maybe 6 issues in to some books, some might be around issue 10 at most. Is that too soon for crossover events? I can name so many books that were killed by being part of an event too early and killing momentum.

Daphne: Oh, it’s way too soon. Ms. Marvel and Squirrel Girl, for example, only just came out and then immediately got rebooted and then ended up part of other people’s crossover events in the same issues they got relaunched. The cycle is just happening faster and faster.

Troy: I would say it depends on the writers, how they manouever with the mandate they are given. The AvX tie ins for Wolverine and the X-Men volume 1 started very early in my opinion. But they were among the best of the event. They were integrated perfectly into its own story. If I had a preference or a moratorium I would probably lean towards a 15-20 issue limit.

Alex: For tie ins or an event?

Brett: It’d be a tie in for an event or crossing over for some event like they’re doing

Alex: Right. I was thinking that’d be an astronomical number for an event.

Troy: Alex: For a tie in to an event

Alex: When it comes to the tie-ins, I’d rather see the Wolverine and the X-Men style AvX type; those that work without you really needing to read the main arc and don’t detract from the current series, regardless of the number. There’s nothing that makes me drop a book than a long, unrelated set of tie ins to an event I don’t care about.

To answer your question, Brett, I honestly think so, mate. I’m more likely to drop a title six to ten issues in if I have no interest in a crossover than I am after 20 or more (unless there’s only two parts to said crossover).

Mr. H: All great points guys. When promotions do this it just smacks of hack writing. They need to get the message that this isn’t best for their creations long-term regardless of the short term profit.

Alex: There’s a reason that most movie tie in comics are generally sub par (specifically those with “…The Movie” in the title, and not adaptations inspired by movies like Fight Club).

Elana: The idea is insane because what the SHOULD be doing is figuring ways to get the people who are excited about the movies that are coming up to go back and read the comics they are based on. That’s how you grow an audience. Asking your current, limited audience to buy more stuff that’s only going to muddy the plot and confuse things is going to make it worse.

I swear the original 52 thing back in 2006 was the last wonderful crossover. I just loaned it all to a friend who is new to DC comics and he LOVED it. He didn’t know the characters. Didn’t matter. It was nice and contained and a really fascinating concept. If the publishers aren’t going to do something that tight they need to not do it at all.

Paul: I am torn on this topic; I can see this working for the Apocalypse crossover simply because Apocalypse is a long time villain of the X-Men (now we have Archangel and Kid Apocalypse to throw into the mix) so sure we can have them turn up into the storyline. Sure, it’s clearly a ploy to coincide with the movie but if handled properly, could make for some great story telling, what with the time displaced X-Men and all. As for Civil War, well as Troy said, been there done that. I have hard time seeing the heroes of the Marvel U letting another civil war happen after the last time, I don’t care how many reboots the universe has gone through. That is nothing but a shameless cash grab to go along with the movie and readers will know it.

Brett: All great points folks. That wraps up this week’s roundtable. What do you readers think? Sound off in the comments below!