Next Crossgen revival: Mystic

abysslord · Post by **abysslord** » Fri May 13, 2011 8:39 am

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page ... e&id=32308

I never read the original so it won't bother me that they're re-imagining it, just like Sigil.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Fri May 13, 2011 8:54 am

Another "re-imagining", taking the name & main characters names & tossing out most everything else a'la Sigil.

The new "Mystic," written by Vertigo's "Air" and "Cairo" scribe G. Willow Wilson, features art by David Lopez and promises to be worlds different than the original series. While the first "Mystic," created by writer Ron Marz and artist Brandon Peterson, centered on shallow socialite Giselle, a party girl who becomes the most powerful mage on her planet when a mystic sigil appears on her hand, the new series completely reimagines the story, pairing Giselle with her sister Genevieve and giving the two a new world, new enemies, and new powers.

I'm not knocking the "re-imagining" route, I'm just kind of mystified why you'd take a Crossgen property & do this. Couldn't you create a new series with exactly the same premise/story/completely new character designs & just name the main girls something other than Giselle & Genevieve? It seems (other than Ruse) that they kept some of the universal-unifying concept of the sigil & tossed pretty much everything else in their Crossgen "relaunches".

Someone should read this as something completely new if it sounds interesting, not out of any kind of tie to the old Crossgen stuff.

If DCBS gives the 1st issue a 75% discount, I'll try it, otherwise this is going to be a "pass" for me.

abysslord · Post by **abysslord** » Fri May 13, 2011 9:20 am

BobBretall wrote: Someone should read this as something completely new if it sounds interesting, not out of any kind of tie to the old Crossgen stuff.

I agree, it's pretty silly to have the license to this title and then only use the name basically.

I guess they're thinking if it was a new series with a different name they would get 'x' amount of readers. But by using the Crossgen name "Mystic", they'll still get those readers, but also get a few more people who read the previous series and may not realize it's completely different. Whether they'll stick around or not after that first issue, who knows, but it seems Marvel doesn't care about long-term stuff. Whatever sells those first issues.

Perry · Post by **Perry** » Fri May 13, 2011 4:01 pm

Went from being totally excited on hearing the news of MYSTIC's return to being totally bummed on hearing the premise.

Yet another CrossGen/Marvel title I will not add to my pull.

Loving RUSE, because it feels like an extension of the original, with a few tweaks or omissions, but SIGIL was nothing like the original, and that saddened me, and now this?

Like stated previously, I just don't understand the move here.

Marvel had a chance to really gain some readers and it seems, from everyone I've talked to locally, they are losing them instead. Oh sure, they may be gaining a few new readers to the CG realm, but if they would have just carried on the original ideas, with perhaps losing the "unifying power" factor (which I never minded), they could have gained so much more.

But, I could be wrong.

comicm · Post by **comicm** » Sat May 14, 2011 10:05 am

I will definitely be checking this one out. So far they are 2/2 so I am sure this one will be decent.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Sun May 15, 2011 12:33 am

comicm wrote:I will definitely be checking this one out. So far they are 2/2 so I am sure this one will be decent.

This is perfectly reasonable. If you liked Sigil, Mystic is definitely worth giving a try.

I didn't think Sigil was bad, but I have no desire to be adding additional Marvel-owned books that aren't in the main Marvel continuity. If I want to read something cool outside of Marvel continuity there are more than enough Indie books I like to be filling that particular need.

Perry · Post by **Perry** » Sun May 15, 2011 7:49 am

BobBretall wrote: I didn't think Sigil was bad, but I have no desire to be adding additional Marvel-owned books that aren't in the main Marvel continuity.

Kind of curious why you feel that way. Yes, true, there are countless other 'properties' and 'universes' out there, but is this stance due to the feeling that Marvel never does them well or because you don't want to 'feed the machine' when smaller companies can get a shot with your money?

Just curious.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Sun May 15, 2011 9:01 am

Perry wrote:
BobBretall wrote: I didn't think Sigil was bad, but I have no desire to be adding additional Marvel-owned books that aren't in the main Marvel continuity.
Kind of curious why you feel that way. Yes, true, there are countless other 'properties' and 'universes' out there, but is this stance due to the feeling that Marvel never does them well or because you don't want to 'feed the machine' when smaller companies can get a shot with your money?
Just curious.

