CLiNT RIP

[Richmond Clements]

Given that CLiNT was --what?-- 75% reprint, it's its failure to hit a monthly schedule was baffling.

I'd like to apologise for that errant apostrophe, which was the result of autocorrect on the part of my phone and a lack of attention on mine.

Cheers

Jim

I should think so, too!
Consider yourself on a warning, Campbell!

[James Stacey]

Dude, no-one cares!

You've met this forum, right ?

[zombemybabynow]

anything that involved frankie boyle and bit the dust can only be a good thing?

[Jim_Campbell]

anything that involved frankie boyle and bit the dust can only be a good thing?

No. One less comic on the stands is automatically a bad thing.

Cheers

Jim

[zombemybabynow]

art for art's sake?

[James Stacey]

I can't help feeling a bit of schadenfreude about this mainly due to the attitude quoted by CF. Trumping themselves as better than 2000ad when it was 40% reprint, 40% lads mag. However it is a bad thing that its failed on the newsstands. I really hope Strip can settle its boat and get back on regular release as its content is good and its heart in the right place.

[starscape]

I picked it up very occasionally and thought a number of stories were okay or better. However, Millar went out of his way to put off anyone vaguely 'mature' in age. I would just come away thinking, Im not supporting that offensive little git. Doubt I was the only one. Wouldn't have taken me much to get on board.

[Banners]

I felt like a real twat about 5 minutes after posting that. Sometimes I wish I could go back in time and punch myself.

Fair play. I often say similar stuff in real life, with far worse consequences ;-)

[Ghastly McNasty]

With no malice.

I'm not trying to claim I really understand the comic market, but it seems to me that after reading most of the "I didn't buy it", and "not for me" remarks here and in other threads, one of the major factors for the demise of the comic is that the got its content/market wrong.

Surely if it was totally badass, we'd have all bought it. I'm not going to deny there are plenty of other factors in the mix, but the rule applies to everything 'a poor product doesn't sell'

[Theblazeuk]

I just want to say I enjoyed the doctor joke, don't feel bad.

As for CLiNT I think it shot itself in the foot face with the obnoxious LADS angle and of course, most of the people who might have picked it up had likely already the comics being reprinted therein or at least tried them long enough to dislike them,.

[CrazyFoxMachine]

Surely if it was totally badass, we'd have all bought it. I'm not going to deny there are plenty of other factors in the mix, but the rule applies to everything 'a poor product doesn't sell'

I basically disagree - although Clint was poorly marketed and its content was (largely) pants sometimes "totally badass" things just don't make the dent they could or should for a whole host of other factors. I'm raking my brain for examples...

hmm. OH THAT KARL URBAN FILM FUTURE COP THING.

And also in terms of 'poor product not selling' then I'd advise you to look at the box office and the album charts, and most of television. Full of terrible products, all selling. Hell even most bestselling comics are shite. One man's poor product is another man's totally badass thing. Doesn't mean it'll sell.

So I'd go with what Jim said - as much as it's nice to piss (another) of Millar's egoprojects that's failed - frankly ANOTHER comic gone is not good news. It just isn't.

[Adrian Bamforth]

I'm disappointed the news wasn't announced in the traditional way:

"INSIDE: GREAT NEWS ABOUT YOUR FAVOURITE COMIC..."

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

I only ever got the first issue. It had a nonsensical Frankie Boyle strip and one about vampires by Jonathan Woss, which could have had potential if it weren't a great big wordy info-dump. There was also an article about milfs. I decided it wasn't for me, but I would also echo Jim's sentiments. More comics is better than less comics. If this had actually given Tharg a run for his money, it could have been really good for British comics. But now, investors might be wary about backing any new comic launches, if even the great Mark Millar couldn't pull it off.

[Ghastly McNasty]

And also in terms of 'poor product not selling' then I'd advise you to look at the box office and the album charts, and most of television. Full of terrible products, all selling. Hell even most bestselling comics are shite.

Rather a subjective response, O. Especially from someone with such an eclectic music taste

A poor product is by definition 'not poor' if it has a market and a willing audience.

As for music and films, if you get enough marketing power/cash/turd polishers behind anything you can trick the public in to thinking it's worth their money. Especially when it's a single shot like a movie, or pop song.

Clint had the time to develop an audience and failed. It was found out. Don't get me wrong, it is a crying shame.

There's a whole other thread discussing that film but I thought one of the major factors it didn't do well is down to the 3D only nonsense = getting the market wrong. Someone high up made the wrong decision. It's the same for Clint, somewhere, someone got something wrong with the marketing/content.

No comic death is good. Analysis of why is essential.

[Theblazeuk]

I only ever got the first issue. It had a nonsensical Frankie Boyle strip and one about vampires by Jonathan Woss, which could have had potential if it weren't a great big wordy info-dump.

Actually that wossy work, Turf, got a lot better in the last couple of issues (read the original American print). Vampires vs Mobsters-Aliens.