We got a curious news story on the Gannett Company wire today from USA Today, briefly looking at Comics sales for 2008. Unfortunately, it's such an obliviously irrelevant piece of news that I wouldn't even mention it, except for two points of contention:
This is the lede:
"The comic-book industry, helped by the enormous success of films such as 'The Dark Knight,' showed continued growth in the burgeoning graphic novel category, according to an exclusive look at top sellers."
To which I can only ask, do you really need to tie-in "The Dark Knight" to EVERYTHING now that it was a success? The movie was a mainstream masterpiece, no question about it, but the bulk of the monthly-buying comics industry has been in place for years, that movie had nothing to do with the genre's popularity, and to claim such belittles us fans in a most ignorant way.
Here's my second problem with this story: You cannot create a list of the "Top 10 Comic Books" of 2008 based on individual sales, and this story attempts to do so as extra material to run with the story.
Here's the list:
1 Secret Invasion No. 1 (Marvel)
2 Secret Invasion No. 2 (Marvel)
3 Secret Invasion No. 3 (Marvel)
4 Secret Invasion No. 4 (Marvel)
5 Secret Invasion No. 5 (Marvel)
6 Secret Invasion No. 6 (Marvel)
7 Uncanny X-Men No. 500 (Marvel)
8 Secret Invasion No. 7 (Marvel)
9 Final Crisis No. 1 (DC)
10 Secret Invasion No. 8 (Marvel)
Anyone else see why this is so needless? Because the most popular "event" comic of the year, with so many chapters to it, will ALWAYS dominate a Top 10 list! With the best event of the year, the number of readers will stay constant throughout the event, making big sales all around.
It would be more accurate to look at the highest-grossing series of the year and rank them, so that mainstream readers don't go thinking there is only two or three wildly popular comic books out there.
Huff. Mainstream stories are bothersome sometimes.