Marvel is riding high and has so many people addicted to their product & their product only. Ultimately, I don't think that is good for the comics industry, so instead of supporting their continued expansion of their stranglehold on the wallets of fandom, I choose to support as many creator owned comics as I can.

I like my Marvel heroes and Marvel is the only place to get them.

If they were doing "real" Crossgen reboots, Marvel would be the only place to get those (for instance, I will continue to buy Ruse).

the new series completely reimagines the story, pairing Giselle with her sister Genevieve and giving the two a new world, new enemies, and new powers.

So, for the "completely reimagining" reboots there are PLENTY of Indie books with similarly interesting "completely different" ideas & comics. In fact there are MORE than I can read in a month.

So, instead of "feeding the machine" (as you put it) I'd rather help some up-and-comers have a chance to do more good stuff and follow their dreams.

Heck, indie guys who really hit it big end up being gobbled up my Marvel anyway: Rick Remender, Matt Fraction, Nick Spencer, Jonathan Hickman.....

I actually like the fact that I was fans of these guys before Marvel signed them up to do their stuff.

I liken buying Marvel comics to eating at McDonald's. If I want a Big Mac, I'm going to go to McDonalds. If I want ribs, I'd rather go to a local barbeque restaurant hat has a passion for making ribs instead of getting a McRib sandwich.

Perry · Post by **Perry** » Sun May 15, 2011 9:32 am

BobBretall wrote: ... so instead of supporting their continued expansion of their stranglehold on the wallets of fandom, I choose to support as many creator owned comics as I can.

Nothing wrong with that. Supporting smaller groups with similar products is a fine way to keep the field as level as possible and the obvious Marvel stronghold at a minimum. I figured that to be the case, but then you threw me a curve ball with your McDonald's analogy -

BobBretall wrote: I liken buying Marvel comics to eating at McDonald's. If I want a Big Mac, I'm going to go to McDonalds. If I want ribs, I'd rather go to a local barbeque restaurant hat has a passion for making ribs instead of getting a McRib sandwich.

This is to imply that Marvel Comic's 'other universes' are less in product value (or at least enjoyment) than the Indy 'other universes', is it not? You are essentially saying that Marvels 'others' is a cheap knock off of the real item.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Sun May 15, 2011 12:46 pm

Perry wrote: This is to imply that Marvel Comic's 'other universes' are less in product value (or at least enjoyment) than the Indy 'other universes', is it not? You are essentially saying that Marvels 'others' is a cheap knock off of the real item.

Essentially, yes.

What Marvel does good is Marvel super-heroes. I have been so far unimpressed with Marvel books that go off that track.

Marvel got their hands on Malibu's Ultraverse characters and totally lost all the "magic", essentially f'ing them up.

The Ultimate Universe (not the "real" Marvel heroes) was good for a while, then got kind of mediocre, IMO. Top the point where they are re-booting it.

The "Squadron Supreme" universe was good in the first series, then got kind of lost after that.

"Marvel Zombie" was a cool 1st series, then, for me, just started milking the hard-core fans with all the follow-ons.

Marvel "Noir" books did absolutely nothing for me.

Personally, I thought Sigil was mediocre.

Some people LOVE these. Some people LOVE McRibs. I have no problem with people eating piles & piles of McRibs if they like McRibs. Personally, I'd rather go to the Beach Pit BBQ.

NOTE: The creator-owned stuff that goes off the beaten track (like Brubaker's Criminal & Bendis' Powers) are good, but those are creator-owned.

Perry · Post by **Perry** » Sun May 15, 2011 1:16 pm

BobBretall wrote: What Marvel does good is Marvel super-heroes. I have been so far unimpressed with Marvel books that go off that track.

I can understand that, but by "so far" - do you mean recently, or "so far" - since inception?

