That's true, but comic creators are nothing like actors.  The characters in comics are like actors.  Imagine if you produced a movie starring Pitt and Jolie and promoted it by talking about the writer or cinematographer.

Mike

***

This is probably true.  Just like, say, Nicholas Cage or Stallone, or Nicholson at least gets me to notice the trailer, Spider-man or Wolverine or Thor or whatever (Hal Jordan) gets me to notice  a project or issue.

Most mini-series not based on characters like the above would have to grab me on story, or if I did go because of an artist (using the term broadly) I'd only stay based on story.

Amazing Spider-man is a little bit more like a continuing soap opera or tv show of long duration

Agree with you, Todd, on CHEERS. It happened twice. Disagree with you on FRIENDS.

Happened on the last season of COSBY SHOW, too. It was just slightly bearable.

That's true, but comic creators are nothing like actors.  The characters in comics are like actors.  Imagine if you produced a movie starring Pitt and Jolie and promoted it by talking about the writer or cinematographer.
---------------------------------

I don't agree with that at all.  Actors, writers, directors are all the same.  They are all a "pull".   They get you to notice something that a company hopes you'll like...and that's no different than an artist pulling you into buying a comic.  Some people will only continue to buy the comic if it is good; some will continue to buy it regardless. Same thing with movie stars.

It's about Neal Adams...He sold books just based on his covers alone.

Again... The Beatles are John, Paul, George, and Ringo not Irving, Harold, Lenny, and Gilbert.... Neal Adams is what I want and I will seek his work out no matter what title he does.... If he stops doing the art in the middle of the series I don't buy the inbetween issues.... It is as simple as that.

It's the Frank Miller run on Daredevil that is applauded....not the issues on either side of his run... The same with JB's X-Men....

If you like a particular artist and not the other then follow them... I do with Music and Literature and Art...

And Yes Squadron Supreme was a let down...Started strong and fizzled off....Camelot 3000 was a much better series because it was complete and consistant. If you bought an album of the Beatles to use that example again you wouldn't want the first 3 songs to be by the Fab Four and the remaining 7 songs to be by a Toledo Ohio cover band would you? I would bet it would piss you off or you wouldn't buy the album at all cause it is not the Beatles....

Again I buy for the Artist alone or the creator I like....Welcome to the world of buying art you like and not buying it cause it has Marvel stamped on the cover. or DC for that matter.... Nobody followed or like the Teen Titans or Wonder Woman for that matter until a guy named George Perez came along.... Creators matter and creators = sales... to ignore that is to be completely stupid!

Hell JB's name alone used to increase sales on a book by 50,000 and there are people on this board who follow him to every book he does... That is the exact same thing....JB on a title is the event....not the title....

If Bernie Wrightson ispires you then seek out and buy everything he does or touches...there is nothing wrong with that.....For me it is Neal Adams....and a slew of other guys...hell I bought Skate Man for Christ's sake cause Neal drew the book....

Not everyone can be the Beatles but they are the artists who produce the work that awes and inspires people.....

Heck, Reality Shows are all about format over stars (though casting, broadly, matters). 

and I agree-ensemble shows can definitely have people go in and out.  Though i left Law and Order when lenny did.  Same if Sipowitz had left Blue-not right away, but after years on the show.

Lost is a concept show-and could lose a few members and no one would really care, to the extent it didn't hurt the concept.  It might matter more in  5 years, if say, Sawyer was recast or dropped, I don't know.

Agree with you, Todd, on CHEERS. It happened twice. Disagree with you on FRIENDS.

**

Think after a time, Ted Danson could not have left w/o the ending of the show.  Friends? Early on it could have lost anyone.  later on, it probably could have lost a member or two. it lost me when Monica and CHandler hooked up. Seemed pretty tired to have that happen, and I didn't see them as a couple and Survivor's concept (not stars) took me away.

Agree with you, Todd, on CHEERS. It happened twice. Disagree with you on FRIENDS.

Happened on the last season of COSBY SHOW, too. It was just slightly bearable.

-----

Which 'Friend' was so indispensable that the show would have failed in their absence?

Personally I got very tired of Monica, and if she got married off, and moved to Cali, so much the better.  Then they could have introduced a new gal who would act as tension between the three guys.  Bang, 3 more seasons, no stupid coupling everyone...(gag).

ps.  Ross and Rachel getting together (for good) is like Charlie Brown kicking the football.  If it ever happened at all, it should have been vaguely alluded to off screen, but not confirmed.  Monica and Chandler?  What a joke. 

The Beatles are John, Paul, George, and Ringo...

***********

Don't forget Clarence. He had all the great ideas IMO. He was robbed.