Books like Conan and a lot of older EPIC books (Alien Legion, Groo

, Dreadstar ... though brought over) were often away from the Marvel Super Hero path and lines like NEW UNIVERSE were really good (at least to me). Heck, even recent books like OZ and the first DARK TOWER were all pretty well done and enjoyable.

Don't get me wrong, Marvel has had some real stinkers and some less than stellar results. I am with you on both SIGIL ... and unfortunately the more of the upcoming CROSSGEN line, with RUSE being the exception ... so far. And of course what Marvel did to MALIBU was a joke.

But then again, creators are not often going to give Marvel (or DC) very much original content anymore ... for obvious reasons

BobBretall wrote: Some people LOVE McRibs. I have no problem with people eating piles & piles of McRibs if they like McRibs. Personally, I'd rather go to the Beach Pit BBQ.

I get ya and I totally agree with most of what you are saying, I just wanted to clear up whether you were against their attempts because they are poorly done or if you are against their attempts because it is another way to fund the Giant Marvel.

It appears it is both.

BobBretall wrote:NOTE: The creator-owned stuff that goes off the beaten track (like Brubaker's Criminal & Bendis' Powers) are good, but those are creator-owned.

I agree (of Course I like Fraction's CASANOVA as well ... even when it was at IMAGE.

HassanT · Post by **HassanT** » Sun May 15, 2011 2:55 pm

BobBretall wrote:
Perry wrote: This is to imply that Marvel Comic's 'other universes' are less in product value (or at least enjoyment) than the Indy 'other universes', is it not? You are essentially saying that Marvels 'others' is a cheap knock off of the real item.

Essentially, yes.

What Marvel does good is Marvel super-heroes. I have been so far unimpressed with Marvel books that go off that track.

I concur. I think part of the problem is that their strategy to sell comics is the same, no matter what the subject is. Unfortunately, one "size" doesn't fit all.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Sun May 15, 2011 3:48 pm

Perry wrote: I can understand that, but by "so far" - do you mean recently, or "so far" - since inception?

Books like Conan and a lot of older EPIC books (Alien Legion, Groo , Dreadstar ... though brought over) were often away from the Marvel Super Hero path and lines like NEW UNIVERSE were really good (at least to me). Heck, even recent books like OZ and the first DARK TOWER were all pretty well done and enjoyable.

The good stuff in Epic mostly fell into the "creator owned" category. New Universe started out good and then fizzled.....much like the Ultimate universe, IMO.

So, I'm thinking it could very well be "since inception", but if "recently" makes you feel better, let's go with that.

I'm tired of supporting Marvel's attempts to crush all competition. They have plenty of support on that front from the majority of their existing fan-base, and I was exactly the same way in my teens/20s, so I can exactly see where those fans are coming from.

HassanT · Post by **HassanT** » Sun May 15, 2011 4:05 pm

BobBretall wrote:
Perry wrote: I can understand that, but by "so far" - do you mean recently, or "so far" - since inception?

Books like Conan and a lot of older EPIC books (Alien Legion, Groo , Dreadstar ... though brought over) were often away from the Marvel Super Hero path and lines like NEW UNIVERSE were really good (at least to me). Heck, even recent books like OZ and the first DARK TOWER were all pretty well done and enjoyable.
The good stuff in Epic mostly fell into the "creator owned" category. New Universe started out good and then fizzled.....much like the Ultimate universe, IMO.

So, I'm thinking it could very well be "since inception", but if "recently" makes you feel better, let's go with that.

I'm tired of supporting Marvel's attempts to crush all competition. They have plenty of support on that front from the majority of their existing fan-base, and I was exactly the same way in my teens/20s, so I can exactly see where those fans are coming from.

While Epic was good, Marvel destroyed that line only after a few years. Jim Starlin took his creation, Dreadstar, over to First comics.

torchsong · Post by **torchsong** » Mon May 16, 2011 4:57 pm

Mystic is one of the CrossGen series I have complete in trade (along with Sojourn and Sigil). I haven't been impressed with what I'm seeing.

With so many books left in the lurch, Marvel could have done a recap issue and then jumped into a mini that continued the series where they all left off, or at the very least gave the Crossgen faithful what we've really been looking for...RESOLUTION!

I can dream, can't it?